Oh, how depressing…

Filed under:Buy the Farm,Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse — posted by admin on January 19, 2016 @ 3:04 pm

CapX_CannonFalls1

On the way to Stephanie Henriksen’s Memorial Service today, along Hwy. 19 on the west side of Cannon Falls, I saw the CapX 2020 foundations in the ground, and Cor-Ten steel poles lined up, poised for installation.  Dog, how depressing…  On the way back, there was a big cement truck coming onto 19 from an access road, and we drove up Hwy. 52 and back and got an eyeful — Alan got some photos.  The one above is on the north side of the Cannon River, and this one below is on the south side, on the Sandstroms’ property, that’s one of the shop buildings in the background:

20160119_135640_resized

Just a bit further south, it is to be right up against the school’s soccer fields.

Landowners and Church snapshot

To think that they’re doing this… how is this justified?  And with no prior notice until moments before the public hearings at the very end of a couple year long process… OBSCENE!

Here’s the latest compliance filing in the 09-1448 docket, with photos:

20161-117244-01_1-14-2016

Q-1 Comments due today!

Filed under:Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse,Q-1 Upgrade — posted by admin on October 13, 2015 @ 8:02 am

October 3 Notice

wow… ohh my.. that’s the complete public notice.

And what they provided for information, some new maps and a “fact sheet.”

Send your comments in today to:

  • Chuck Thompson, Manager, Siting & Regulatory Affairs, Dairyland Power Cooperative, 3200 East Avenue South, La Crosse, WI  54602-0617, or via email at cat@dairynet.com  (608) 787-1432.
  • Dennis Rankin, Engineering and Environmental Analyst,  USDA RUS, 1400 Independence SW, Mailstop 1571, Washington D.C., 20250-1571, or via email at dennis.rankin@wdc.usda.gov    (202) 720-1953

FYI, here’s what I sent in:

NoCapX2020_Comment_October 12 2015

And previously:

NoCapX2020_Q-1D South_Comment_9-25-2015

For more info, just scroll through or search No CapX 2020 for the recent “Q-1” and/or “Dairyland” posts.

Capping off the CapX 2020 project…

Filed under:Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse — posted by admin on October 10, 2015 @ 9:00 pm

I guess I’m not the only one putting this project in bankers boxes and wrapping it up.  11 years on this project, and it’s up, it’s built, wires in the air, cor-ten steel soldiers marching across the hills.  Yeah, it didn’t go in a few places it shouldn’t, but it went up in a lot of places it shouldn’t, like EVERYWHERE.  This project never should have been built.  2.49% annual increase in peak demand…  Yeah, right…  What a scam… and they got what they wanted, transmission for their surplus, sending it off to market, wherever.  Driving to WI last week, first passing under the span just below Wabasha, and then seeing the lines glistening in the sun stretching south of Alma, it was so depressing.  I hear there’s an article in the latest Zumbrota paper about it, guess people are finally noticing something is happening.  So hard to get people to care, and now it’s too late.

So after a long, long day of writing, bleary eyed, I head downstairs, see that there’s junk mail falling out into the porch, and checked outside to see if my 6 month tea order arrived, YES, it did, but noooooo, that’s not a Stash label… hmmmmm, and way too light.

CapXCap1

And dig the back, “La Crosse Project” SNORT!  Suzanne, Steve, George and Guy, eat your heart out…

CapXCap2

WHEW!!!  With receipt of this, my hourly rate on this project has just quadrupled!  And it’s appropriate dark mourning color.  Yeah, it’s over.  Too few glimmers of light, other than that landowners are winning on “Buy the Farm” cases, it’s not over the Laymen for Christ campground, or over NORCA and NRG North Routes, and I got my easement client almost 4 times their original lowball offer.

Thank you, little birdie!

vulture

Dairyland’s Q-1D South transmission in the news!

