Montana-to-Washington Transmission Upgrade Project
The following comments were submitted in response to the open comment period described below.
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 (800) 622-4519.
In 2010, BPA conducted a Network Open Season (NOS) process to help manage its queue of requests for long-term transmission service. During the NOS process, utilities and power generators (including wind generators and power marketers) requested the use of BPA’s transmission system to transmit their power. To determine if BPA could offer the service requested, BPA studied the transmission system and identified where existing capacity was available and where the system needed upgrades. In conducting these studies, BPA took into consideration reliability standards and criteria established by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) and Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC). Utilities are required to meet these standards and criteria when planning new facilities.
The studies found that there was not enough available transmission capacity to accommodate all requests for long-term service from BPA’s Garrison substation in Western Montana to load centers west of the Cascades and to market hubs serving the entire Northwest power market. Wind generation facilities built and proposed in the region have greatly increased the amount of planned generation in Montana seeking load and markets in the Northwest. As a result, BPA is proposing several reinforcements on BPA's transmission system at the Garrison Substation, Hot Springs Substation, Bell Substation, Dworshak Substation, and at the Hatwai Substation vicinity map. Additionally, reconductoring is being proposed on four sections totaling 12 miles on the Dworshak-Taft No. 1 500-kilovolt (kV) line and a new series compensation substation is being proposed along the Garrison-Taft No. 1 & 2 500-kV lines, both of which would allow BPA to accommodate the requests for transmission service in this area. These reinforcements would increase the firm east-to-west transfer capability of the West of Garrison and West of Hatwai paths by primarily increasing the series compensation in existing 500-kV lines in the area.
Please tell us what you think should be studied during the EIS by submitting comments during the scoping comment period that closes on June 18, 2012. To learn more about the project go to: www.bpa.gov/go/M2W or contact Andrew Montaño, toll free at 800-622-4519; directly at 503-230-4145; or by e-mail ammontano@bpa.gov.
PLEASE NOTE: This comment period has been extended to July 2, 2012.
For More Information:
http://www.bpa.gov/go/M2W
Close of comment: 7/2/2012
- M2W12 0002 -
Ebert/Clearwater CountyConcerning the Dworshak sub we would appreciate it if inprovements were structured so that a seperate co-gen plant could utilize the facilities if the opportunity presents itself to our county in the future. There has been an active effort to build a small co-gen plant here and the access to the Dworshak sub sould be vital to that effort. Thank You, Commissioner Ebert
- M2W12 0003 -
Marne/Marne and Associates, Inc.I performed a drive by of sites 2, 3, and 4 in the Miller Creek area. I did not examine each site in detail. It appears from the road that site 3 is a logical choice since there is already a substation at that site. I live in the Linda Vista area therefore none of the sites directly impact my residential neighborhood. I am not able to attend the meeting on June 12, 2012 so I am submitting this comment on-line. I am surprised you are not having the meeting at Missoula Fire Station #5 on Lower Miller Creek Road.
- M2W12 0004 -
DeVosI am for options 1 and 3. Thanks
- M2W12 0005 -
PotterI am writing in response to your proposed transmission line upgrade. I live directly below option 4 that you present. I also drive daily in view of options 2 and 3. The transmission line going up Cahoot Canyon has always been an eyesore from the inception. It ruins the view of Lolo Peak as it is and now you want to further degrade the view by adding a new substation. It shouldn't take much studying to pick the logical site for a substation... Option 1. It affects the least number of residents.
- M2W12 0007 -
AllenPer your "fact Sheet" Bonneville Power Administration is a noprofit FEDERAL agency. The proposed compensation station zone crosses about 70 miles of FEDERAL and STATE land. So why would you propose to build the new substation on private property. I am the owner of the property under option #1. Yes you do have an esement for the power line, but now a substation. You can move the location less than 1/2 mile in either direction and it would be on government land. I do not know if options 2, 3 or 4 are on private land, but if they are not, put the new substation there. If options 2, 3 & 4 are on private land, please GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD
- M2W12 0010 -
BryantLook at harm to humans or animals because of high voltage electricl waves. Also, damage to vegetation. I'd like more information about long-term effects of living near substation and high voltage wires.
- M2W12 0011 -
public meeting attendee
view attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0012 -
RobertsI need more information about everything! Will there be new/more power lines? Where? Do you have maps of plans?
- M2W12 0013 -
I need more information on the size of the area impacted by a new series compensation substation. What changes, if any, to the lines in the proposed compensation station zone?
