Big Eddy-Knight Transmission Project
The following comments were submitted in response to the open comment period described below.
BPA is proposing to construct a 500-kilovolt line from BPA’s Big Eddy Substation in The Dalles, Ore., to a proposed substation (Knight Substation) about 4 miles northwest of Goldendale, Wash., under existing BPA transmission lines. The proposed project is needed to increase the electrical capacity of our lines in response to requests for transmission service in this area.
To understand the potential impacts of this proposal, BPA will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed project. During this public process, we will be working with the Washington and Oregon energy facility siting councils, as well as with other federal, state and local agencies, landowners, interest groups and tribes.
Public scoping meeting information: http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/public_affairs/Calendar/
Comments are numbered consecutively as they are received. Breaks in the number sequence result when comments are deleted because they were submitted in error or have inappropriate content (such as SPAM). If you do not see your comment two business days after you submit it, please contact us at (800) 622-4519.
For More Information:
http://www.efw.bpa.gov/environmental_services/Document_Library/Big_Eddy-Knight/
Close of comment: 7/21/2009
- BEP090001 -
Shawn Zumwalt/Oregon Department of State LandsThe Department of State Lands (DSL) holds ownership of the Columbia River from the Ordinary High Water line to the center of the river, additional transmission lines require an easement with DSL. BPA has multiple transmission line easements with DSL; however, additional lines are not covered under the current easements. Attached is an easement application for the proposed transmission line. Please contact me for any assistance on the application process.
View Attachment
- BEP090002 -
Eshelman
- BEP090003 -
Sam D. HarrisonThe West Alternative line is by far a better route than either of the other two proposed routes. It crosses Washington state lands and other properties not as heavily agricultural in nature as the other alternative routes. And, the West Alternative follows an existing BPA transmission line. The Middle and East Alternatives cross mostly agricultural properties that include structures. The agricultural land in the Centerville, WA, area is essential to the economy of Klickitat County, WA.
- BEP090004 -
Sam D. Harrison
This is a duplicate comment to BEP090003
The West Alternative line is by far a better route than either of the other two proposed routes. It crosses Washington State lands and other properties not as heavily agricultural in nature as the other alternative routes. And, the West Alternative follows an existing BPA transmission line already established. The Middle and East Alternatives cross mostly agricultural properties that include structures. The agricultural land in the Centerville, WA, area is essential to the economy of Klickitat County, WA.
- BEP090006 -
Robert WohlseinI would like to see you useing the west alignment option since you already have the right of way and I think it would be the most cost effective. We need to have a way to get the power out of this area because we have very good wind here for wind generators.
- BEP090007 -
Mark Doubravsky
- BEP090008 -
Scott McEwen/Columbia Land Trust
- BEP090009 -
Van EatonRegarding the Big Eddy-Knight Project: 1. A single three-hour visitation by the public, in my area, did not provide enough time for me to attend. 2. If the line is to be placed on existing towers, I do not understand the need for this process. 3. If the "West alternative" is a NEW route, the map makes it look like it goes right over my house; not an alternative I can approve. Maybe an enlargement of the map would help.
- BEP090010 -
Robert E. Morrow
- BEP090011 -
Mark Rankin
- BEP090012 -
Jim E. Hill
- BEP090013 -
Lenny Anderson and Gisela Foerstermann
- BEP090014 -
Thomas E. Roth
- BEP090015 -
Sam D. and Twyla M. Harrison
- BEP090021 -
Gary and Lynda LaVine
- BEP090022 -
Douglas ClosnerTwo years ago I bought a RETIREMENT piece of property with a beautiful view of Mt.Adams in the RiverCrest Developement. We spent all of our time developing the property and with this proposal I just might stop, and look elsewhere. Doug and Molly Closner P.S. How about decent maps and being properly informed!
- BEP090023 -
Shannon McCaw/Matt and Shannon McCawI would like to voice our opposition to the Big Eddy-Knight 500 KV Line - Middle Alternative. The subdivision which we have purchased 20 acres in (River Crest) would be extremely affected by this option, with both views obstructed as well as making it less aesthetically pleasing.