Filed under:BadgerCoulee - Wisconsin,Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse,News coverage,Wisconsin — posted by admin on October 4, 2015 @ 7:46 am

End of the Line

Today’s big news in the La Crosse Tribune, hot on the heels of tapping Oktoberfest’s Golden Keg, is a pretty extensive piece on Dairyland’s upgrade of its Q-1D South transmission line through Onalaska to La Crosse.  Note the “amp up capacity” which is exactly what they’re doing:

Residents worried by plans to rebuild transmission line, amp up capacity

9 hours ago  •  By Chris Hubbuch

TOWN OF ONALASKA — Dairyland Power Cooperative’s plans to replace a 65-year-old power line have raised concerns of residents living near the high-voltage line.

Originally constructed in 1950 through farmland, the 161-kilovolt line now cuts through back yards and in some cases directly over homes that were built around it as development pushed north, first along the Hwy. 35 and later the Hwy. 53 corridor.

Some residents worry about the health effects of living so close to the line — especially if Dairyland is able to push more electricity through it.

Darlene Adams lives directly under the lines in a mobile home on Kimberly Street and says she can hear them crackle when it rains or snows.

“It sounds like water on a frying pan,” Adams said.

Adams said she didn’t think about the line when she bought the home but has since become concerned about health effects.

“What is it doing to my house?” she said. “I’ve wondered, but no one has contacted me.”

The La Crosse-based utility has been working for most of the past decade to replace the Q1 line, which connects power plants in Alma and Genoa to the electric grid and delivers power to customers in surrounding rural areas.

The segment from Genoa to La Crosse was replaced in 2013, and the majority of the northern section is being rebuilt as part of CapX2020, a new transmission line nearing completion. Work is set to begin this month on a segment north of Holmen.

That leaves a nine-mile stretch, known as Q1-D South, running from Briggs Road in Holmen south into the town of Medary.

Dairyland hopes to begin construction in late 2016, but Chuck Thompson, who is in charge of siting and regulation for Dairyland, said designs for the replacement line are not complete.

In general, plans call for 95- to 115-foot steel poles to replace the existing wooden H structures, which range in height from 55 to 85 feet, although the company will need special clearance for some poles in the flight path of the La Crosse Regional Airport.

The estimated cost is between $7 million and $8 million.

Dairyland also plans to use a larger wire that will be able to carry more than twice as much electricity at the same voltage.

Carol Overland, a Red Wing, Minn., attorney who has fought transmission projects on behalf of citizens and ratepayers, said that will result in about twice as much EMF, which Dairyland hopes to mitigate by raising the wires.

A form of radiation given off by electricity, EMF is present anywhere there are electric wires or appliances.

Studies have found possible links between EMF exposure and increased risk of childhood leukemia, but according to the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences studies have not found links to adult cancers.

There are no federal regulations on EMF levels in homes, though the NIEHS recommends reducing exposure.

“It’s regarded as tin hat stuff, but it’s real,” Overland said. “Very real.”

Michael Yeager said his daughters, now 33 and 37, grew up playing under the wires, which cut through his yard. he suffers from multiple sclerosis, and one of his daughters has a tumor in her knee.

“I really wonder if something’s going on here,” he said. “Now they’re planning on getting bigger yet.”

Dairyland provides EMF monitoring at the request of people living near its lines but the utility does not retain that data, nor has it modeled the likely emissions from the rebuilt line.

Thompson said such modeling is not required.

“The RUS does not require us to do that,” he said. “The (state) requires it in their analysis. The federal process does not.”

Ann Kathan recently moved her family into a cottage next the home where she grew up on County Road OT. She planned to raise her 6-year-old twins there while caring for her aging parents, Lois and Bob.

But since learning about Dairyland’s plans to rebuild the line about 70 feet from her kids’ bedroom, she’s become concerned about the potential health effects of EMF.

She opposes the rebuild and plans to move unless the line is removed.

“In good conscience we cannot live in that house,” she said. “This is devastating.”