- M2W12 0014 -
Please have your studies look at the impact of project on spread of obnoxious weeds.
- M2W12 0015 -
Please get this done ASAP. Our country needs more domestic energy and less red tape getting it.
- M2W12 0016 -
DUPLICATE
Please get this done ASAP. Our country needs more domestic energy and less red tape getting it.
- M2W12 0017 -
BraunI live on upper Duncan Drive on the west side of the Rattlesnake Missoula near the substation. Will the upgrade project affect me and my neighborhood?
- M2W12 0018 -
Schneider/Flathead Electricview attachment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0019 -
Slovarp, City Engineer/City of MissoulaAny physical infrastructure upgrade doesn't seem to affect the city of Missoula from what I can tll by the information provided. If the project plans any physical improvements in the Missoula city limits, please contact me at the City of Missoula.
- M2W12 0020 -
Ellis, Sr./Lincoln Electric Cooperative
I have the utmost confidence that BPA will do everything it can to placate the many different interests. I believe that this upgrade is driven by the Eastern Montana wind projects so they have access to the I-5 corridor in Washington and Oregon. Please make sure that the costs of this project is recovered from these that are requiring it and not from Preference Customers!
Thank you for your work!
- M2W12 0021 -
Please have your studies look at the impacts to adjoining landowners.
I need more information about will this project require any additional right of way?
We appreciate your efforts to improve the power grid so we can all have available power at an affordable price.
- M2W12 0022 -
Scott
Any of the potential substation locations will not affect my property, as they are not within my view.
Thank you for the information.
- M2W12 0023 -
Hunterview attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0024 -
Twite/Linda Vista Subdivision and Golf Courseview attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0025 -
public meeting attendeeview attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0026 -
public meeting attendeeview attached comments
View Attachment
- M2W12 0027 -
public meeting attendeeview attached comments
View Attachment
- M2W12 0028 -
Evansview attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0029 -
Public Meeting Attendeeview attached comments
View Attachment
- M2W12 0030 -
Tierney/Montana Department of Transportationview attached letter
View Attachment
- M2W12 0031 -
Kelly/United States Department of the Interiorview attached letter
View Attachment
- M2W12 0032 -
Public Meeting Attendeesview attached comments from St. Regis Public Meeting on June 13, 2012.
View Attachment
- M2W12 0033 -
Winegarview attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0034 -
Hearstview attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0035 -
public meeting attendeeview attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0036 -
public meeting attendeesView attached comments received at the Missoula Public Scoping Meeting on June 13, 2012.
View Attachment
- M2W12 0037 -
Public meeting attendeesComments attached from Public Scoping Meeting held in Wallace, ID on June 14, 2012
View Attachment
- M2W12 0039 -
MuzzanaThe existing substation at option 3 is already an eyesore, I can't imagine making the thing bigger! The Miller Creek area has neighborhoods and will continue to grow. The residents take great pride in their homes and yards and appreciate the views. Why wreck a good thing? Option 1 appears to be the best option. The St. Regis area will have the least impact on families and property values.
- M2W12 0038 -
LouisI own bare land near St. Regis, MT very close to proposed substation 1. I attended a meeting and heard this may be as large as 40 acres. That is huge and definitely not what I intended as a neighbor when I purchased my land. There are moose, elk, deer, turkeys, grouse, myriad birds, and many other wildlife in the area which would be negatively affected by a substation of any size. I am a participant in the MSU Extension Forestry Forest Stewardship Program for private landowners and, as such, I have surveyed my land, timber, wildlife, etc. I have a working stewardship plan with the primary purpose of maintaining wildlife habitat. A substation would be counter to everything I bought the land for. The US Forest Service is currently doing an EIS in this area to potentially close more roads and areas to protect wildlife and their habitat. The neighbors all live off grid and are content to do so, as am I. They have solar, microhydro, and propane generators. Please don't destroy our natural surroundings to send power to the west coast. A less environmentally sensitive area would be more appropriate. I am concerned about my property value dropping due to the potential installation of a substation. Property values have suffered enough due to the state of the economy without have a substation as my new neighbor. I am concerned about damage from increased traffic on Tamarack Creek Road during construction of a substation. The road is currently well maintained, but does not carry a lot of traffic. An increase in traffic can do a lot of damage to the road as well as Tamarack Creek and the adjacent woods/wildlife habitat. I access my property from Tamarack Creek Road and Lower Sevenmile Road. Please don't destroy natural areas with unnatural installations. You must minimize impact now. Once degraded, there is often no going back. And I don't see BPA taking out the substation and rehabilitating the land when they see what damage it has done to the wildlife nor compensating any neighbors for the devaluation of private property.
