Showing posts with label Basin Electric Power Cooperative. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Basin Electric Power Cooperative. Show all posts

Saturday, February 8, 2014

Biologists worry proposed power line a threat to golden eagles

Published February 08, 2014, 10:54 PM

Biologists worry proposed power line a threat to golden eagles

FARGO – Biologists are concerned that a proposed power transmission line that would skirt the southern Killdeer Mountains in western North Dakota could disrupt nesting habitat for protected golden eagles.
By: Patrick Springer, INFORUM
  • Protected golden eagles
    • image
    Protected golden eagles, such as the one shown above, have important nesting habitat and hunting territory in the Killdeer Mountains. Biologists are concerned that a proposed electrical transmission line could disturb nesting sites for the eagles or result in eagle deaths through electrocution or colliding with the wires. Special to The Forum
    FARGO – Biologists are concerned that a proposed power transmission line that would skirt the southern Killdeer Mountains in western North Dakota could disrupt nesting habitat for protected golden eagles.
    A research biologist said the eagles around the Killdeer Mountains are of special concern because they exhibit rare paired hunting and group hunting behavior, never before documented in golden eagles.
    Marguerite Coyle, an assistant biology professor at the University of Jamestown who has studied the golden eagles since 2002, said placement and construction of the power line could disturb nesting sites. She’s also concerned eagles could be electrocuted or killed by colliding with the lines in flight.
    “It’s a big concern,” Coyle said. “You’re putting power lines through one of the highest-density areas of golden eagles in North Dakota.”
    Coyle has submitted testimony about her concerns about habitat disruption in federal and state reviews of the power line Basin Electric Power Cooperative is proposing that would extend almost 200 miles from its Antelope Valley Station northwest of Beulah to a substation near Neset in western North Dakota.
    Coyle and biologists for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which also has provided comments about the proposal, are concerned that the project’s disruptions would be especially harmful to breeding eagles and juvenile eagles.
    The transmission project should take an alternative route to avoid what Coyle calls “vital nesting habitat” for golden eagles, she wrote to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service, which is conducting the federal environmental and cultural resources review of the project.
    Basin Electric said the power line is needed to meet a dramatic increase in power demand stemming from the oil boom in western North Dakota.
    “Basin Electric’s current route goes through the heart of one of the most important” golden eagle habitat sites in the state, Coyle said. The area provides important nesting and hunting terrain, and also is a major migration route for eagles in North Dakota, she said.
    “They are using that area very densely,” she said.
    Federal laws protecting bald eagles and golden eagles require that eagle nests not be disturbed unless a permit has been obtained, which requires an eagle conservation plan.
    A draft review by the Rural Utilities Service found about 97 raptor nests within a one-mile corridor of the proposed transmission route but did not identify any active golden eagle nests, said Jeffrey Towner, field supervisor for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s North Dakota Field Office in Bismarck.
    But even eagle nests that appear inactive or unoccupied cannot be disturbed and should be protected, Towner said. Eagles sometimes use multiple nests and rotate among them, he said.
    Federal wildlife officials are asking the project reviewers to make “doubly sure” there are no eagle nests that could be disturbed by the transmission line, he said.
    “We believe they should take our recommendation into account,” Towner said. “In my view, they would be well-advised to make absolutely sure that anything they authorize or provide funding for would not result in unauthorized taking of an eagle.”
    The route Basin Electric proposes for the transmission line in the area of the Killdeer Mountains in Dunn County has strong support from landowners, said Curt Pearson, a Basin spokesman.
    Because of strong landowner acceptance, and problems encountered by development farther south of the Killdeer Mountains, Basin Electric is not proposing any alternate routes in the area, he said.
    “Basin is going to be working with the federal agencies to mitigate any impacts that are identified,” Pearson said.
    Although advocating for protection of eagles and nesting sites, federal wildlife officials are not asking that the transmission route be altered. Standard procedures call for taking steps to minimize bird collisions or electrocutions from power lines, Towner said.
    The cooperative hunting behavior of the golden eagles in North Dakota first was observed and documented in 2003, Coyle said.
    Researchers observed 11 groups of adult eagles, with two or more hunting together in nine areas known to be occupied by the eagles. Since then, cooperative hunting among golden eagles has been documented in multiple years and sites, suggesting to Coyle that the practice is not a “fluke.”
    All of the instances of group hunting involved nesting eagles, with many confirmed to be rearing young, Coyle said.
    Because of widespread oil and gas development, golden eagles and other species are experiencing habitat fragmentation and human disturbances, Towner said.
    “We believe they’re under unprecedented pressure, and we’re concerned,” he said. “I think wildlife in general is under unprecedented pressure.”
    Eagles have been protected by federal law since 1940.


