The Grand Bargain: Oregon Heritage for Idaho Power

The Grand Bargain: Oregon Heritage for Idaho Power

The B2H high voltage transmission line wins site approval, and an underdog group is headed to the Oregon Supreme Court

written by Lee Lewis Husk

THE UNDERDOGS have lost another round in the battle against Idaho Power’s plans to build a high-voltage transmission line across five Eastern Oregon counties. In October, the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council issued a site certificate (with conditions) after hearing testimony from more than 400 people—farmers, ranchers, environmentalists, wildlife protectionists and Eastern Oregon residents opposed to the 300-mile line known as B2H which would run from Boardman, Oregon, to Hemingway, Idaho. The council, which is staffed by the Oregon Department of Energy, has jurisdiction over the entire project in Oregon—190 miles of private land and one mile of state land.

The Stop B2H Coalition, a nonprofit grassroots organization of disparate individuals, has struggled for years to try to protect what’s theirs and what Idaho Power wants and may seize (via condemnation). At stake are seven treasured miles of wagon wheel ruts left by pioneers on the Oregon Trail, as well as sensitive wildlife habitat, quiet rural areas and big sky views. All would be impacted for the next 100 years, or longer, if Idaho Power prevails.

The company said that it’s been collaborating with landowners, federal agencies, interest groups and other organizations to reduce B2H’s cultural and environmental impacts, according to Sven Berg, spokesman for Idaho Power. “Through years of this collaboration, we’ve tweaked the project route so that it balances the needs of communities closest to B2H with the safe, reliable, affordable, clean energy customers across the West need. Oregon’s Energy Facility Siting Council examined the route and its impacts in detail before approving a site certificate for the project.”

The biggest impacts are in Eastern Oregon, so it’s not surprising the people most affected have spent years wading through a morass of federal and state regulations that allow public input but deeply favor utilities before any new energy resource can be built.

“It’s been a heavy, heavy lift,” said Fuji Kreider of Stop B2H, who along with twenty or so volunteers, has spearheaded much of the opposition. The most recent skirmish involved the contested case the coalition entered in 2020 after ODOE gave preliminary approval of Idaho Power’s proposed siting. She said it took two years for the agency to complete the contested case review because fifty-two opponents raised seventy-one issues, even after narrowing by ODOE.

“It was hellish,” she said. “It was during Covid, and everything was in writing. Each time we filed, Idaho Power and its bevy of lawyers would come back with objections, often with hundreds of pages. People got stressed out. Over time, they couldn’t keep up.

“We weren’t surprised (ODOE and the council) ruled with the company,” she said. “They’ve ruled with the company ninety percent of the time.”

Next Battles: the Oregon Supreme Court and property condemnation

Stop B2H and other opponents have known for years that the final arbiter would likely be the Oregon Supreme Court. “We’re in the process of analyzing which issues to take to court,” Jim Kreider, Stop B2H co-chair, said.

Years ago, the Oregon Legislature, acting at the behest of power companies, fast-tracked the energy siting process, bypassing lower courts and funneling challenges directly to the Supreme Court. This highly unusual process means that Oregon’s highest court has no previous lower court reviews to inform it. “It’s a lot for them to absorb and a lot for us to go forward,” he said.

Stop B2H’s other co-chair, Irene Gilbert, said the group will consider various procedural errors, interpretation of the law and the utility’s noncompliance with rules and standards. Stop B2H and other challengers have sixty days from being served with the siting council’s final order on Oct. 7, 2022, to notify the Supreme Court of their intent to appeal, and fourteen days thereafter to file written arguments.

“The timelines for filing a petition and briefing the case out are insanely short,” said Karl G. Anuta, a Portland-based trial lawyer who focuses on environmental and conservation issues, who will take Stop B2H’s arguments to the Supreme Court.

