BOARDMAN, Ore. — The Energy Facility Siting Council will soon make a decision on whether to approve an expansion of the site boundary for the Boardman-to-Hemingway transmission line.

The council has approved Idaho Power Co.’s 500-kilovolt line to run 278 miles from Boardman to a substation in western Idaho, but Idaho Power is requesting an amendment to its site certificate. The utility wants to expand the site boundary by half a mile (one-fourth a mile on either side of the center line), add “micrositing” areas to relocate the transmission line in 12 locations — including line alternatives — install a midline capacitor substation in Union County, and adjust the road plans and width.

The council on May 30 heard comments on the draft proposed order regarding the request  during a public hearing at the Riverfront Center in Boardman.

Energy department recommendations

Kellen Tardaewether, a senior siting analyst with the Oregon Department of Energy, presented the analysis and recommendations about the request to the council, giving a summary of ODOE’s draft proposed order.

Tardaewether recommended the council approve the request for amendment, explaining that mostly what the request will do is allow for more flexibility on the part of Idaho Power as the project gets underway. Her job focuses on whether or not the site certificate holder meets the condition requirements and laws that apply to its request; she was not presenting an argument in favor of Idaho Power beyond that its request met the requirements.

“The council’s process has a lot of rules and statutes and terms and so this is just applying these terms differently,” Tardaewether said after the hearing, “which then opens up a process later to then be able to accommodate minor changes that aren’t associated with impacts or resources that are negotiated with landowners on a process that’s an amendment determination request rather than this year-long formal amendment process.”

During her presentation, Tardaewether emphasized no materials will be added to the half-mile increase of the site boundary. Instead, the newly encompassed area can be evaluated to potentially later allow for minor changes.

As she said later, the larger boundary would set up Idaho Power for a simpler process of approval that would not go through the same rigorous public process for low-impact changes and decisions.

Members of public push back

Some groups and members of the public have scrutinized the transmission line project throughout its development, in particular the Stop B2H Coalition, citing environmental and energy concerns as the main reasons against the transmission line.

Although Stop B2H did not keep the project from moving forward as a whole, many people remain concerned about the effects of its development.

Tardaewether said ODOE received many public comments May 30, just before the original comment period deadline, and so she’s not yet sure what people had to say. The comment period was supposed to close at the end of the meeting, but after a few people requested an extension, the council decided to extend the deadline to 5 p.m. May 31.

During the public hearing, five people gave oral comments. Sam Myers, a farmer in Morrow County, said the whole process has been messy and confusing. He cited concerns about noxious weed control and said he worried about Idaho Power putting responsibility onto the county for road maintenance and weed control.

“This is a mess, and it’s really frustrating because we’re on the ground, right there in the middle of it,” he told the council.

His sister, Wendy King, said she was worried Idaho Power’s ability to make changes would cut out the voices of landowners in the decision making process.

Irene Gilbert, co-chair of Stop B2H, said she worries about the effects on the surrounding areas if the site boundary expands. The new boundary line would come close to wildlife areas in Union County, she said, and could affect waterways and fish, too.

Fuji Kreider, one of Stop B2H’s founders, called Idaho Power’s latest request for an amendment “a wolf in sheep’s clothing.” She said she is concerned this request will allow Idaho Power to “strategically position themselves” to “cut corners” moving forward.

Idaho Power responds

Idaho Power’s project manager, Joseph Stippel, in response said impetus for the change is to make Idaho Power’s plans more flexible because unforeseen requests and changes come up during construction.

“So what we’re trying to do is, if it’s minor in nature, we’ve done the studies, we’ve proved that it’s a similar impact, same habitat, we’ve proven there’s no resources that are impacted, then it just makes sense for the project and for the landowner,” he said. “So that’s what we’re trying to do. We’re trying to accommodate the landowner request.”

If the change were found to be more significant than minor, it would have to go through the same request for amendment process as this request, he said, but if it’s minor, the change can be requested through an amendment determination request, which is a quicker process.

Stippel said an example of a minor change he anticipates would be if a landowner wanted to move an access road because it would work better for their farm.

“It’ll allow us to keep construction on schedule, this is a vital project in the Northwest, as I stated earlier,” he said. “And it’ll really allow us to minimize our impacts and minimize the burden on doing multiple and multiple amendments for microchanges.”

It does not allow Idaho Power to do whatever it wants, he clarified.

“We can’t just build wherever we want in the site boundary without approval, we can’t avoid studies, we can’t avoid determining exactly what the impacts are. We still have to go through that process,” he said. “It doesn’t allow Idaho Power to force changes on landowners.”

His arguments were not convincing to everyone.

Gilbert said the request for amendment is going to hurt landowners in the long run.

“The concern is that Idaho Power now is going to be asking Oregon Department of Energy to exempt them from a public process, make changes in this area that hasn’t been fully evaluated, and avoid any public communication or information about it,” she said. “To me, that’s really the basis of the whole problem here, it’s like a manipulation to take control of people’s land without doing the surveys.”

Next steps

With the public comment period closed, Idaho Power will have until the end of day Monday, June 3, to respond to comments. Then, barring any unforeseen delays, there will be just under two weeks for the council to review the amendment request alongside the submitted comments from both sides before its June 14 meeting. At that point, if the draft moves forward, ODOE staff will create a proposed order.

People who submitted comments, either verbally or in writing, will be able to request a contested case proceeding that stems from their comments, which the council can decide to approve or deny based on the information in the request.

If the contested case is approved, the proposed order undergoes an independent administrative judicial review process of a specific piece of it, based on the requestor’s raised concerns. The council has final say on any contested case orders from the hearing officer.

After any contested cases are resolved, EFSC will make its final decision to adopt, modify or reject the amendment to the site certificate. Its final decision on the Boardman to Hemingway transmission line site expansion request, then, is likely at least a month away.