[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Page 8855]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      EPA RULE AND BIG STONE PLANT

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I wish to speak about the President's 
misguided plan to reduce carbon emissions from existing powerplants, 
specifically the impact it is going to have on my home State, South 
Dakota.
  Over the last year, EPA has claimed its rule will grant States 
flexibility to meet burdensome emission reduction targets. However, 
there is really only one way for South Dakota to meet its staggering 
target of a 35-percent reduction; that is, by effectively shutting down 
Big Stone Plant, our only baseload coal-fired plant, which will soon be 
among the cleanest in the country.
  The plant, which provides affordable power to thousands in South 
Dakota and neighboring States, is nearing completion of a $384 million 
environmental upgrade project to meet the EPA's regional haze and 
Utility MACT regulations. So as you can see, the clean powerplant would 
threaten this significant investment.
  The EPA has required this nearly $400 million upgrade--which is more 
than the original cost, the entire original cost of the plant itself--
and is now turning around and saying: That is not enough. We want it 
shut down.
  Let me repeat that. The EPA has required a $384 million environmental 
upgrade to make the plant among the cleanest in the country and now 
wants to put all that to waste. This isn't right, and this will stick 
South Dakotans with holding the bill.
  When the Obama EPA pushes new regulations to attack affordable and 
reliable coal generation, it is low-income families who take the 
biggest hit. South Dakotans have already seen their electricity rates 
increased to pay for that $384 million add-on, but the Clean Power Plan 
will limit the ability for this investment to be recouped, and now they 
will be charged even more.
  This is because the Clean Power Plan would require Big Stone Plant to 
run less, even on a limited or seasonal basis, not at the high capacity 
for which it was designed and is most efficient. At the same time, the 
Clean Power Plan would require the plan to run more efficiently to meet 
strict emission requirements. So, again, we have had this nearly $400 
million investment to make the plant cleaner and more efficient in 
order to satisfy the EPA, and now the Obama EPA wants to shut it down.
  The Obama EPA should not push regulations that result in higher 
utility costs for consumers, less grid reliability, and fewer jobs. 
Affordable and reliable energy helps grow the economy and helps low- 
and middle-income families make ends meet.
  Unfortunately, the EPA's rule will only increase electrical rates and 
hurt those who can afford it the least by forcing our most affordable 
energy sources offline.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this burdensome rule and 
to prevent the serious economic burden it will impose on middle-income 
families in this country.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.

                          ____________________