- M2W12 0040 -
WRIGHTAs a former resident of Montana that visits the Montana-Idaho-Washington are often, I am EXTREMELY concerned about the Transmission Upgrade Project. It seems ridiculous that BPA would put this project on private land instead of public land. If BPA is a non-profit, federal agency, then they need to put forth every effort to do their projects on federal land - away from private residences and areas where hard-working citizens live, work and play. While I know there have been studies done (many by the power companies themselves) that do not show a direct health risk from substations, it is impossible to prove that there is no risk over the long term, especially for children. Since my children ( who are two and four) love to spend time on their grandparents' land - I would be concerned for their health if there was a substation present. Furthermore, from what I've learned about the construction process, the use of BPA's equipment is very loud and will be harmful to the elk, deer and other animal populations - especially in areas where mammals and birds raise their young. BPA, in their own words, states they are "accountable to the people of the Northwest and works collaboratively with residents, utilities, elected officials and other stakeholders to meet the regions electricity needs." I truly hope this is true. I hope BPA will take the needs of private land-owners in the St.Regis area into consideration and not put any electricity substations on private land where citizens live, work, play and enjoy the UNSPOILED land, water and wildlife. Thank you.
- M2W12 0041 -
Wrightview attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0042 -
Gidel/Upper Linda Vista Homeowners Associationview attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0043 -
Twite/Twite Family Partnershipview attached comment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0044 -
Brush/NorthWestern.EnergyWe request BPA to consider future transmission and load serving needs for the Missoula and Bitterroot Valleys in its selection of the compensation station location. Option 2 would allow the station to be co-located with existing transmission and substation facilities with minimal new future line and substation additions needed. NorthWestern Energy owns 80 acres in the Miller Creek area that is zoned and planned for future substation and transmission additions. If option 4 is selected and it is decided that a tap is needed to meet the load needs of these valleys, the series compensation station may need to be moved. The timeframe for the EIS process seems to be exceedingly long. All of the system additions are in existing substations or in the transmission right of way. The only series compensation addition not in an existing substation is between Garrison and Taft. We urge you to expedite the EIS process to get the process completed in less than two years.
- M2W12 0045 -
Brush/NorthWestern EnergyIn my previous comment Option 2 should be Option 3. NorthWestern's substation and transmission is located near Option 3.
- M2W12 0046 -
Smith/Idaho Conservation Leagueview attachment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0047 -
Mbabalyie/United States Environmental Protection Agencyview attachment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0048 -
Berry/Sonoran InstituteThe Sonoran Institute supports federal, state, and local policies that facilitate renewable energy development in areas with the best resources and the fewest environmental and community impacts. In turn, we favor upgrades to existing transmission systems to service new renewable energy generation, as opposed to constructing new lines with more extensive impacts to environmental and community values. The Montana-to-Washington Transmission System Upgrade represents a project that could deliver considerable renewable energy with minimal environmental and community impacts. We encourage BPA to move forward with a thorough analysis of impacts to environmental and community values that could potentially result from this project.
- M2W12 0049 -
Wagner/Garlington Lohn Robinsonview attached comment on behalf of Maloney Properties, LLC
View Attachment
- M2W12 0050 -
Allen
My husband and I own property in option #1. We are currently building a small cabin to enjoy with our friends and family. We love the St. Regis area. It is beautiful, quiet, and majestic. We have seen deer, turkey, elk, elk calves, eagles, and moose on our property.
The noise the substation will make is awful, and the view will be gone. Any 2 year old can go to google earth and find a better spot for the substation then BPA has done!
I hope you DON'T put it on option #1, but if you do, then I want you to buy our property, because the reason for going there would be destroyed.
- M2W12 0051 -
AllenOnly 4 Proposed sites? The transmission line from site 1 near St Regis to site 4 near Missoula stretches at least 70 areal miles. To conduct a thorough study more than four sites should be considered. Proposed site 1 is the only site I can speak for, but it is on private property. Why not public property for a public utility? Everyone can understand that the area is growing and more infrastructure is inevitable, however private land should not be acquired using eminent domain when public land is available. If landowners do sell you property, neighboring property values will be affected for miles surrounding the sites because of noise pollution and visual esthetics. It is my understanding that there are other proposed sites near existing sub-stations. Impacts near existing sub-stations would be less dramatic. They are already noisy and visually unappealing. Proposed site 1 is not the best option.
