washingtonpost.com
NEWS | OPINIONS | SPORTS | ARTS & LIVING | Discussions | Photos & Video | City Guide | CLASSIFIEDS | JOBS | CARS | REAL ESTATE
'); } //-->
Foes Fume Over FAA Ruling on Plant Site
Mirant Seeking To Raise Stacks

By Leef Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 9, 2006; LZ05

The Federal Aviation Administration has given a green light to a plan to raise the height of smokestacks at the troubled Mirant power generating station in Alexandria, ruling that the change would pose no risk to Reagan National Airport's flight operations.

Mirant officials have said that increasing the height of the plant's five smokestacks by 50 feet could help to remedy the environmental violations that forced the plant to shut down temporarily in August. The plant, on the banks of the Potomac River, provides electricity to hundreds of thousands of customers in the District and Maryland. It does not serve Virginia.

The FAA's ruling, issued last month, dealt a blow to opponents of the plant who have been battling for years to have the facility, a documented polluter, shuttered.

"We're just amazed" at the FAA ruling, said Alexandria City Attorney Ignacio Pessoa. "Surprised and shocked and outraged."

Pessoa said that the city plans to petition the FAA to reconsider its decision, which he and other critics characterized as a reversal of a September determination in which the FAA said taller stacks at the Mirant plant were a "presumed hazard."

"It's a shameless acquiescence to Mirant's operational needs," said Elizabeth Chimento, who has helped to lead the campaign against the 56-year-old plant. "Before, they said [taller stacks] would be a hazard, and they rejected the application. Now they've reversed that decision. That speaks to me that this is really a political decision."

Mirant spokesman Steve Arabia declined to comment for this report except to say that "we're pleased that the FAA has made its final decision."

FAA officials insisted that their Feb. 26 decision was not a reversal.

"When an object is a certain height and distance from an airport, it's presumed to be a hazard. That requires us to go in and see if it is a hazard," FAA spokesman Paul Takemoto said. "We looked at this purely in aeronautical terms . . . and whether [the objects] will interfere with navigation. In this case, it was found to be clearly not a hazard."

The FAA has said that Mirant will have to clearly mark and light the stacks if the heights are increased.

© 2007 The Washington Post Company