- BEP090024 -
Todd Cornett/Wasco County
- BEP090025 -
Mark Mesecher/Mesecher
- BEP090027 -
Rachael Hurst/selfMy daughters are 7th generation property holders and stewards of the land in the Centerville valley. I think you would be hard pressed to find an individual land owner that will be more affected by any of your three routes than our family if you choose the middle route, in either the amount of land affected and the spirit and history that you will irreparably harm. My family are not wealthy land owners. The amount of land and cattle we manage makes enough money to keep the ranch viable so that we don't have to sell it (no one actually makes a living through this ranch anymore). We are just trying to keep a dying tradition alive. A 500 KV powerline splitting us down the middle will dramatically harm not only our family tradition but, more importantly, the tradition of many other families in this area. It is hard to really write in words the value of tradition and the many varied textures this terms carries. Hard to translate into dollars and weigh the value of tradition against the monetary analysis of this project you are undertaking. But we ask that you seriously consider this aspect and at least attempt to understand this intangibility. Finally, the middle option crosses perhaps the most important wetland and avian habitat in the area. Please take a very serious and hard look at the environmental impact of this area.
- BEP090029 -
Paul Chiles/Horseshoe Bend Ranch
- BEP090030 -
Matthew Chiles
- BEP090031 -
Matthew Fromherz/Washington State Department of Natural ResourcesHard copy of attached document placed in mail July 20, 2009.
View Attachment
- BEP090032 -
Lenny Anderson and Gisela Foerstermann
- BEP090033 -
Bob Divers/Divers Company, LLC
- BEP090034 -
Mark GarnerThe West alternative is the best alternative for my family and I believe the community of Centerville. My family homesteaded in the Centerville valley in 1876, our Ranch/Farm has stayed in and been worked by our family for the past 133 years. I am part of the 5th generation of Garner to live and work the land and the 6th generation is from age 1 to 13. We run 100 head of cattle and farm a little over 400 acres of alfalfa and wheat. The proposed middle route alternative effectively splits our farm down the middle coming within less than 1/4 mile of the family homestead where both my brother and cousins families reside, running the length of our farm ground for an entire mile, 80 acres of which is irrigated. It then continues south running the entire length of our grazing lands for another 3+ miles. My family and I are not wealthy land owners, this amount of land an cattle makes enough money to keep the ranch viable so that we don't have to sell it. We are just trying to keep a dying tradition alive, and a 500 KV powerline splitting us down the middle will dramatically harm not only our family tradition but, more importantly, the tradition of many other families in this area. It is hard to really write in words the value of tradition and the many varied textures this term carries. Hard to translate into dollars and weigh the value of tradition against the monetary analysis of this project you are undertaking. But we ask that you seriously consider this aspect and at least attempt to understand this intangibility. I think you would be hard pressed to find an individual land owner that will be more affected by any of your three routes than our family if you choose the middle route, in either the amount of land affected and the spirit and history that you will irreparably harm. Finally, the middle option crosses perhaps the most important wetland and avian habitat in the area. Please take a very serious and hard look at the environmental impact of this area.
- BEP090035 -
John GarnerThe West alternative is the best alternative for my family and I believe the community of Centerville. My family homesteaded in the Centerville valley in 1876, our Ranch/Farm has stayed in and been worked by our family for the past 133 years. I am part of the 5th generation of Garner to live and work the land and the 6th generation is from age 1 to 13. We run 100 head of cattle and farm a little over 400 acres of alfalfa and wheat. The proposed middle route alternative effectively splits our farm down the middle coming within less than 1/4 mile of the family homestead where my family and cousins families reside, running the length of our farm ground for an entire mile, 80 acres of which is irrigated. It then continues south running the entire length of our grazing lands for another 3+ miles. My family and I are not wealthy land owners, this amount of land an cattle makes enough money to keep the ranch viable so that we don't have to sell it. We are just trying to keep a dying tradition alive, and a 500 KV powerline splitting us down the middle will dramatically harm not only our family tradition but, more importantly, the tradition of many other families in this area. It is hard to really write in words the value of tradition and the many varied textures this term carries. Hard to translate into dollars and weigh the value of tradition against the monetary analysis of this project you are undertaking. But we ask that you seriously consider this aspect and at least attempt to understand this intangibility. I think you would be hard pressed to find an individual land owner that will be more affected by any of your three routes than our family if you choose the middle route, in either the amount of land affected and the spirit and history that you will irreparably harm. Finally, the middle option crosses perhaps the most important wetland and avian habitat in the area. Please take a very serious and hard look at the environmental impact of this area.