- M2W12 0052 -
AllenMy in-laws own property on/near option 1 where my family (including two small children) loves to recreate. We are very concerned about the noise and possible health concerns produced by a sub-station. It would also affect the abundant wildlife on the property. The property provides important cover at that elevation for many species. Elk winter and calf there now, but the noise produced would drive the wildlife and my family away from the PRIVATE property we love.
- M2W12 0053 -
MallionPlease find suitable federal land for the project and not private property. I am concerned for both the impact on the wildlife and surrounding private property values.
- M2W12 0054 -
Haun/Pacific Northwest Regional Council of CarpentersThe Montana to Washington (M2W) Project is an opportunity to put Montana workers to work and to begin the transformation of the United States into an energy independent nation. The M2W Project will allow wind developers a better opportunity to bring their projects from the conceptual phase to on-line in a timely manner. It is a rare occurrence to have a project with this many positive implications and minimal impacts. By approving the M2W Project, Montana's economy will be transformed by creating thousands of family-wage construction jobs, hundreds of permanent local jobs and generating millions of dollars in tax revenue and lease payments. Having a succinct NEPA analysis process is essential to Montana's economic future. Sincerely, Jimmy Haun Representative Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters
- M2W12 0055 -
Doney/Great Falls Development AuthorityView attachment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0056 -
Kaiserski/MT Department of Commerce, Energy Promotion and DevelopmentView attachment
View Attachment
- M2W12 0057 -
Fox/Renewable Northwest ProjectPlease see attached comments from Renewable Northwest Project.
View Attachment
- M2W12 0058 -
MartinezMy name is Mario Martinez. I am a Service Representative for the Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters and a native of Montana. I would like to say on a personal level, I am excited that Montana has an opportunity to be at the fore front of the renewable energy industry. Renewable energy’s ability to have virtually no footprint is outstanding. On a professional level, the renewable energy industry has an enormous potential to put people to work at a livable family wage. I have the great honor to represent over 800 carpenters, millwrights and pile drivers here in Montana. I communicate with them every day and all of them are extremely proud to be able to perform such important work, while having the opportunity to provide for their families. My members and are in complete support of the M2W project. “The M2W project is the lowest-hanging fruit and the lowest impact transmission capacity addition available anywhere in the West. It doesn't involve placing a single new pole anywhere other than where poles are currently situated. The M2W project simply upgrades and adds capacity to a line that was constructed nearly 30 years ago. The line has been part of the ambient environment for three decades. The value of homes and other structures built after the line was constructed will not be adversely affected; the original values of these properties reflected the line’s presence. Similarly, the views from these properties have always included the BPA and other power lines. The BPA M2W project simply entails small expansions at two existing substations in Montana and the construction of a new one near either Missoula or St. Regis. A very small amount of ground disturbance will be required to complete the entire M2W project. Any disturbance outside of the actual substation footprint can be reclaimed to its original condition. Any visual impacts associated with the new substation near either St. Regis or Missoula can be mitigated with screening. Hundreds of millions of dollars in wind power generation investment, millions of dollars in annual, local property tax collections, hundreds of thousands of dollars in landowner lease payments, hundreds of temporary construction jobs and a significant number of permanent jobs in rural Montana hinge on getting the M2W project constructed in a timely way. There are no significant environmental impacts to justify exhaustive environmental studies or a protracted public review process. The NEPA review and schedule should reflect the minimal, new environmental risks the M2W project poses. It should be focused strictly on the areas actually affected by the two substation expansions and the new substation near either St. Regis or Missoula. BPA should avoid looking at the impacts of the existing BPA transmission line. Those impacts were addressed 30 years ago and factored into decisions property owners, buyers, and others have made since then. There are too many benefits to Montana riding on the construction of the low impact M2W project to hold it hostage to a protracted, needlessly exhaustive NEPA analysis process.”