    Readers can reach Forum reporter Patrick Springer at (701) 241-5522

    http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/426116/publisher_ID/1/
    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels: , ,

    Historic value of power-line path knowingly ignored, professor claims

    Published February 08, 2014, 10:46 PM

    Historic value of power-line path knowingly ignored, professor claims

    FARGO – Call it the second Battle of Killdeer Mountain – a clash between growing power needs associated with the oil boom and preservation of what one historian calls the Gettysburg of the Plains.
    By: Patrick Springer, INFORUM

    • Rob Sand
      • image
      Rob Sand, pictured above in a file photo, is a rancher and member of the Killdeer Mountain Alliance, which opposes a proposed power transmission line that will run about eight miles north of the town of Killdeer through the site of the 1864 Battle of Killdeer Mountain between the U.S. Army and Sioux Indians. He said the State Historical Society of North Dakota has done little to protect and preserve the site. Katherine Lymn / Forum News Service
    • Tom Isern
    • Map: Killdeer site

    More...

    Poll

    Is enough being done to protect the Killdeer Mountain battlefield site in North Dakota?
     
     
     

     or view poll results »
    FARGO – Call it the second Battle of Killdeer Mountain – a clash between growing power needs associated with the oil boom and preservation of what one historian calls the Gettysburg of the Plains.
    It’s a clash the power company, Basin Electric Power Cooperative, tried to avoid by purposefully ignoring the historic significance of a portion of the path of a proposed new electric transmission line, according to a Fargo history professor who has a grant to study the area.
    “I think omissions were made knowingly. That is my belief,” said Tom Isern, the historian-director of the Center for Cultural Heritage Renewal at North Dakota State University, of the company’s review of the site.
    Isern also questions why the state agency charged with historic preservation – a recipient of a donation of more than $1 million from a group of which Basin Electric is a member – hasn’t been more involved in speaking out about the power-line plan.
    History long known
    The Battle of Killdeer Mountain saw a huge engagement between the U.S. Army and Sioux Indians in a punitive attack by 2,200 soldiers against a native village encampment of 1,500 in 1864.
    A state historic site located a half-mile north of the proposed transmission line commemorates the battle, which involved Sitting Bull and Gall as young warriors and is seen as a prelude to Custer’s defeat at the Little Bighorn in 1876.
    The rugged Killdeer Mountains once were considered for inclusion in Theodore Roosevelt National Park, and were proposed as a freestanding national park by a prominent group of North Dakotans in 1919.
    The National Park Service in 2010 noted the historical significance of the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield area, one of five Civil War-era battle sites in North Dakota it said are likely eligible for designation on the National Register of Historic Places.
    Yet a cultural resources review by Basin Electric, which is proposing the $350 million transmission project, omitted mention of the sprawling battlefield, which the Park Service said could cover 17,340 acres, an area of roughly 36 square miles highlighted for further study.
    The proposed power line route, which skirts the south side of the Killdeer Mountains in Dunn County, would run eight miles through the study area.
    The battlefield omission came despite the fact that the consultant whose firm conducted the review twice earlier had publicly noted the area’s historic and archeological significance – even telling state oil and gas regulators of the National Park Service report.
    “The excellent condition of these landscapes where U.S. Army and American Indian combatants fought provides a unique opportunity – all five of North Dakota’s Civil War battlefields could be protected completely and permanently,” the Park Service said.
    The Park Service’s American Battlefield Protection Program noted, however, that “little effort has been made to formally protect these historic places,” and said rapid energy development made the Killdeer Mountain site the most threatened in North Dakota.
    Isern calls the review “shoddy” and deliberately incomplete to avoid controversy that could jeopardize the transmission project.
    He also said he wonders whether a $1.3 million gift from Touchstone Energy Partners, of which Basin Electric is a member, might have muzzled the State Historical Society of North Dakota, which is charged with historic preservation, on the issue.
    A “chain of evidence,” including a letter and legislative testimony by the consultant who headed Basin Electric’s flawed cultural resources review, led Isern to conclude the omission was deliberate.
    “I no longer believe mistakes were made,” he said.
    A Basin Electric spokesman acknowledges that the consultant knew of the 2010 National Park Service report recommending preservation of the battlefield area, and could not provide an explanation for the area’s omission in the document listing areas of concern.
    In written comments to both state and federal regulators reviewing the transmission project, Isern has called for preservation of the entire battlefield area, believed to be the site of the largest clash between the Army and American Indians.
    The State Historical Society of North Dakota, which includes the State Historic Preservation Office, has not called for the transmission line to avoid the battlefield area.
    It did, however, reach an agreement with Basin Electric to move a planned substation outside the battlefield area and to provide a “viewshed” study to show how the transmission line would alter the landscape.
