Debate shifts from local approval to state environmental review
Heather Michon
Editor
Tenaska representatives held an open house at Fluvanna County High School on Tuesday, July 28, the first since the Board of Supervisors approved a special use permit for the proposed Expedition Generation power plant back in March.
More than 100 people attended the session, with many raising questions about the potential health impacts and environmental impacts of the 1.5-gigawatt gas-fired power plant, should it be built.
The meeting was required as part of the Prevention of Significant Deterioration air permit process. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality received Tenaska’s 377-page application on April 30 and is now undergoing a technical review.
The proposed plant’s chief health-related air pollutants include nitrogen oxides, fine particulate matter known as PM2.5, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and other toxic pollutants.
Larry Carlson, Tenaska’s vice president for environmental affairs, outlined the company’s proposed pollution controls and said the project would use what regulators determine to be the best available control technology.
Some residents argued that meeting federal standards did not fully address their concerns.
Opponents cited a study commissioned by the Southern Environmental Law Center and conducted by researchers at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, which projected that emissions could increase asthma attacks and other illnesses and contribute to two to three premature deaths annually.
The company has disputed the study’s conclusions, arguing its methods and models are not those used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the DEQ.
If approved, the plant would be required to submit quarterly emissions reports, semiannual monitoring and deviation reports, annual compliance certifications and emissions inventories to DEQ. Continuous emissions-monitoring data would also be submitted quarterly to the EPA.
Reviewing the air permit could take many months to complete. Once that is done, the DEQ will prepare a draft permit and open a public comment process that will include additional public meetings and a hearing. Tenaska is also expected to submit a separate water-quality permit application later this year.
Since the Nebraska-based company unveiled the project last summer, the proposed plant has divided residents over whether its promised economic benefits outweigh its potential costs.
Supporters have emphasized the need for reliable electricity, the millions of dollars in projected local tax revenue, and other benefits, while opponents have raised concerns about air pollution and public health, water withdrawals and discharges, noise, property values, and the further industrialization of rural Fluvanna.
The debate has also been shaped by lingering distrust surrounding Tenaska’s existing plant and disagreement over whether company-funded studies and regulatory reviews provide enough protection for nearby residents.
After months of deferrals and debate, the Planning Commission recommended denial of critical local permits. The Board of Supervisors overruled them, approving the special use permit in March and shifting the dispute into the state and federal permitting process.
Should permits ultimately be granted, Tensaka could start the construction project as early as late 2027, with the plant going online sometime in 2031.
The company has launched a “virtual open house” on the project website for those who were unable to attend the presentation in person. Visit
