20 Winter 2011 Applegater
Update on the Applegate Dam
Hydroelectric Project
BY MARGARET DELLA SANTINA
As the proposed Applegate Dam Hydroelectric
Project appears close to final approval, we are thrilled
that Symbiotics, Inc. has decided to bury the entire
fifteen miles of high-voltage transmission lines, from
Applegate Dam to the substation in Ruch. While
residents support the idea of using the existing dam to
generate electricity, we have long been worried about
the impact of high-voltage power lines running along
the easements on our properties, on poles that would
have extended significantly higher than they presently
do. Installing environmentally-intrusive power poles and
lines to carry environmentally-friendly energy seemed
counter-productive, and we hoped to find a way to con-
vince Symbiotics, LLC to become our partners in this
beautiful area, rather than marring the landscape with
tall high-voltage transmission lines. This is why we view
Symbiotics’ decision to bury the transmission lines as a
rare example of corporate interests actually listening and
responding to community concerns.
So, a big THANK YOU to all who attended
the September 21 “contested case hearing” regarding
the Applegate Dam Hydroelectric Project. Despite the
hearing being held on a weekday morning, the meeting
room at the Ruch Public Library was overflowing (to the
evident surprise of the judge, and the obvious distress of
the attorney representing Symbiotics, Inc., the company
proposing the project). The size of the crowd—and
residents’ articulate comments—conveyed clearly to the
presiding Oregon Administrative Law Judge that the
community had not received sufficient information from
Symbiotics, Inc., nor sufficient opportunity to participate
in decisions that would affect both private properties
and public recreation areas along the Applegate River.
Judge Han listened respectfully to residents’ concerns,
and repeatedly overruled the objections of Symbiotics’
attorney to our comments being heard. Finally, deviating
from convention, Judge Han took the hearing ‘off the
record’ and turned it into a ‘town hall meeting.’ By that
time, however, many residents had spoken, and these
recorded comments were admitted to the public record
of the case. So again, thanks to all who came; whether
or not you spoke at the hearing, your presence helped
shape this critical stage of the process.
On November 17, Judge Han informed the Or-
egon Water Resources Department that he had “affirmed”
the Proposed Order for the hydroelectric project; this
tentative ruling did not require Symbiotics to bury the
line, nor did it include any other conditions related to
transmission towers. However, the judge did allow com-
ments made by residents at the Ruch hearing to remain as
part of the public record of the case. The judge’s tentative
approval also outlined a (somewhat lengthy and complex)
process for appealing the decision and by late November
we were preparing to file an exemption to the ruling.
Then on December 3, Symbiotics issued a press
release stating their intent to bury the lines. According to
Erik Steimle of Symbiotics, the developer has amended
their license application to include buried lines, and
Jackson County Public Works is prepared “to green-light”
the amended proposal. (Symbiotics is not going to pursue
the idea of creating a bike path along Upper Applegate
Road; however, I think they have met us more than
halfway, at an additional cost of 14% to their project, so
we may want to think about ways to do this as a grant-
funded community project.) Asked what had influenced
their decision, Steimle emphasized Symbiotics’ desire to
obtain community support for the project, which they
hope to operate for 50 years. Having our statements on
record as part of the recent Ruch hearing was certainly
part of that decision! So again, thanks to all who signed
the statement, wrote letters, attended the hearing, or
made a comment. And thanks, too, to Erik Steimle at
Symbiotics, who really became our ally on this issue!
In case you were unable to attend the hearing,
below is the text of a statement submitted to Judge
Han (which I read at the hearing) on behalf of over 100
residents who had signed it. The gist of the statement
is that as residents who would receive no direct benefit
from the hydroelectric project, we wanted some input
into how that energy would be transmitted along our
properties and down this beautiful river corridor. While
the implementation of this project is still far from cer-
tain, it is gratifying to know that we have had significant
input on its design.
Residents’ Statement
Regarding the Applegate
Dam Hydroelectric Project:
As residents of Upper Applegate Road and the
surrounding area, we respectfully ask that our comments
be included as a part of the record of this contested case
hearing. The Notice announcing this hearing states, “no
protests were received by the [Water Resources] Depart-
ment.” In fact, Applegate Valley residents wrote multiple
letters to Mary Grainey at the WRD in advance of the
June 10, 2010 deadline. These letters expressed concerns
ranging from diminishing views and property values, to
increased risk of wildfire. In these letters, residents have
repeatedly requested that consideration be given to bury-
ing the high-voltage power lines; these letters, which never
received a formal response, are appended to the official
Proposed Order. Apparently our letters do not count as
protests because we did not pay a $600 fee requested by
the WRD. We did not pay this fee because we found it
to be—and still view it as—an outrageous condition for
citizens’ concerns to be heard. So we appreciate your hear-
ing our concerns at this hearing. And, we look forward
to hearing from you.
First, it is important to note that as residents of
the Applegate Lake area, many of whom live within a
mile or two of the Applegate dam, we are not opposed to
using the dam to generate clean, hydroelectric power to
contribute to our country’s energy resources. We support
hydroelectric power for its potential to produce energy
with less negative environmental impact than fossil fu-
els. So we simply see it as counter-productive to install
hydroelectric transmission lines that will result in greater
negative impact on the environment and on residents
than currently exists.
It may be worth noting that Upper Applegate
Road is not “undeveloped” with “a few residences,” as the
FERC stated in approving the project; in fact, there are
approximately 400 residences along the 15-mile stretch
of Upper Applegate Road leading to the dam, and many
hundreds more along the streets that connect to Upper
Applegate. From the wording in the FERC EA, it appears
that the project may have been approved at the Federal
level in part on the mistaken idea that this is a sparsely
populated remote rural area where the impact on residents
would be small. This is not true: many people—residents
and the many visitors who come to our beautiful valley
alike—will be affected by this project.
So while we support the conversion of the dam to
produce hydroelectric power, we are very concerned about
how that conversion takes place, and the impact—on a
large number of residents and on the environment—of
the significantly taller high-voltage poles and lines that
will be installed. If, as the proposal suggests, the new
lines will be installed following the existing easement
right-of-way, the result will be a significant negative
impact on many residents’ views, safety, property values,
and quality of life.
County records show that the utilities easements
on our properties, which currently grant Pacific Power
(and its “successors and assigns”) right-of-way to install
and maintain power lines, were created as far back as 1948
and 1952. The easements give the power company broad
discretionary power to clear the land and install supports
for the power lines both inside and outside of the easement
boundaries. This is a matter of great concern to us.
At the time they were initially recorded, the
easements certainly did not anticipate the kind of high-
voltage transmission that Symbiotics is proposing today.
The purpose of the original easement was ostensibly to
provide power that would benefit local residents. The
proposed project vastly increases the amount of electricity
being transmitted along a residential corridor. If, as the
proposal states, the new power line simply follows the
existing ones, it provides no benefit to local residents in
return for far more intrusive power installations on our
properties. The power lines will be much more visible than
they currently are; in some cases this line passes directly
See DAM, page 21