    Basin also agreed to perform a metal detector survey along the transmission line route in the battlefield area, with the aim of identifying any battlefield-related artifacts.
    Those steps don’t go far enough to protect what Isern regards as North Dakota’s most significant historic site. The Center for Cultural Heritage Renewal, which Isern heads, received a grant from the National Park Service to study the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield area.
    “This is trivializing the whole thing,” he said. “The problem is we’re building a physical structure on the battlefield,” he added, referring to towers that will support the transmission lines. “This is the Gettysburg of the Plains.”
    The project is still seeking permit approval, both from federal and state officials. The company hopes to start construction later this year.
    Filings omitted concern
    The proposed route of Basin Electric’s proposed 197-mile transmission line first became known to the public Aug. 23, 2013, in a letter to the editor of the Dunn County Herald from a nearby landowner.
    Basin Electric filed a letter of intent to build the transmission line, from its Antelope Valley station northwest of Beulah to its Neset substation on Dec. 5, 2011.
    Representatives of Basin Electric repeatedly have said the cooperative first became aware of Isern’s planned study of the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield area Aug. 27, when one of its executives received a call from the State Historic Preservation Office.
    But Basin Electric’s spokesman acknowledges that its cultural heritage consultant, Kimball Banks of Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, knew of the National Park Service’s 2010 report highlighting the battlefield’s importance and eligibility for preservation.
    In fact, Banks wrote a letter to the North Dakota Industrial Commission dated Nov. 28, 2012, warning oil and gas regulators that inadequate management of oil development in the Killdeer Mountains could adversely impact “archaeological and historic sites important in and unique to North Dakota’s heritage.”
    Also, on Feb. 7, 2013, Banks testified before lawmakers on behalf of a proposed $250,000 study, supported by state historic preservation officials, of the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield area, which has never been extensively surveyed despite its importance.
    “This has national significance as well as state,” Banks said, according to legislative minutes.
    Banks declined to be interviewed about why, since he knew of the historical significance of the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield, he neglected to mention it in the cultural resource report for Basin Electric. He referred questions to Basin.
    Curt Pearson, the Basin spokesman, acknowledged that Banks knew of the National Park Service’s interest in preserving the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield area, but could not explain why Basin Electric’s filings for the project omitted noting the sprawling area as one of potential concern.
    Basin Electric will use poles consisting of a single column to support the transmission wires, instead of the more obtrusive double-poled H-posts, typically five to seven per mile, Pearson said. The posts will be rusty, to blend in better with the background, he said.
    So far, a metal detector survey of the battlefield area found two lead “Minnie balls” and a copper bullet cartridge that might be related to the battle, but cannot be precisely dated. Shovel tests at two locations found chipped stone debris.
    Fern Swenson, the state’s deputy historic preservation director, said the state is fulfilling its responsibilities, although it has not sent representatives to testify at hearings, and has not been outspoken about the area’s historical significance.
    “We do our job as the State Historic Preservation Office,” Swenson said. “We follow the regulations. We’ve been part of the process.”
    Site sacred to tribes
    The Killdeer Mountains are held as sacred to the Mandan and Hidatsa tribes. The Medicine Hole atop Killdeer Mountain plays a crucial role in their origin stories.
    The battlefield area also contains the graves of Dakota and Lakota Sioux who were killed in the fighting. Their graves, near the area of combat, are north of the planned transmission line.
    For those reasons, the United Tribes of North Dakota last fall passed a resolution opposing further development that would disturb the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield site.
    Calvin Grinnell, a curator for the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation, said many of the tribes’ members are resigned to the likelihood that the transmission line will be built on the proposed route.
    “It should be protected more,” said Grinnell, who serves as president of the State Historical Society of North Dakota. “It’s deserving of protection. That definitely is an area that is sacred to us.”
    As a form of mitigation, Grinnell would like to see Basin Electric contribute resources to native cultural preservation programming, as coal mining has done.
    “We’re kind of pragmatic about it,” Grinnell said. “If there’s something that’s going to go through, it’s going to go through.”
    Rob Sand, who ranches in the Killdeer Mountains and is a member of the Killdeer Mountain Alliance, a preservation advocacy group, said the state was “negligent” when lawmakers last year rejected the proposed study of the battlefield area.
    Sand doesn’t fault the State Historical Society of North Dakota for not being a more vocal advocate for preservation of the battlefield.
    “I don’t think it’s their way to be advocates,” he said. “That can be political and can go either way. But their mission is protection and preservation.”


