Live blogging from the Longleaf power plant trial

by shelbinator on Oct 24, 2007 at 8:55 AM

8:57 A.M. This is a new one for me. Some of y'all on the Georgia Sierra Club's e-mail list may have gotten the clue that the last week of court proceedings that will determine (I think) whether Dynegy receives a permit to build the Longleaf coal-fired power plant in south Georgia. So here I am in a courtroom in downtown Atlanta, all by myself and sort of clueless about what's going on. I'm still trying to pick the good guys from the bad guys...

9:04 A.M. Here is some of the background information that might help clue people in. We're going through some issues about whether or not to allow some data from some new models into the proceedings; I still don't know who's who, although just from looks I'm guessing this guy who looks a little like the guy from Law and Order with less gray hair might a bad guy

9:09 A.M. Oh, I think I see now. Clearly the good guys are the ones with fewer lawyers, and Mr. Law and Order is one of two on this side of the courtroom. It seems (if I have this right now) that Longleaf is arguing that new modeling testimony that might show that Longleaf might be contributing to sulfur dioxide emissions in the area of the proposed plant be ruled inadmissible. The central question seems to be the timeliness of this new modeling data, sounds like a typical corporate lawyer tactic - "oops, too late, right answer but wrong time!" (I hope I've figured out who the good guys are here...)

9:21 A.M. Mr. Law and Order (who I understand is actually a Mr. Hayes) is trying to dumb down the specifics of the statistical modeling that they are trying to have admitted. I'm gathering that Mr. Hayes is with the SELC or something. I wish Betsy were here to tell me who's who ;-P

9:30 A.M. The woman who I think is the corporate lawyer is accusing the petitioners (that would be the good guys) of not adequately preparing for the litigating of this lawsuit. That sounds like the lawyerly equivalent of fighting words... There are a lot of players (expert witnesses and such) that I am having trouble sorting out. The judge has just declined to issue a ruling on the motion to have this new modeling data excluded from evidence, so the two sides are going to gather some more information and the final decision will be made tomorrow morning.

9:38 A.M. Well, we're not done with this question yet. The judge doesn't think that this new analysis should take two weeks - Mr. Hayes is saying that they have four computers dedicated to this analysis of five years worth of SO₂ collection data, and it still takes several days, apparently. I wonder what kind of machines are running this analysis?

9:43 A.M. What we have here is, apparently, a failure of a Mr. McCann, a Mr. Tran, and a Mr. Courtney (expert witnesses from both sides) to communicate, or at least to know what each other are saying. Not sure what the import of that might be one way or the other, IANAL and I am sure feeling a bit lost in these proceedings... we're taking a 5 minute break now.

9:54 A.M. We're just finishing up the break, and they just brought a PA system in here so people can be heard. A bit silly that it wasn't here all along... Incidentally, there are exactly three other people in the gallery with me here, and two of them are wearing suits. The other one is an old guy who I suspect is probably on the side of good, how many ordinary people are going to come out and cheer "C-O-A-L what's that spell, AIR POLLUTION!!! WOOO" We're talking about H₂SO₄ estimated emissions from a Dr. Fox (who is Mr. Hayes' lone friend on this side of the court). I can't see Petitioner's Exhibit 1.16-2, but a person is on the stand testifying about this document, which seems to be a spreadsheet of numbers produced by Southern Company and reported to the EPA on sulfuric acid emissions. The witness is testifying that the document is not intended to be used in this kind of permitting process, and also uses an inaccurate test method. Hm.

10:05 A.M. The witness is now about to be cross-examined on the NO_x emission numbers in the spreadsheet. A couple of other folks have joined the gallery here. Maybe I'm wrong about who's who...

10:18 A.M. We've had a bit of a break while they get this spreadsheet on a screen here - we've got the NO_x emission numbers up now. (Reading the comments about the people in suits, Mr. Hayes has a suit, but Dr. Fox has something a bit less formal - Mr. McCann in a suit on the stand is the one dissing the spreadsheet numbers, and the corporate lawyer looking chicks definitely look dressed for power. So I think I'm right about who the good guys are...) I guess this post is less a sophisticated breakdown of what's happening in this trial and more a little "Mr. Ataru Goes To the Courtroom" to see how the chips go down. Just had a hilarious moment, Mr. Haye's laptop just went into screensaver and the court got a look at his adorable kids Mr. McCann is taking issue right now with the fact that the spreadsheet does not take into account the type of coal in use when the data were generated.