Federal money, but no state permit

Kathan, who has been contacting residents along the line in an effort to rally opposition, said Dairyland has been less than transparent, giving little information about the plans or the process.

“It’s just a gigantic black hole of missing information,” she said.

Overland was frustrated that Dairyland ran a legal notice in the La Crosse Tribune on Aug. 28 — with two paragraphs describing the project and an illegible map — without publishing any additional information about the project.

“There’s no application on line, nothing for anyone to look at and figure out what’s going on and then comment on,” Overland said. “What’s the point of making comments if we don’t know the plan?”

Because Dairyland is replacing an existing line, the utility does not need permission from Wisconsin regulators. But in order to receive low-interest financing from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Dairyland must submit an application to the Rural Utility Service, which will determine what level of environmental review is necessary.

Thompson said the RUS application process requires Dairyland to collect public comments before submitting the application, which is why it was not available.

Dairyland has since agreed to extend the public comment period until Oct. 13, is publishing a second legal notice and has posted maps and basic information about the project on the company’s website.

State Sen. Jennifer Shilling and Rep. Steve Doyle, whose district is crossed by the line, said they’ve heard from concerned constituents but are limited in what they can do, because the project is not subject to state authority.

Both lawmakers said they encouraged Dairyland to listen to residents’ concerns.

Some residents along the line would like Dairyland to consider an alternative route — along Hwy. 35 or Hwy. 53 — or running it along the same poles as Xcel Energy’s 161-kv line that also bisects the area.

Chuck Thompson, who is in charge of siting and regulation, said the other routes present problems — Hwy. 35 has scenic easements, right-of-ways that extend into front yards, and is in the airport flight path; combining routes is also a challenge.

“When you start combining transmission lines the height goes up,” he said “It gets more difficult to put these lines together.”

And to move the line Dairyland would need permission from the Wisconsin Public Service Commission.

Thompson said burying the line — another common suggestion — would cost about 10 times as much.

“It’s difficult any time you’re in a city to route transmission,” Thompson said.

Urban planning

Dairyland could not provide the number of home within 300 feet of the line, but a Tribune analysis found the line crosses 142 developed residential properties and at least another nine multi-family properties with 84 apartments.

It crosses another 31 developed commercial properties, according to the Tribune’s analysis.

Much of the development occurred in the 1960s and 70s, prior to state statute that prohibits utilities from running anything higher than a 35kv line over a residence — or the construction of a residence under an existing line.

Kurt Childs, Dairyland’s director of land and design services, notes that homes built within the 80-foot right-of-way were constructed in violation of the company’s easement.

Who — if anyone — signed off on such plans is not clear.

“It really is a perfect example of a lack of urban planning,” Doyle said. “To have a mobile home directly under an existing line seems to me ludicrous.”

Kathan objects to the rebuilding project and thinks Dairyland should relocate the line away from the homes that were built around it, arguing that they are responsible for acting on new information about EMF.

“There really was not a choice,” she said. “People did not choose to be bombarded with EMF, because they did not know.”

And in a sidebar:

Public comments sought

Dairyland Power Cooperative is planning to rebuild about nine miles of 161-kilovolt transmission line, which runs from Briggs Road in Holmen through the city and towns of Onalaska and into the town of Medary south of the La Crosse River.

A fact sheet and maps of the project are available on Dairyland’s website, at http://www.dairynet.com/power_delivery/project_updates.php.

Dairyland is accepting public comments until Oct. 13 to be forwarded to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service, which will oversee the environmental review of the project.

Comments can be emailed to Chuck Thompson at cat@dairynet.com or mailed to Dairyland Power Cooperative, 3200 East Ave. S., La Crosse, WI 54602.

Please contact Dairyland and ask them to provide information!

Chuck Thompson, Manager, Siting & Regulatory Affairs, Dairyland Power Cooperative, 3200 East Avenue South, La Crosse, WI  54602-0617, or via email at cat@dairynet.com  (608) 787-1432.