    Readers can reach Forum reporter Patrick Springer at (701) 241-5522
    http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/426111/
    http://www.prairiebizmag.com/event/article/id/17767/#sthash.RBvPce04.dpuf
    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

    Friday, January 17, 2014

    Killdeer Mountain Alliance statement


    Killdeer Mountain Alliance · 267 like this
    January 17 ·  · 
    • Killdeer Mountain Alliance statement at the Rural Utility Service hearing, presented by Rob Sand and researched by Ed Dickey. Both are Killdeer Mountain landowners. Thank you, Rob and Ed!

      ***

      Thank you for the opportunity to make a statement at this public hearing concerning this important project. I am speaking on behalf of The Killdeer Mountain Alliance, a group of individuals working to preserve the cultural, spiritual, ecological, archaeological, and historical integrity of the Killdeer Mountains.

      We learned of this meeting as a result of a press release dated January 10, 2014 published by Basin Electric and made available on the internet. Apparently the Rural Utility Service limited its notifications to other media as no other information regarding the meeting is available on the internet, which we as a scattered membership must rely upon for timely information.

      Yesterday we learned that a Federal Register Notice was published by the Rural Utilities Service on Tuesday, January 14, just two days ago regarding this project. It states: “RUS will hold an open-house public hearing in January 2014 once the SDEIS is published. The time and location of the meeting will be well advertised in local media outlets a minimum of 15 days prior to the time of the meeting.” This commitment was not met; the notice of this meeting appeared in the Dunn County Herald on January 10, just six days ago. This edition of the Herald has not yet even been received by its mail subscribers. The January 14th Federal Register notice further states: “Public Participation: Pursuant to 36 CFR 800.22(d)(3), it is the intent of RUS to use its NEPA procedures for public involvement in lieu of the public involvement requirements of 36 CFR 800.3 through 800.7.” If you pursue this reference, you will find it does not exist; apparently the Rural Utilities Service intended to refer to CFR 800.2(d)(3) which authorizes the use of agency procedures for public involvement under the National Environmental Policy Act.

