Letters to Army Corps of Engineers and MD DOE supporting Charles and Prince George's Counties

Calvert Citizens for Safe Energy are deeply concerned with the prospect of Pepco, in the name of MAPP, erecting huge power lines and placing the largest power conversion plant in the US and Europe in ecologically and socially sensitive portions of rural Calvert County. 

 Charles and Prince George's counties face serious impacts to their wetlands.  We support their efforts to encourage Pepco to reroute MAPP in order to avoid devastating their fragile wetlands.  An underground solution sounds possible and perhaps even economical.  Please insist the Pepco really look at alternatives.  We have attended public meetings where Robert Jubic, Pepco project manager, has led us to believe that there are no possible alternative routes and that there is a mandate to break ground almost immediately and be finished by 2015.  Please, let's slow down and do this right if necessary, and not at all if unnecessary. 

Calvert County is next up for negative impacts,including a proposed 34 acre power  conversion plant and a 64 foot high building in our farm and forest zone and in the headwaters of Parker's Creek, thought to be perhaps the only pristine watershed running into the Chesapeake Bay today.

We concur with  comments made by Richard Klein of CEDS, which we have reviewed.
Please take Mr. Klein's comments seriously.  He has done the research and presents intelligent arguments and suggestions.

Whatever is done now is forever.

Marcia Tripp

Charles County Commissioners Weight In on PEPCO

http://openstream.charlescounty.org/videoplayer.jsp?file=/meetings/2011/feb/BOCC_021611.mp4&title=Board of Commissioners Meeting for 2/16/2011

The MAPP presentation begins at 34:30 through to 63:00.

Commissioner Kenneth Robinson was great

He passed a motion that the Charles County government should consult with other counties (Calvert and Prince George’s) to get their take on MAPP.

He also pressed Pepco to hold a second public hearing, which Pepco said they’d consider.

Charles County Planning director Chuck Beall pointed out that County approval would be required where MAPP crosses county right-of-ways.  Pepco said that while the Critical Areas Commission has approved MAPP in Charles County they still need county approval for the Forest Harvest Plan covering the Possum Point to Burches segment.  This could be an extremely important opportunity for the County to resolve impacts.

Pepco said the lights could go out in Southern and Central Maryland as well as the Eastern Shore if MAPP isn’t built.  Of course our experts and those hired by State agencies have shown this is nonsense.

Pepco said Charles County will get $1 million per year in tax revenue. Pepco also claimed that MAPP was critical to taking advantage of Maryland offshore wind potential.  I was just in a conference call with the folks leading support for the Offshore Wind bill and the consensus was that this claim is poorly supported.  Besides alternatives like the head of Bay option would achieve the same benefit without all the environmental impact.

Pepco MAPP project should seek alternative site

Pepco MAPP project should seek alternative site

Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2011

As reported in the Jan. 28 edition of The Calvert Recorder, the Calvert County Board of County Commissioners took a major step last month by petitioning Maryland's Public Service Commission to intervene in its proceedings on Pepco's Mid-Atlantic Power Pathway Project (MAPP) in order to help protect the interests of the county and its residents as this massive, multi-billion dollar power project is considered in the months ahead.
This was very welcome news, especially the statements by Commissioners' President Susan Shaw (R) that expressed concern over Pepco's proposal to cover acres of farm and forest land at the headwaters of Parkers Creek.
As The Calvert Recorder also reported, we are only now learning that Pepco's proposed facilities on that site would be the largest of their kind in North America.
Pepco's efforts to upgrade the power grid and the interests of the county and its residents in ensuring that these facilities are properly sited certainly need not be irreconcilable. So, it is also encouraging that the county commissioners have asked that talks continue between the county's director of economic development, Linda Vassallo, and Pepco representatives on finding alternative, more acceptable building sites other than the Parkers Creek site.
Let's hope the county now takes the next step and makes it crystal clear to Pepco that building its proposed industrial facilities at the Parkers Creek headwaters site is simply a non-starter.
Yes, other sites can and should continue to be considered, but Pepco needs to get a clear message that the Parkers Creek site is off the list entirely.
Long before Pepco set its sights on this area of farm and forest land to construct its enormous power conversion and switching stations, the Parkers Creek watershed was already one of the county's crowning achievements in sensible zoning, land planning and land conservation.
Over the course of more than 25 years, county officials, state agencies, land conservation groups such as American Chestnut Land Trust and the Nature Conservancy, and hundreds of volunteer citizens have all made great strides in protecting Parkers Creek and its surrounding watershed lands, making it one of the small wonders on the entire western shore of the Chesapeake Bay.
This work continues today and will need to continue for many more years to come.
We can have better, more reliable electric power and still preserve the natural legacy and rural landscape of the Parkers Creek watershed for all future generations.
All it takes is for people of goodwill to commit to working together, starting with the understanding that large industrial power facilities will not be placed where they really don't belong.
Paul Dennett, Port Republic
The writer is a former member of the ACLT board of directors and is a member of Calvert Citizens for Safe Energy.