Here’s what little they have told us about this project:

And what I figure the magnetic field exposure would be if line is running at capacity it’s rated for (click chart for larger version):

Q-1 161 kV 795 ACSS_ Calculated Magnetic Field

Comments sent on Q-1D South rebuild!

Filed under:BadgerCoulee - Wisconsin,Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse,Laws & Rules,News coverage,Nuts & Bolts,RUS EIS,Wisconsin — posted by admin on September 25, 2015 @ 1:47 pm

mailbox

SENT!  On behalf of No CapX 2020 I sent the following Comments:

No CapX 2020_Q-1D South_Comment_9-25-2015

I’ve asked how many times for more information, nada, still nothing.  N-O-T-H-I-N-G!

Of particular note is this handy-dandy chart that Bruce McKay had put together for the Brookings docket, and I plugged in the voltage, amps, MVA and here’s what we get for magnetic fields for various options of this 795 ACSS 161 kV transmission line — CLICK FOR A BIGGER VERSION, this is all that will fit in this format:

Q-1 161 kV 795 ACSS_ Calculated Magnetic Field

OK, Dairyland, USDA RUS — let’s see your calculations, let’s have disclosure of the peak and normal amps, the MVA, everything.  Show me this is wrong!  Note at what point mG levels drop to a 2-4 mG “safe” range.

For those of you who haven’t yet asked for an extension of time to comment, or who haven’t yet sent in comments, there’s still time, until 11:59 p.m. Sunday!

Send Comments, via email to BOTH:

  • Chuck Thompson, Manager, Siting & Regulatory Affairs, Dairyland Power Cooperative, 3200 East Avenue South, La Crosse, WI  54602-0617, or via email at cat@dairynet.com  (608) 787-1432.
  • Dennis Rankin, Engineering and Environmental Analyst,  USDA RUS, 1400 Independence SW, Mailstop 1571, Washington D.C., 20250-1571, or via email at dennis.rankin@wdc.usda.gov    (202) 720-1953

And who knows — with all the requests coming in, maybe they’ll extend the Comment period!!

Let us know, Chuck!

Book_Borchwriting

PR shill hits it out of the park!

Filed under:Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse,News coverage — posted by admin on September 24, 2015 @ 4:43 pm

PB_ForumRochester Post Bulletin’s CapX 2020 Forum — 11/7/2010

Oh, Tim Carlsbad really did it today!  SNORT!!!  He’s doing a great job, though I do think he’s really needed back in sex trafficking at the UN.

This was a long, long, day, and here it is, I’ve arrived… I’ve reached the pinnacle of my illustrious legal career, well, second to the Senator Steve Murphy letter to a certain Minnesota Mayor… and… well… it’s certainly up there with the infamous Michael Murphy complaint to the Goodhue County Sheriff!

What the heck am I snorting about?

It’s the Carol Overland question!  But it’s not a question.  We all know it’s a statement,because CapX 2020 is transmission they don’t need and we don’t want!

Here ’tis, but be sure to swallow your coffee, tea, or even beer, first [with some comments, like this!] — wonder why they blocked me from making comments — guess I’ll have to do it here with No CapX 2020:

Answer Man: When power usage is generally flat, why build a power line?

Posted: Thursday, September 24, 2015 10:25 am

Dear Answer Man, you’ve been just about the only consistent source of local information on the CapX2020 power line. Can you remind me, why was this power line needed in the first place? Has power consumption been going up so much that a $2 billion power line was needed?

That’s a very good question, and tough to answer because the information is always a little dated, the project spans a huge area and involves many power utilities with different needs, and infrastructure of this kind is built in anticipation of future demand. The CapX people would tell you that it’s the largest power transmission system built in the state in 35 to 40 years, and that it was needed because the demand for electricity in the region has grown about 2 percent a year for the past decade.