- BEP090036 -
Phil GarnerPlease choose the West alternative I belive it is the best alternative for my family and the community of Centerville. My family homesteaded in the Centerville valley in 1876, our Ranch/Farm has stayed in and been worked by our family for the past 133 years. I am the last of the of the 4th generation of Garners to live and work the land. We run 100 head of cattle and farm a little over 400 acres of alfalfa and wheat. The proposed middle route alternative effectively splits our farm down the middle coming within less than 1/4 mile of the family homestead where my nephews and their families reside as well as the ranch that I own on the east side of the line, where my daughter and her family live. this route runs the length of our farm ground for an entire mile, 80 acres of which is irrigated. It then continues south running the entire length of our grazing lands for another 3+ miles. My family and I are not wealthy land owners, this amount of land an cattle makes enough money to keep the ranch viable so that we don't have to sell it. We are just trying to keep a dying tradition alive, and a 500 KV powerline splitting us down the middle will dramatically harm not only our family tradition but, more importantly, the tradition of many other families in this area. It is hard to really write in words the value of tradition and the many varied textures this term carries. Hard to translate into dollars and weigh the value of tradition against the monetary analysis of this project you are undertaking. But we ask that you seriously consider this aspect and at least attempt to understand this intangibility. I think you would be hard pressed to find an individual land owner that will be more affected by any of your three routes than our family if you choose the middle route, in either the amount of land affected and the spirit and history that you will irreparably harm. Finally, the middle option crosses perhaps the most important wetland and avian habitat in the area. Please take a very serious and hard look at the environmental impact of this area.
- BEP090037 -
Rory D. Westberg/National Park Service
- BEP090038 -
Robert Hogfoss/selfI am an attorney who practices environmental and energy law nationally. I have lived and worked in the Gorge off and on since the 1970s, and I have owned land in Klickitat County for several decades. I currently reside in Klickitat County within the general vicinity of the proposed Big Eddy-Knight transmission project area. Of the three proposed alternatives identified by BPA in the scoping notice, the West alternative would have significant impacts on the environment, beyond the impacts that would be associated with either the Middle or East alternatives. Impacts that can be anticipated from the West alternative include (a) greater intrusion to the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area; (b) greater impacts on identified sensitive plants; (c) potential impacts on the cultural resources of Horsethief Lake State Park; (d) intrusion on conservation easements and trust lands; and (e) greater visibility impacts from State and federal lands. The preferred alternative for this project should be one that avoids or minimizes the preceding impacts to the fullest extent possible. Please add me to the mailing list for future notices concerning this project. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Robert Hogfoss 8132 HWY 14 Lyle, Washington 98635
- BEP090039 -
Mark and Theresa Rankins
- BEP090040 -
Harry Chaussee
- BEP090041 -
David M. Phillips/ProjectPATCHPlease see the attachments, also sent via First Class Mail today.
View Attachment
- BEP090042 -
David M. Phillips/ProjectPATCHPlease see the attachment. Also sent via First Class Mail today.
View Attachment
- BEP090043 -
Richard Till/Friends of the Columbia GorgeWritten comments were submitted directly to Steve Prickett, Project Manager, because the on-line form would not allow pdf or doc files to be attached.
View Attachment
- BEP090044 -
Eckton Ranch
See attached comment.
View Attachment
- BEP090045 -
Carter Timmerman/Washington State Department of TransportationSee attached comment.
View Attachment
- BEP090046 -
Angie Kenney/Columbia River Gorge CommissionSee attached comment.
View Attachment
- BEP090047 -
Kristin Cameron
- BEP090049 -
Phone calls - 24 conversation records
- BEP090050 -
Public Comments/Goldendale Open HouseView the attachment.
View Attachment
- BEP090051 -
Public Comments/The Dalles Open House
- BEP090052 -
Jeff Horne and 252 signatories
I am writing to comment on the proposed Big Eddy-Knight Transmission Project and its potential impact on the Columbia River Gorge, a place I care about protecting for future generations to enjoy. The Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area is a spectacular area, recognized by Congress for its unparalleled scenic vistas and outstanding natural landscapes. When considering the construction of 26 to 28 miles of new transmission lines through the Columbia River Gorge and surrounding areas, The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) must analyze the potential direct and indirect effects of the proposed action on resources protected under the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Act. The BPA should apply programmatic environmental review to assess the impacts of new transmission lines, pipelines, and associated energy development throughout the Gorge region.