      The rush to hold this meeting is more than contemptuousness of the public input element of the NEPA process, it is reflective of the haste and superficiality of the investigations and analysis of alternatives that support this project in general and the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) in particular.
      The SDEIS for the Antelope Valley Station to Neset Transmission Project was developed to expand the alternatives considered because the original ones would not meet the current demand projections for movement of electrical energy in Western North Dakota. Equally important from our perspective was that for the first time the Rural Utility Service and the other cooperating agencies more appropriately recognized the extent and significance of the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield as an important element of America’s Civil War experience. It is truly an important historical and cultural site from the perspective of both the Union Army forces and the Native Americans who fought and died there.

      The fundamental problem with the SDEIS is that it develops no alternative that would avoid constructing eight miles (that is right, eight miles) of transmission lines though the heart of the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield. Consequently it fails to comply with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

      Section 1502.1 of the Council on Environmental Quality’s NEPA implementing regulations states: “The primary purpose of an environmental impact statement is to serve as an action-forcing device to insure that the policies and goals defined in the Act are infused into the ongoing programs and actions of the federal government. It shall provide full and fair discussion of significant environmental impacts and shall inform decisionmakers and the public of the reasonable alternatives which would avoid or minimize adverse impacts or enhance the quality of the human environment.”

      Section 1502.14 of The Council on Environmental Quality’s regulations further requires agencies to: “Rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives, and for alternatives which were eliminated from detailed study, briefly discuss the reasons for their having been eliminated.” The National Park Service recognizes the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield as a place eligible to be placed on the National Registry of Historic Places. Proceeding to degrade a noteworthy historic site without even analyzing alternatives which would avoid doing so is unconscionable and fails to comply with the requirements of NEPA and the Council on Environmental Quality’s Implementing Regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508).

      It must be kept in mind that the reason that an Environmental Impact Statement is being prepared is because Basin Electric is requesting Federal taxpayer subsidies for constructing the transmission project. As concerned citizens, we find it to be absurd that one agency of the Federal government, in this case the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utility Service, would even consider using its funds to degrade the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield. After all, its sister Federal agency, the National Park Service of the Department of the Interior, used taxpayer money to study and to identify the battlefield site as a place worthy of protection through its inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.

      What must be done to avoid degrading this unique historical and cultural site on the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Killdeer Mountain, which took place on July 28, 1864? The project must be sent back to the drawing board. Alternatives that avoid crossing the battlefield must be evaluated in a detail comparable to analysis of the present alternatives. It must be demonstrated that it is not practicable to avoid degrading the Battlefield site. Only then will the requirements of the Environmental Protection Act be satisfied, and we as citizens and taxpayers can have confidence that the decisions of government are indeed in the public interest.
    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels: , , , , , , ,