It’s about 800 miles long and will cost more than $2 billion when the final checks are written.

When I asked Tim Carlsgaard, communications and public affairs manager for Xcel Energy, to recap the rationale for CapX2020, he called this “the Carol Overland question,” a reference to the activist attorney from Red Wing who was a leader in trying to stop the project.

I’m sure Carol will enjoy seeing her name attached to this question.

“Each CapX2020 utility will have a different answer to this question,” Carlsgaard said by email. “Concerning demand, you need to look at the Resource Plans that each utility must file with the respective public utilities commissions. Nevertheless, there are many factors as to why you build transmission, including meeting peak demand, regional reliability and providing capacity to support renewable energy development.

He also said the CapX lines “are helping the individual utility partners meet the Minnesota renewable energy mandate of 25 percent by 2025 (30 percent by 2020 for Xcel). As you know, there are not a lot of wind turbines within 20 miles of Rochester. I’m sure you are aware of the wind developers who have attempted to build wind farms in the vicinity of the Rochester metro area and were denied. … most of the wind farms in the Upper Midwest are located in far western and southern Minnesota and eastern Dakotas.”

Actually, I’m not aware of a gold rush in the immediate Rochester metro area for wind farms, though there are plenty in Dodge and Mower counties. But in any case, renewable energy is one reason the lines were needed.

Regarding power usage, project opponents have said from the beginning that electricity use has been flat for several years and will actually decline in the near term, thanks to conservation measures and greater efficiency. According to a filing last year by Xcel, which is a lead partner in the project, the utility said its “current forecast indicates a slight downward correction, projecting average growth over the 2017-2022 period to be less than 0.60 percent compared to the September 2013 update, which indicated average growth of 0.90 percent.  [CapX 2020 was predicated on their 2.49% annual increase, which we knew then, and their SEC filings now demonstrate, is utter bull-poo-poo.  The “Answer Man” still can’t admit that major “miscalculation.”]

“This lower expected growth rate in customer demand represents a 22 MW reduction in the forecasted median Peak Demand in 2017, growing to a 190 MW reduction by 2021, and a 388 MW reduction in 2024.”

The U.S. Department of Energy says that residential energy consumption in Minnesota was more or less flat from 2004 to 2011, which is the most current report I could find on that score. [somebody didn’t look very hard, they disclose this in their quarterly SEC filings, here’s the June 30, 2015:  Xcel Energy admits “growth” is down]Rochester Public Utilities and SMMPA are also partners in the project. According to a report in 2012, [note he’s citing an Xcel Resource Acquisition Compliance that I posted!  Yup, he sure has the answers…] the CapX upgrades to the 161kV lines around Rochester were expected to relieve transmission “constraints,” which will “benefit RPU in that it can rely more on imported power to meet its electric supply obligations.” Conversely, RPU can “reduce its reliance on internal generation to meet its reliability goals,” which is important with the closing of its smoke-belching, coal-fired generators at Silver Lake.

To my reader’s point about me being the best source of information on CapX2020 over the years, especially during the permitting process: I defy you to find a reporter who has followed this more closely, and I’ve posed more questions than I’ve answered.

What’s the story on the Q-1D South rebuild?

Filed under:BadgerCoulee - Wisconsin,Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse,Wisconsin — posted by admin on September 21, 2015 @ 3:34 pm

Who knows?  The public sure has no idea, and Dairyland isn’t telling!

The Comment deadline is FRIDAY (deadline is really Sunday, but Friday on the conservative side), and we still have only Dairyland Q-1D South Sheetmaps, no other information.

Please take 90 seconds and email Chuck Thompson and Dennis and let them know that we need more time!  I did!