10:28 A.M. *sigh* I'm lost I'm going to have to go back over this data and produce a summary once I know for sure who's who. Sorry for confusing everyone...

10:37 A.M. It seems that part of the dispute over the spreadsheet data is whether the data were collected before or after the gas passed from the boiler to the SCR units. What's an SCR, you ask? As usual, Wikipedia has the answer. Geez, Betsy does this all day? Wow. This has really been an exercise in "You think you understood the issues at stake with this power plant? Sucker!!" Really, this is interesting stuff, but boy, these proceedings are not for the faint of heart. Mr. McCann is saying that Dr. Fox made some unreasonably high estimates of what was achievable in terms of NO_x emission rates, which definitely sounds like some corporate whining to me. "Waah! We can't meet these goals, waah!" It seems that Longleaf is not too happy with the low emission numbers the good guys want to push on them. Shock!

10:56 A.M. WHEW! We're just finishing up with another break (I believe we have up to 30 minutes of questioning left in this morning's session), and I asked the nice younger man who came in at some point who was who - he happens to *be* an SELC guy, and Mr. Hayes and Dr. Fox are indeed the good guys. Mr. Hayes is objecting to Mr. McCann's being cross-examined by the interveners, I don't know who they are (EPD perhaps?), but he's been overruled. Nice SELC guy told me that at this point in the trial they skip the whole introductions business, so it makes it tough for Joe Random Guy (me) to waltz in here and know what's going on. Hm, speaking of hard, I think I may have misstated the witness' name - I can't hear it clearly when they're addressing him, but he's not Mr. McCann... sorry for the continuous changes of paint color as it dries here.

11:05 A.M. Add "PM" to the list of acronyms that are in the required vocabulary to be in this room - that's our good friend "particulate matter" that makes summer in Atlanta such a joy. It seems that the witness is maybe with EPD, and the intervener is EPA. Does that make sense? No wonder it's thin in here.

11:10 A.M. "Monox" is presumably our other friend carbon monoxide. Also add "BACT", which is Best Available Control Technology - at least when we talk about "BACT limits" it makes it sound like the latest technology is going to be involved at this power plant, as opposed to older power plants that REALLY suck. PSD = Prevention of Significant Deterioration. That is apparently the technical term for this permit process. Doesn't it feel good to desuckify these acronyms? Now you can know what these folks are actually talking about, instead of feeling like you're at a crappy meeting of upper management or something!

11:20 A.M. Witness is being cross-examined about SO₂ ambient monitoring data from the Columbus area from 1999 to 2002. Apparently the SO₂ levels in that area during this time were about 1/3 of what they typically are in Atlanta and some other areas. Mr. Hayes is apparently turning to Google as we speak, a triumph of technology. How did cases go on before the Internet came into the courtroom?

11:27 A.M. Intervener is asking the witness about what effect using a higher SO₂ number would have had if it had been used instead of the Columbus in the statistical model, which Mr. Hayes is saying is outside his realm of expertise as demonstrated by previous testimony. Seems to be pretty obvious to *me*, at least, but he's being allowed to answer the question. He's saying that they would have reached the same conclusion if the higher numbers had been used, that conclusion being that the PSD rules are being complied with. That doesn't sound reasonable to me - different numbers, different results, right? - but that's just my complete novice's opinion.

11:36 A.M. Witness is being questioned now about some cost numbers for dry versus wet scrubbers for controlling SO₂ emissions. Apparently wet scrubbing is more expensive (80% more), although it seems that there has been some previous testimony about some errors in the cost data presented.

11:48 A.M. Apparently the witness is the Permit Program Manager for EPD; his expertise in the area of the cost estimates is under some dispute, and the lead lawyer for the intervener is looking to establish his competence in this current line of questioning. It seems that the recommendation was to allow the use of dry scrubbing technology based on these cost numbers, which (surprise) isn't as good pollution-wise. Cut corner alert...

11:57 A.M. The questions now are focusing on why EPD chose to express the emissions limits for the permit in "pounds per million BTU" rather than "pounds per megawatt hour"... that's pretty dang arcane even for someone detail-obsessed like myself. It's not at all clear to me exactly what the significance, if there is any, of this issue might be. It's a good thing there's a Starbucks downstairs...

12:05 P.M. We are about to break for lunch now (finishing up the questioning), which means it's time for me to head back to work. I have to say, this has been a highly informative experience for me - I've never seen the legal process in action before, and seeing this very important case go down in person was really interesting. Now, if only they made these things a little easier for those of us who work to get to...