Petition

Print off a copy of the petition.

If you want to sign the petition electronically you can do it in the comment section below. Put your name and address. If you want to email your support you can email CapX52route@gmail.com.

Minnesota Public Utilities Commission

121 Seventh Place East

St. Paul, MN 55101

Phyllis Reha           Vice Chair

David Boyd            Commissioner

J. Dennis O Brien  Commissioner

Betsy Wergin        Commissioner

RE:  MPUC Docket #E-002/TL-09-1448 (Petition against Segment 1P-003)

We are affected by the Capx2020 power line. We respectfully recommend that you follow the Modified Preferred Route along Highway 52.  We are opposed to 1P-003, the route through Stanton and Randolph Townships.

We are opposed to segment 1P-003 going through our townships for the following reasons:

Residential Impacts:  Segment 1P-003 affects more homes and humans than the Modified Preferred Route. 

Existing Land Use:  Segment 1P-003 also affects two parks in two separate counties in addition to many acres of farm land.  The Little Cannon River (runs through Stanton Township) is home to a healthy population of both Rainbow and Brown trout.  Both Stanton and Randolph Townships are home to sizable populations of deer, bald eagles, fox, turkeys, etc.  Both Townships are also well known for their horse populations.

Protection of Endangered Flowers:  Segment 1P-003 goes directly over the only area in the world that the “Dwarf Trout Lily” grows.

Corridor Sharing:  We are in support of the power line following Highway 52.  Highway 52 follows existing roads, does not cut across agricultural, residential or park land. The land use near Highway 52 is primarily commercial and industrial suitable for a project of this magnitude.

I AM OPPOSED TO SEGMENT 1P-003:

NAME      ADDRESS        PHONE /EMAIL       DISTANCE FROM 1P-003 (FT)               SIGNATURE

1

2

continued on print out of petition . . . 

MN State Statute 7850.4100 FACTORS CONSIDERED.

In determining whether to issue a permit for a large electric power generating plant or a high voltage transmission line, the commission shall consider the following:

A.  effects on human settlement, including, but not limited to, displacement, noise, aesthetics, cultural values, recreation, and public services;

B.  effects on public health and safety;

C.  effects on land-based economies, including, but not limited to, agriculture, forestry, tourism, and mining;

D.  effects on archaeological and historic resources;

E.  effects on the natural environment, including effects on air and water quality resources and flora and fauna;

F.  effects on rare and unique natural resources;

G. application of design options that maximize energy efficiencies, mitigate adverse environmental effects, and could accommodate expansion of transmission or generating capacity;

H. use or paralleling of existing rights-of-way, survey lines, natural division lines, and agricultural field boundaries;

I.  use of existing large electric power generating plant sites;

J.  use of existing transportation, pipeline, and electrical transmission systems or rights-of-way;

K. electrical system reliability;

L. costs of constructing, operating, and maintaining the facility which are dependent on design and route;

M. adverse human and natural environmental effects which cannot be avoided; and

N.  irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources.

Statutory Authority: MS s 116C.66; 216E.16

History: 27 SR 1295; L 2005 c 97 art 3 s 19

Posted:September 18, 2009