  • Chuck Thompson, Manager, Siting & Regulatory Affairs, Dairyland Power Cooperative, 3200 East Avenue South, La Crosse, WI  54602-0617, or via email at cat@dairynet.com
  • Dennis Rankin, Engineering and Environmental Analyst,  USDA RUS, 1400 Independence SW, Mailstop 1571, Washington D.C., 20250-1571, or via email at dennis.rankin@wdc.usda.gov

OK, fine, don’t give us what we need to know, no problem, that’s what the Freedom of Information Act is for:

USDA RUS FOIA Request

USDA RUS – Acknowledgement of FOIA_Dairyland Q-1D

I’ve sent Dairyland and USDA-RUS a request to extend the comment period to 30 days after information on this project has been made available to the public.  Until we know what’s going on, it’s pretty tough to comment.

No CapX Letter to USDA & DPC_September 18 2015

We need more time to be able to meaningfully comment on this stealth project!

Sheet Map 6

Dairyland’s N LaX-LaX 161 kV Tap maps

Filed under:BadgerCoulee - Wisconsin,Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse,RUS EIS,Wisconsin — posted by admin on September 8, 2015 @ 3:39 pm

There’s a lot to learn about this 9 mile short little project, and it’s been hard to find information.  VERY difficult to find anything on it.  Yet some progress!

birdie-eveninggrosbeak

 

 

 

Here are a few tidbits, but there’s still a lot more to find.

Dairyland Q-1D South Sheetmaps

From our friends at MISO, from a July 2015 subcommittee meeting (same slide as was presented in several earlier meetings):

MISOslideFrom MISO – see p. 23: 20150727 WSPM Item 05b Review of Reliability Projects ATC DPC

But go figure — MISO testimony says that the Badger Coulee line will eliminate reliability problems with this and other 161 kV infrastructure in the area:

MISO Post Hearing Initial Brief 05-CE-142 p 72015-01-30 Docket 05-CE-142 Post-Hearing Brief by MISO__ p 7

So let me see if I understand this — they’re saying that there’s a “reliability” problem with a number of utility facilities, of which “North La Crosse — La Crosse Tap 161 kV line (Dairyland’s Q-1D South) is one, and that building the Badger Coulee line “solves” those problems.  So they use this to justify permitting the Badger Coulee line… DONE!  But now they want to rebuild this La Crosse — La Crosse Tap 161 kV line (Dairyland’s Q-1D South).

  • If Badger Coulee is permitted, then why rebuild?
  • Or conversely, if they’re going to rebuild, why do they need Badger Coulee?

Were you lying then, or are you lying now?  Or maybe both?

Anyway, here’s a start on the info I’ve been looking for — the MAPS!  Click the map for a larger version:

Sheet Map Index

Sheet Map 1

Sheet Map 2

Sheet Map 3

Sheet Map 4

Sheet Map 5

Sheet Map 6

Sheet Map 7

Sheet Map 8

Sheet Map 9

Sheet Map 10

Sheet Map 11

REMEMBER: The deadline for comments is Sunday, September 27, so technically I’d say it’s Monday, September 28, but to be safe, send your comments in by Friday, September 25.

I recommend you send to both:

  • Chuck Thompson, Manager, Siting & Regulatory Affairs, Dairyland Power Cooperative, 3200 East Avenue South, La Crosse, WI  54602-0617, or via email at cat@dairynet.com
  • Dennis Rankin, Engineering and Environmental Analyst,  USDA RUS, 1400 Independence SW, Mailstop 1571, Washington D.C., 20250-1571, or via email at dennis.rankin@wdc.usda.gov

Plan for Q-1D South near LaX?

Filed under:BadgerCoulee - Wisconsin,Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse,News coverage,RUS EIS,Wisconsin — posted by admin on September 5, 2015 @ 5:43 am

QuestionMarks_crop

What’s the scoop??!!??

Deadline for comments is Sunday, September 27, so technically I’d say it’s Monday, September 28, but to be safe, send your comments in by Friday, September 25.