    Basin Electric members and tribal members testify at RUS hearing

    Basin Electric members and tribal members testify at RUS hearing

    Contact Us : Bookmark & Share :
    A A A
    The proposed north Killdeer loop will deliver power into member cooperative McKenzie Electric Cooperative’s service territory.
    Basin Electric Power Cooperative - January 17, 2014
    John Skurupey   
    John Skurupey, McKenzie Electric CEO and
    general manager, testifies in favor of Basin
    Electric's proposed north Killdeer loop transmission
    line segment.
    Representatives of Basin Electric member cooperatives testified in favor of a proposed Basin Electric transmission project in the Williston Basin at a public hearing held by the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) Jan. 16 in Watford City, ND.
    Basin Electric plans to build, operate and maintain an approximately 278-mile 345-kilovolt (kV) transmission project from Antelope Valley Station (AVS) to Neset in western North Dakota. The RUS, an agency within the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is considering funding the project and is preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the project.
    The Jan. 16 hearing gave the public an opportunity to comment on a supplemental draft EIS that evaluates an additional transmission line segment that would interconnect with the previously proposed AVS to Neset project at a switchyard near Killdeer, ND. The project, called the north Killdeer loop, includes 60 miles of 345-kV transmission line and two substations that will deliver power into member cooperative McKenzie Electric Cooperative’s service territory.
    About 20 people attended the Jan. 16 hearing. Representing Basin Electric Basin Electric were Curt Pearson, manager of media and community relations; Kelly Suko, property and right of way project coordinator; and Cris Miller, senior environmental project administrator. Basin Electric members Claire Vigesaa, Upper Missouri G & T Electric Cooperative manager, and John Skurupey, McKenzie Electric CEO and general manager, testified at the hearing.
    Skurupey said that the cooperative’s rapid growth warrants construction of the additional line segment.
    “Without this additional north Killdeer loop, members who may want additional electricity or new members wanting electricity at a new home site, water well or commercial location will eventually be refused service for the sake of keeping the lights on for those who are currently being served,” Skurupey said. “This is not a futuristic prediction but rather a road we’re traveling and a stop sign we’re already slowing down for.”
    Several members of North Dakota Native American tribes and a member of the Killdeer Mountain Alliance spoke against the proposed route of the AVS to Neset line at the hearing. As proposed, the line would run south of the Killdeer Mountain Battlefield State Historic Site, though cross about 27 square miles of a proposed study of privately-owned lands near the designated historic site.
    The north Killdeer loop project requires authorization from the North Dakota Public Service Commission and several federal and state agencies to move forward in the federal EIS process. Basin Electric plans to start construction on the transmission line segment in 2016, with the line in service in 2017.
    The public comment period ends Feb. 3. Written comments on the scope of the EIS should be sent todennis.rankin@wdc.usda.gov or:
    Mr. Dennis Rankin, environmental protection specialist
    USDA, Rural Utilities Service
    1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Stop 1571
    Washington, DC 20250-1571
    The supplemental draft EIS is available at www.rurdev.usda.gov/UWP-AVS-Neset.html.

    http://www.basinelectric.com/News_Center/Publications/News_Briefs/basin-electric-members-and-tribal-members-testify-at-rus-hearing.html
    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels: , , , , , ,

    The Final stages for Basin Electric's Transmission Line

    The Final stages for Basin Electric's Transmission Line

    Posted: Jan 17, 2014 12:06 PM CSTUpdated: Jan 17, 2014 12:27 PM CST
    Last November, we visited the Killdeer Battlefield historical site, which is at the center of a new controversy. Basin Electric proposed to run a transmission line from its coal power plant in Beulah to Williston.
    But that route would place the transmission line within 2 miles of that site, and run near the Killdeer Mountains.
    Basin Electric and USDA Rural Utility Services, has already met with the public in Watford City, on the proposed transmission line. But if you couldn't make it to the meeting, the USDA still wants to hear your comments.

    "There's still time. There are a lot of ways people can do that. They can email and give information but what's really important is that there are alternatives and I think people need to talk about and tell the agency and Basin Electric that there are other ways to do this," says Dakota Resource Council director, Don Morrison.

    Public Service Commissioner Brian Kalk says the project is in the final stages before a decision can be made. He says it's just a matter of finalizing an environmental impact study.

    "The commission held three different hearings around the state and during those hearings we received in put from the public the computer made their case as to why this power line is needed so we completed the hearings. After the hearings we were quite honestly waiting for some information from some of the different concerned groups we received all that information now and we have work sessions set up in early February and I'm anticipating a decision sometime this spring, it will make for a very detailed process," says Public Service Commissioner, Brian Kalk. 
    The PSC has a draft of the environmental impact statement. Once that's finalized, the commission will use it, along with public testimony and other materials, to make its decision.
    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels: , , , ,