Does Pepco have what it takes to get it right?

To the editor:  Does Pepco have what it takes to get it right?

“Better safe than sorry” came to mind when I saw the PEPCO President’s very public apology for the delays restoring customers’ service after the recent storm.   Too bad the money for a full-page ad in the Washington Post hadn’t been invested in basic system maintenance to prevent such emergencies.

Thank you, Calvert County Commissioners, for formally intervening in Pepco’s proposed Mid Atlantic Power Pathway (MAPP) project.  The decision to be an intervener allows the County to examine and question Pepco’s proposed locations of its MAPP facilities, including the proposal to use land in rural Port Republic in the Parkers Creek headwaters for the location for the biggest AC/DC converter facility ever built in the US.

Of all places to take such a large and irreversible gamble!  In the past 20 years, the Parkers Creek watershed has received much effective County, state and private attention to minimize the impacts of human development on the natural environment. Pepco’s proposal to build on land zoned farm and forest in the Parkers Creek watershed is neither logical nor respectful of the County’s exemplary land use planning.  The County has designated sites for industrial and commercial activities and invested our public funds to provide industrial infrastructure for exactly this type of project.  Let’ s put that planning and investment to good use.

If Pepco had an excellent track record conducting its basic operations I would be more willing to gamble that it can safely build and operate this unproven technology.  MAPP may be diverting Pepco’s funds and its management’s attention from its existing operations; which by the Pepco President’s own admission, clearly need more investment and care, and will for years to come.

Being a good corporate citizen means not having to say you are sorry.  Keep this project out of the Parkers Creek watershed.

Very truly yours,

Joy A. Bartholomew
Port Republic

The writer is a former board member of the American Chestnut Land Trust and member of Calvert Citizens for Safe Energy.

Department of Energy Corridors Gone for Now

	View this Message Online
	Department of Energy Transmission Corridors Gone (!!) Dear Richard, Going back a few years, do you remember the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors, aka, the NIETCs? These corridors made it possible for utilities to use federal eminent domain (or threaten to use it) for the siting of transmission lines. Well, we just found out that we won our 9th Circuit case against the Department of Energy designations --and as of today, they're gone! The 9th Circuit Court eliminates the corridor designations, ruling that DOE failed to conduct an environmental review as required by the National Environmental Policy Act and failed to consult with affected states. Here's a quote from the opinion: "We determine that DOE failed to properly consult with the affected States in conducting the Congestion Study and failed to undertake any environmental study for its NIETC Designation as required by the National Environmental Protection Act (“NEPA”), 42 U.S.C. ? 4332(C). We also determine that these failings were not harmless errors. Accordingly, we vacate the Congestion Study and NIETC designation and remand the cases to the DOE for further proceedings." While this doesn't change things for those who are being impacted by the 500-kV TrAIL line, going forward, it takes away a major power company advantage, and could have a big impact on future transmission line proposals, including the 765-kV PATH line proposal currently under review. We're just digesting the court decision now, but wanted to send it around right away: View the 9th Circuit Decision Very best, Bri West Piedmont Environmental Council bwest@pecva.org 540-347-2334 Received this from a friend? Sign up to receive alerts and news from PEC.

Another voice is heard

Pepco should rethink proposal

Wednesday, Dec. 29, 2010

In addition to the environmental concerns voiced by the American Chestnut Land Trust and the Chesapeake Biological Lab, there are more critical issues raised by the project proposed by the Pepco Holdings Group that should concern all residents of Calvert County.

As a community of 90,000-plus residents, Calvert County has a long history of land use planning: an activity that is the domain of the County, not the domain or activity of a one-time corporate structure established for a single purpose; to erect a section of the national electric grid.

If allowed to go forward with this blatant violation of the county's zoning regulations, Pepco has opened the door for any other well-funded corporate entity to drop a future project at will on any land available for their use without regard to our zoning regulations.

In short, the concepts of locating commercial operations in our town centers or industrial operations on land zoned for industrial activities would become a vague concept, for planners only.

We, the citizens of Calvert, have worked too hard for too many years to establish order to our land use to allow a large utility to thumb its collective nose at our zoning.

I only hope that the newly elected Calvert County Board of County Commissioners is willing to fully protect the citizens of Calvert, past, present and future from this blatant and arrogant proposal.

And, I also hope that Pepco and its partners will rethink their proposal and relocate their activities to land already zoned for this purpose.

Robert M. Pfeiffer, Port Republic

Biggest Converter in the US and Europe for Parker's Creek watershed

Robert Jubic of Pepco , when queried about possible equivalent power conversion plants for us to photograph. replied that there were none of this magnitude anywhere in the US or Europe ...the Chestnut Converter would be the biggest one ever built in the United States or Europe! There is nothing to compare it with.

Please help keep this huge industrial facility out of Parker's Creek watershed in the rural farm and forest zone of Calvert County.