The notice says to send your comments to Dairyland’s Chuck Thompson, and that they’ll forward them to the USDA.  Ummmm, no, I’m not at all comfortable with that.  I recommend you send to both:

  • Chuck Thompson, Manager, Siting & Regulatory Affairs, Dairyland Power Cooperative, 3200 East Avenue South, La Crosse, WI  54602-0617, or via email at cat@dairynet.com  (608) 787-1432.
  • Dennis Rankin, Engineering and Environmental Analyst,  USDA RUS, 1400 Independence SW, Mailstop 1571, Washington D.C., 20250-1571, or via email at dennis.rankin@wdc.usda.gov    (202) 720-1953

What’s the plan for the 161 kV transmission line upgrade that Dairyland Power Cooperative plans for its “Q-1D South” transmission line that runs south of the Briggs Road substation in Holmen, WI, through Onalaska, and south across 90 to somewhere near or in La Crosse?

Who knows?  They’re sure not telling…  All we’ve got to go on is the notice, below.  From that notice, here’s a closeup of that map in the “Notice” published last week:

mAPNot OK.  Call and ask for more information, take 2 minutes and call, ask what it is that we’re supposed to be commenting on:

  • Chuck Thompson, Dairyland: (608) 787-1432
  • Dennis Rankin, RUS: (202) 720-1953

I’ve been on google earth and cannot figure out where this thing terminates.  Can you?  Please check it out and let me know.

DairylandNotice

UPDATE: Dairyland’s Q-1 “upgrades” through La Crosse

Filed under:BadgerCoulee - Wisconsin,Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse,News coverage,Nuts & Bolts,RUS EIS,Wisconsin — posted by admin on August 30, 2015 @ 6:30 am

DairylandNotice

“Upgrade” through Holmen, Onalaska, La Crosse, from Briggs Road to some substation south of 90.

This is a “notice” found in the La Crosse Tribune on Friday.  Take a close look, yes, it’s hard to read, but multiple searches of the Notices section online have NOTHING, nada…

This is another USDA Rural Utilities Services project, yet here, there’s no indication of the status of the project, no RUS contact, and they want comments sent to DAIRYLAND, and we’re to trust they’ll send them to whoever.

Where’s the link to the USDA RUS site?  Where’s the link for the project application.  WHERE’S A DECENT MAP!!??!!??!!??

WHAT KIND OF NOTICE IS THIS?

$50 says it’s USDA’s Stephanie Strength on this project, as she was on the Dairyland Q-1D going north from Briggs Rd. to Marshaland, as she was on the Dairyland financing for its share of CapX 2020.

Any Comments you send to Dairyland’s Chuck Thompson, I’d advise you also send any comments or questions to (?? NOTE: Stephanie Strength’s two emails are NOT working… so who is Project Manager?):

Stephanie Strength, Project Mgr.

Dairyland Q-1D South Upgrade
USDA Rural Development Utilities Programs
1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 2244
Mail Stop 1571
Washington, DC  20250-1571

… or by email:

stephanie.strength@wdc.usda.gov (doesn’t seem to be working!)

stephanie.strength@usda.gov

The map, for starters, is awful, can’t even see it, nothing identified but lines for a couple of major highways, but anyone in the area knows this line, running up and down Hwy 35. from near Briggs Road substation through Onalaska going south and darting with Xcel’s line on the other side, back and forth, through trailer parks, towards 90, across and then south.

This is what this line looks like, going right through people’s back yards, front yards, and over homes, directly overhead, right next to it, how can Dairyland think this should be “upgraded” — it should be torn down:

Kimberly St

And at Ulman St., there are two trailers right up against the structures:

Ulman_St[1]

It’s bad enough that Dairyland is planning this upgrade, but how does any city allow this to happen?  In what world is it OK to allow development under a transmission line?  On the other side of Hwy. 35 it’s the same thing, an Xcel transmission line over a trailer park.  This shows zero regard for human life.


previous page · next page


image: detail of installation by Bronwyn Lace