He said there are a host of different procedural issues, as well as substantive concerns about whether the project can meet applicable standards—such as noise and scenic view standards. There’s also the question of why Stop B2H, which represents a broad coalition of individuals and organizations, was relegated to limited party status rather than the full party status granted ODOE and Idaho Power. Once the court has both sides’ briefs, state law requires a court decision within six months.

“We’re hopeful the court will see some of the fundamental errors and say, look, you’ve got to give people a fair hearing, and you have to follow the law,” Anuta said. For example, he cites the siting council’s approval of a noise variance along the entire line but contends that the legislature gave the authority to grant a variance to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, not the siting council.

With site approval in hand (pending the Supreme Court’s ruling), Idaho Power can begin the process of acquiring the 190 miles of private land to build the transmission line using eminent domain. That is the power normally reserved for government to seize property and convert it to public use. The utility has filed a 1,200-page application to begin taking property, either by agreement with property owners on price or through condemnation, a process overseen by the Oregon Public Utility Commission. “We’re trying to organize landowners to represent themselves in the contested case before the OPUC,” Jim Kreider said.

No one expects Stop B2H to stop fighting. “This $1.2 billion dinosaur will not only cause the degradation of viewsheds, protected areas and sensitive habitats in northeast Oregon, it will deface the National Historic Oregon Trail, and potentially hasten species extinction,” he said. “On top of that, it will increase electric rates in both Idaho and Oregon. This is not a good deal for people in Oregon or Idaho. Only the Idaho Power Corporation, through its government guaranteed profits for building the line, benefits from this.”

Idaho Power maintains that population growth and a corresponding leap in energy use have highlighted why B2H is so important for utilities across the Pacific Northwest and Mountain West. “The nation, including Idaho Power, needs more high-voltage transmission lines like B2H to move that clean energy from the places it’s generated to the people and businesses who need it,” said Berg.

For now, all parties are headed to the Oregon Supreme Court. Stop B2H is asking for donations to help fund its case. Those interested can go to the website, www.stopb2h.org.

Perspective From Eastern Oregon: The threat from a transmission-line-sparked wildfire is real, but Oregon officials are not listening

FOR A CENTURY, Sam Myers’ family has been a good steward of land that lies halfway between Hepner and Hermiston in Morrow County where it grows dryland wheat. But Idaho Power has served Myers notice that it plans to build a right-of-way across his 5,000 acres for a high-voltage transmission line known as B2H.

“They’ve mapped the area and know where they want to put the line,” he said. “I don’t know whether I can farm underneath it, and I don’t know how many acres will be impacted. It’s so bizarre. They want to compensate people, but we don’t know yet what we can do.” The power company would give him a one-time payment to use his property in exchange for a line that has a 100-year lifespan.

“I did research and decided I don’t want to have this on my property and am now finding more danger and risk,” he said. Chief among his worries is the threat of wildland fire. With help from the Stop B2H Coalition, he testified at hearings held by the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council about wildland fire’s devastating impact on dryland cropping.

“Idaho Power argues that some soils like fire, but everyone locally knows that fire on dryland is a no-no,” he said, pointing to evidence that fires can sterilize and alter the texture of soil and decrease water storage capacity. “The only place this information doesn’t seem to resonate is in Salem.”

He also disputes Idaho Power’s intent to build the transmission line to withstand a maximum 90-mile-per-hour wind load. “Wind events will eclipse 90 in zones where the National Weather Service issues frequent red-flag warnings, such as in Eastern Oregon. No one [at the State level] cares. “I feel like I’m a whistleblower because nobody will put this together until high winds cause a catastrophic wildfire.”

He has weathered the arduous process of keeping up with formal hearings and timelines and is now the only one in Morrow County who has survived to present his issues with the Oregon Supreme Court. “I’m forever lost in the battle,” he said. “I don’t know my next deadline. The process is not for the faint of heart.” For his own sake and landowners along the entire 300-mile proposed route, he plans to take his fight as far as he can.