| Comment: |
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoPlainText><FONT size=3><FONT face=Calibri>~Please see attached documents for additional comments~</FONT></FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoPlainText><FONT size=3><FONT face=Calibri>Hello- My mother and I live in Antelope, Oregon in a Victorian bungaloe my Grandparents purchased in 1913. Our tiny village existed without electricity until I believe 1947 when we finally got our REA Co-Op, Wasco Electric.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I was not alive but the Ruralite wrote an article that featured my Grandparents and the electrification of Antelope. This was one of the last areas to be electrified. <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>We still have some original REA wiring in our home and I tell you that's damn good wiring. The BPA and the REA was designed to deliver to rural and domestic consumers low-cost public power from the Columbia River dams for which we sacrificed our cultural heritage and wildlife. Today our power supply is being raided by enterprises using our resources to export power elsewhere with little benefit to us. Some time ago I read that already 13% of our co-op's load was being used by these giant wind turbine plantations.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>This is before the so-called Brush Canyon is hooked-up. The co-op's rates have risen and will rise higher forced to buy power to meet these loads.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Why should we the tiny rural domestic consumer pay for these costs? We have social costs as well. (I will attach some comments made to Oregon ODOE to explain.)<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoPlainText><o:p><FONT size=3 face=Calibri> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoPlainText><FONT size=3><FONT face=Calibri>In terms of hooking Brush Canyon project up to the BPA system via the proposed transmission line in question would urge a complete agency review and that an EIS be required.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>That EIS should have an expanded scope beyond the project’s direct impacts, to encompass impacts “on both ends”<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoPlainText><FONT size=3><FONT face=Calibri>(i.e., related to both the source and the use and impacts of the energy transmitted). For this transmission line, federal jurisdiction over this crucial part of the project federalizes the entire project, forcing the whole project to be reviewed. There should be focus on impacts to co-op customers, wildlife impacts, both direct species impacts and potential habitat fragmentation, particularly in previously undeveloped areas. The should also be focus on aesthetic and visual resource impacts, particularly in this area of special cultural, historic, or scenic value.<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoPlainText><FONT size=3><FONT face=Calibri>BPA should review and disclose the impacts of induced energy generation as an “indirect effect.” This should include greenhouse gas emissions if the transmission line may induce, for example, new fossil fuel generation, through increased demands of energy upon the Wasco Electric Coop and any other utilities from which the Brush Canyon wind turbine plantation expects to draw electricity.<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoPlainText><o:p><FONT size=3 face=Calibri> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoPlainText><FONT size=3><FONT face=Calibri>Thanks.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I would incorporate also a packet I sent via USPS that explains negative effects of this project on our community.<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></P> |