- M2W12 0060 -
Corday/City of Missoula, Parks DeptAttached is a comment letter and also a map from Missoula's Open Space Plan. Thanks, Jackie Corday
View Attachment
- M2W12 0061 -
O'Herron/Missoula City CouncilMr. Andrew Montano Bonneville Power Administration PO Box 3621 905 NE 11th Ave. Portland, OR 97208-3621 June 30, 2012 Comments on the Montana-to-Washington Transmission System Upgrade Project. Dear Mr. Montano: I reside in Missoula, Montana, and I am a member of the Missoula City Council. I represent Ward 5, which is the area of the City adjacent to the area where Options 2, 3, 4 are located. I would like to make it clear that I have a realistic expectation that electricity is necessary for the function of our society. I understand that, for the foreseeable future, electricity must be transferred across the ground near the earth's surface, and there is a need for substations on the landscape. If you decide to put the substation at one of the Missoula locations, I ask that you consider Option 4. In your efforts to avoid or minimize impacts to human resources, it looks as though the socioeconomic impacts of Option 4 would be much less than Options 2 or 3. I say that because hundreds of residential parcels have been approved by the City of Missoula for development adjacent to the locations of Options 2 and 3. If either Option 2 or 3 were selected: • There would be a substantial decrease in the property values of the parcels that have been approved for development compared to Option 4, greatly affecting the property owners and putting at risk their ability to market the parcels. • If development still occurred, the relative quality of life of local residents would be less, due to the close proximity of the substation to residences and parks, compared to Option 4. I hope that the EIS does a good job analyzing and identifying the socioeconomic impacts of the Options. And, if you decide to locate the substation at one of the three Missoula locations, I strongly urge you to make it Option 4. Thank you very much for your consideration in this matter, Mr. Montano. If I may be of assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, /s/ Michael P. O'Herron Mike O'Herron 4117 S. Reserve St. Missoula, MT 59803 (406) 240-4199 moherron99@aol.com cc: Senator Jon Tester Senator Max Baucus Representative Denny Rehberg
- M2W12 0062 -
Malek/House District 98 MT State Representative
I am a two-term Montana State Representative, currently running for a Montana Senate seat in a district where I won the primary with strong numbers just a month ago. My Senate district includes the Miller Creek area where, I understand, a new substation as large as 40 acres may be built to support the M2W Project. I am writing in strong support of expediting the review and approval of the M2W Project.
As you know, Montana has been rapidly developing wind projects. Montana wind is abundant and strong, better, I’m told than Oregon, Washington, and several other states. Montana wind is attractive for the Northwest because our winds peak during the day and in the winter and can therefore augment the Gorge winds that peak in the spring and summer and tend to blow at night. I am proud of the exceptional work the BPA has done in demonstrating wind energy works! Montanans want to be part of developing a carbon-neutral and reliable energy future for the Northwest.
Montana has struggled with issues surrounding rights-of-way for new transmission lines. The M2W project involves no location of new transmission lines and no significant environmental impacts that necessitate protracted environmental studies and public review processes. Existing lines will be used! Existing substations can be expanded with minimal impacts.
Missoula and Ravalli counties are growing and will need more energy. Northwestern Energy owns the land where a new substation could be built. Missoulians are strong supporters of alternative energy and, I believe, will ultimately support incurring impacts from a new substation to support wind energy development in our state. We will work with developers to minimize impacts involved with construction of a new substation, make sure the surrounding area is returned to its original condition, and mitigate ongoing impacts with trees and natural screening to reduce visual impacts.
Montana needs the temporary construction jobs that can employ students from our alternative energy college programs, the permanent jobs that will be created in rural areas, the local property tax increases, and the lease payments to landowners. We are a rural state in need of diversification. As our constitution states, we treasure our clean and healthful environment. Use of Montana’s clean, renewable wind is critically important to our state, to the education of our citizens and jobs for the future.
I read that BPA spokesperson Teresa Waugh estimates the M2W project will cost between $115 and $125 million compared to the $1 billion cost of MSTI. Teresa noted the M2W project will provide 520 megawatts of additional capacity, enough to power 500,000 homes. This project is important to Montana and to the Northwest. I encourage you to do all you can to expedite its review.
In your response to these comments, please outline the benefits to Missoula County especially in terms of potential payments in lieu of taxes should the substation be built in our county. I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you.
- M2W12 0063 -
Hernandez/Western Environmental Law Centerview attached document
View Attachment
- M2W12 0064 -
Dorris/Maloney Propertiesview attached document
View Attachment
- M2W12 0065 -
Haines/Missoula City Council, Ward 5view attached comments
View Attachment
- M2W12 0066 -
Larson/Gilbert Larson Engineering and SurveyingView comment on behalf of Lloyd A. Twite Family Partnership
View Attachment
- M2W12 0067 -
Whitman/Nez Perce Tribal Executive Committeeview attached document
View Attachment
|
|
|