The BPA’s alternatives analysis must consider alternatives that avoid siting any new transmission lines within the National Scenic Area or its viewshed and alternatives that would place underground all or portions of new transmissions lines within the Scenic Area viewshed. The western alternative would have egregious impacts on scenic, natural, cultural and recreation resources. Therefore it should be immediately dropped from consideration.
The BPA must evaluate the potential impacts to scenic, natural, cultural and recreation resources in the National scenic Area. Besides the Scenic Area concerns, two of the alternatives, the middle and the western routes, are near or within a state park, a natural area preserve, the Columbia Hills Important Bird Area, rare plant habitat, oak woodlands listed as critical habitat in Washington State, and endangered species habitat.
The BPA must submit a complete application to the Forest Service for scenic area review and approval. Approval of a land use proposal not accompanied by a complete and adequate application violates the Columbia River Gorge Management Plan.
As BPA moves forward with this project, please require all transmission lines be visually subordinate as seen from key viewing areas to the maximum extent practicable and select an alternative route with the least impact on resources within the Columbia River Gorge. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Jeff Horne
Attachment includes 252 signatories
View Attachment
- BEP090053 -
Teresa Kubo/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- BEP090054 -
Joanne Alexander
- BEP090055 -
Gwen Clear/Washington State Department of Ecology
- BEP090056 -
Betsy Billeter
- BEP090057 -
Travis Nelson/Washington State Department of Fish and WildlifeSee comments attached.
View Attachment
- BEP090058 -
Richard Till/Friends of the Columbia GorgeSupplemental comments.
View Attachment
- BEP090059 -
Gary Hardke/Cannon Power Group/Cannon Power GroupSee attached comments
View Attachment
- BEP090060 -
Dave Brotherton, Fire Chief/Centerville Fire DepartmentSee attached comment.
View Attachment
- BEP090061 -
Maria KrollSee document attached.
View Attachment
- BEP090062 -
Jon DoveSee document attached
View Attachment
- BEP090063 -
Barton H. ClennonSee attached document.
View Attachment
- BEP090064 -
Lynn BlakstadSee attached document
View Attachment
- BEP090065 -
Douglas and Molly ClosnerSee document attached
View Attachment
- BEP090066 -
Karl and Christine BjergoSee attached document
View Attachment
- BEP090067 -
David and Joan McClimansI am a landowner here in Klickitat County and would like to comment on your proposal to run new power lines through our area and possibly my property. I know that you are probably aware of our concerns and the fact that no one wants this in their back yard. we just want our voice to be heard. First off, right now we have what we consider a million-dollar view and that’s why we chose this particular piece of property. We look at Mt. Adams, Mt Rainier and the goat rocks area. We can see the simcoe’s and if the weather has socked in the mountains, we can still see the klickitat valley. There does exist short wooden power poles in our view, but their coloring and height make it so they are not noticed too much. putting up taller metal poles will ruin the esthetic value of our view. It has been documented that living near power lines is a health hazard. We have direct knowledge of this through a family member. We moved here for health reasons and now this. If you do decide to build, please try to move your routes as far from existing homes as possible. I know you like straight lines, but the world is getting smaller and it might be time to consider a few jogs to accommodate your neighbors. Along the same thinking of health issues is the noise of these wires. that constant buzzing is enough to drive anyone mad and what does it do to the deer? We have close to thirty deer in the area, what will it do to them and their sensitive ears? Do you realize that the proposed west alternative line would be built right in the flight path of a private airport that has no tower? We see these planes struggling to gain altitude right after take off. Putting these tall towers right in that flight path seems to be inviting a disaster. With the winds we get here, an accident involving an aircraft would surly start a fire that would be hard to contain, and may race all the way to Goldendale. this airport should make the west alternative the worst choice. Lastly, being in real estate, every one knows that power lines will devalue property values. no one wants to live around the lines. We have trouble getting people interested in land if they are any lines in sight. Some of the pieces of property already have the existing lines on them. This proposal would add another set and make it impossible to sell or build on. will you buy those properties at today’s prices? or, if you have to buy, would it be a rock bottom offer since the property will be useless as residential property? All in all I think that going through farmland would be more preferable than going though a development such as ours. Thank you for taking the time to read our concerns.
- BEP090068 -
Ken S. Berg/U.S. Department of the InteriorSee document attached.....
View Attachment
|
|
|
Finance & Rates