    Thursday, January 16, 2014

    Basin lists alternate routes for power lines

    Basin lists alternate routes for power lines

    January 16, 2014 10:13 pm  •  By Lauren Donovan


    WATFORD CITY — A power company went back to the drawing board and came up with two alternate routes for a massive new transmission line. It solves some issues, but not the primary one of crossing the Killdeer Mountain battlefield.
    Basin Electric Power Cooperative plans to send nearly 700 kilovolts of much-needed electricity to the Bakken oil patch from its power plant near Beulah.
    On Thursday, Basin unveiled two new routes for getting there along with one the public has already seen.
    A supplemental draft environmental impact statement was released at a public hearing in Watford City. It’s required because so many federal agencies are involved and the two alternatives are new.
    The public can comment on it until Feb. 3.
    All three alternatives will still cross eight miles of the Killdeer Mountains foothills west of the town of Killdeer. The path tracks through an area short-listed by the American Battlefield Protection Program as the most at-risk of all Civil War-era Indian battlefields. It is under study by a North Dakota State University heritage group to detail its history and condition.
    The piece through the battlefield area can’t be avoided because Basin has to connect to a major substation called Charlie Creek near U.S. Highway 85 to the west, said Cris Miller, the co-op’s senior environmental manager.
    Two strong voices of opposition were from the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, which was engaged by the U.S. military in the 1864 battle.
    LaDonna Allard, the tribe historian whose ancestors were engaged with Brig. Gen. Alfred Sully in 1864, said she wants the project postponed until the battlefield boundaries are defined by the study.
    She called the environmental document “appalling” for its lack of knowledge.
    “This is a Civil War battlefield,” she said. “Why doesn’t North Dakota know its own history?”
    She said Sioux burials remain there, including those of her relatives.
    “We know where they are,” she said.
    “Are we going to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the battle in the middle of this development?” she asked.
    Sioux historic preservation officer Waste’ Win Young called the environmental study biased and incomplete.
    “How can you in one document dispute the boundaries of the battlefield and then say, ‘Oh, this is where they buried their (war) dead?’” she said.
    Heading north
    The difference in the alternatives is how to move the power north and across Lake Sakakawea.
    Basin wants to build two new power lines and load 345 kilovolts on each one — one traveling north along U.S. 85 from the substation and another backfeeding and then going north along N.D. Highway 22.
    In two other alternatives, new in this study, it would use the backfeed route and either build two parallel lines along N.D. 22, or one that’s double-circuited on one support structure.
    Each of the alternatives eventually would cross the Little Missouri River, on to Williston and then east toward Tioga.
    Miller said Basin prefers two routes because of reliability. The miles between them could prevent both being involved in an outage at the same time, he said.
    But Basin may not get what it wants.
    The U.S. Forest Service, the Western Area Power Administration and the Rural Utilities Service all have to approve the project in separate records of decision.
    The route Basin wants — the one with two distinct lines — would cross eight miles of U.S. Forest Service land and head past the north unit of Theodore Roosevelt National Park, where it would be visible, but only with binoculars.
    Jay Frederick, local ranger for the Forest Service, said the new alternatives changed the discussion for his agency.
    The one Basin prefers would affect the agency’s Lone Butte roadless area and the national park. The other two don’t, he said.
    The two new alternatives cross much more private land, financially benefiting individuals rather than the government — and the project’s bottom line. Frederick said his agency could decide whether it would issue a permit in as soon as a month.
    “If we say ‘no,’ they have to go to the other routes,” he said.
    Basin will spend about $500 million to construct the lines, Miller said. The electricity would add to about 270 megawatts of recently constructed power from three gas-fired turbines in the oil patch.
    The company is trying to meet a demand for electricity that has doubled in recent projections.
    Theodore Roosevelt Park Superintendent Valerie Naylor said industrial development is cumulative and she cautioned against too much.
    “You reach a tipping point where you’ve changed the landscape so much, you’ve lost the value of it,” Naylor said
    She said she’s glad to see alternatives that don’t visually impact the park, but said she’d prefer a project that didn’t affect the battlefield area.
    The American Battlefield Protection Program is a National Park Service program.
    Jan Swenson, director of the Badlands Conservation Alliance, represented her group at the sparsely attended hearing.
    “I’m delighted to see two alternatives that avoid going past the national park,” she said.
    As for the battlefield route remaining in play, she said: “One step at a time.”
    Miller said Basin hopes to have a decision by mid-year. It is also awaiting a permit from the Public Service Commission. He said the PSC hasn’t seen the new alternatives and the co-op would have to make another route application for those.
    Reach Lauren Donovan at 701-220-5511 or lauren@westriv.com.
    http://bismarcktribune.com/bakken/basin-lists-alternate-routes-for-power-lines/article_c50f0648-7f2d-11e3-af96-001a4bcf887a.html
    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)