Board of Environmental Protection
17 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333
February 18, 2021
Re:DEP Project #L-27625-26-L-C/ L-27625-TB-M-C/ L-27625-2C-N-C/ L-27625-VP-O-C/ L- 27625-IW-P-C, Minor Revision Application
Dear Chairman Draper
Members of the Board of Environmental Protection,
The purpose of the Board is to provide informed, independent and timely decisions on the interpretation, administration and enforcement of the laws related to environmental protection and to provide for credible, fair and responsible public participation in department decisions.
I am writing as a volunteer leader on behalf of Sierra Club Maine and our 22,000 members and supporters in Maine. We are one of 64 chapters nationwide with close to 4 million members and supporters. We are a grassroots organization which relies heavily on volunteer effort to explore, protect and enjoy our environment.
We are writing to request that the BEP “provide for credible, fair and responsible public participation in department decisions” as stated in your mission. We ask that the Board of Environmental Protection (BEP) take on the review of the “minor” revisions of the NECEC/CMP/ Avangrid application. We are in receipt of the preliminary judgement from Acting Commissioner Loyzim regarding “Minor Revision Application” by CMP to the DEP. However we do not accept that the 700 page minor review application complies with the below definition as written in the DEP guidelines.
Chapter 2 N. Minor Revision. "Minor Revision" means an application to modify a license previously granted by the Department, where the modification significantly decreases or eliminates an environmental impact, does not significantly expand the project, does not change the nature of the project, or does not modify any Department findings with respect to any licensing criteria. This term may be further defined by the Department by rule.
CMP ’s original application did not provide an alternatives analysis. It simply stated that there were no alternatives. Apparently the Department of Environmental Protection chose to find that application complete without that analysis. However here comes the applicant with a long laundry list of alterations to the original application including a new route that permanently damages other wetlands and vernal pools than were the original application. This is not a modification that “significantly decreases or eliminates an environmental impact.” While it is not clear whether the nature of the project has been altered, there have been no finding on the impacts of the changes.
We do not know how the changes will increase or decrease impacts because no analysis has been done. We do know that there are other wetlands and vernal pool that will be impacted. No impact has been eliminated. While the broad scope of the project may not have changed, the size of the changes is not insignificant. Simply stating that the changes are minor does not make them so. It would seem that in fact alternatives did exist and were willfully neglected.
We believe that the NECEC Project fulfills at least three of the criteria for review by the BEP.
- (1) Will have an environmental or economic impact in more than one municipality, territory or county; The geography of the environmental impact is widespread across multiple municipalities.
- (2) Involves an activity not previously permitted or licensed in the State;
While the DEP has clearly permitted some transmission lines previously, this is the largest and most impactful, crossing international borders as well as delivering power to another state. - (3) Is likely to come under significant public scrutiny, and There is not doubt that this application has come under significant public scrutiny and comment. Many of us have twice stood in the cold to collect signatures for two Citizens Initiatives, recently collecting more than 100,000 signatures in more than 240 towns and municipalities across the state. We have patiently waited to make oral comments as well as submitting them to the DEP and at the Army Corps of Engineers which finally agreed to hold a public hearing at the request of 2nd District Congressman, Jared Golden.
- (4) Is located in more than one municipality, territory or county. The project clearly covers many municipalities most of which have voted to reject this project. There are myriad testimonies addressing the economic impact to the existing businesses which enable the local communities to survive and even thrive.
It does not appear that the DEP takes the concerns of the citizenry about the scale and impacts of this project seriously. However we hope that you as the “citizens” board tasked with fulfilling your mission to interpret and administer laws as well as provide fair public participation in the decision making process will take under your review the NECEC Application for “minor”alterations.
Respectfully Submitted,
Becky Layton Bartovics, Executive Committee Representative
273 North Shore Rd
North Haven, ME 04853
207-867-4938