Yes, it’s true, the cow is out of the barn – and the National Park Service says that the “No Action Alternative” is the best alternative for the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line.  Can you hear PSEG and PPL squealing???


Big thanks to Scott Olson for the heads up, and this link:

Park Service: No line is best option

The bottom line, from page 16 of the pdf below, page vii of the actual document:

The environmentally preferred alternative is the alternative that would promote the requirements of the
national environmental policy expressed in section 101(b) of NEPA. It is the alternative that causes the
least damage to the biological and physical environment and that best protects, preserves, and enhances historic, cultural, and natural resources (CEQ 1981, Q6a). Alternative 1, the no-action alternative, was selected as the environmentally preferred alternative by the NPS. This decision was based on the available scientific data about the proposal and mitigation measures presented by the applicant and collected by NPS. An analysis of this data made it clear that alternative 1 best meets the requirements of the environmentally preferred alternative.

Really, that’s what it says… wow… I’ve never seen that before in a DEIS.  You can see for yourself here, again, p. 16 of the pdf, page vii of the actual document:

Here’s the NPS page with the whole thing:


Comments are due by 11:59 p.m. January 31, 2012:

National Park Service
Susquehanna to Roseland
500 kV Transmission Line
Right of Way and Special Use Permit
Draft Environmental Impact Statement

From the site, there are three public “meetings” scheduled where you can make comments in person:

Tuesday, January 24, 2012
(snow date 1/31)
Fernwood Hotel and Resort
U.S. 209 Bushkill, PA 18324

Wednesday, January 25, 2012
(snow date 2/1)
Stroudsmoor Country Inn – Ridgecrest
RD#4 Stroudsmoor Road Stroudsburg, PA 18360

Thursday, January 26, 2012
(snow date 2/2)
Farmstead Golf and Country Club
88 Lawrence Road
Lafayette, NJ 07848

Comments are due by 11:59 p.m. January 31, 2012.  If you are unable to attend the public meetings, please submit your comments by January 31, 2012 via the internet at http:// or by mail to address below (there are two addresses below – best send to BOTH!):

John J. Donahue, Superintendent
Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area &
Middle Delaware National Scenic and Recreational River
HQ River Road, off Rt. 209
Bushkill, PA 18324


Pamela Underhill, Superintendent
Appalachian National Scenic Trail
P.O. Box 50
Harpers Ferry, WV 25425

Or by filing it at this site:


Comments are due by 11:59 p.m. January 31, 2012


Imagine 190 foot transmission towers through the Delaware Water Gap, between Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

That’s what’s proposed by PSE&G for its Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line.  This quad/tri bundled 500kV line is HUGE, ugly beyond belief, and it’s just so big that I can hardly comprehend, there’s nothing that large that I’ve found.  Others like it are being cancelled by PJM due to lack of demand, and this one should be too…

From the Pocono Record:

Park Service report on power line plan released

Anyway, the National Park Service is doing an Environmental Impact Statement, and leading up to that is “scoping,” which, as Grant Stevenson noted yesterday at the Task Force meeting, is THE most misunderstood term.  I agree.  It just zooms over people’s heads, and comments end up being of the “I hate this project because___” and nothing that relates to what the scope of the environmental review should be.  Utter waste of time, and something to be mindful of with the CapX 2020 transmission scoping meetings coming up.

SCOPE: Range, area of coverage, breadth

So “scoping” in this sense is the range, area of coverage, and breadth of environmental review.

We had comments on the scope a few months ago, and there were something like 6,500 comments.  Yes, that’s right, SIX THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED!  At the meetings I went to, it was standing room only and the comments were notably on point, they were profound examples of those rare uplifting meetings.  Facilitation of the meetings was so good it felt like they really were interested in what we had to say.  It was all taken down by a court reporter.  THAT level of attention and appreciation is SO rare… and dig this … afterwards I RECEIVED A THANK YOU NOTE FOR PARTICIPATING.  That is a first, I’ve never gotten a thank you note from an agency for showing up and speaking out.  I’m thinking of framing it (after sending it to MN’s Dept. of Commerce).


Here’s their report:

Public Scoping Report – Susquehanna-Roseland transmission

The next step?

The NPS is currently developing preliminary alternatives for the project. Our plan is to host public meetings to present and receive feedback on these preliminary alternatives this summer. Announcements and news releases will be prepared to inform and invite the public to these meetings.

We’ll keep you posted.


Stop the Lines!!!

National Park Service has extended the deadline for EIS Scoping Comments on the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission project.  WHEW!  Now we have until March 12 to send our comments in!

NPS Home Page for Susquehanna-Roseland Transmission Project

Get your clues on Comments from what they do and do not include:

NPS Internal Scoping Document

It’s in the Pocono Times:

Transmission line public scoping period extended

From the NPS blog:

High public interest has prompted the superintendents of Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, and the Middle Delaware National Scenic and Recreational River and National Recreation Water Trail to extend by a week the public comment period on a proposal to run a transmission line across the areas.

The comment period was scheduled to end today, but has been extended through March 12.

“Scoping comments,” those that suggest areas the Park Service should examine in preparing an environmental impact statement, are being taken to help agency managers prepare an EIS on a proposal to replace existing 80-foot transmission towers with larger towers (up to 200 feet high) and add an additional 500 kV transmission line.

Park Service officials say the request would necessitate widening the cleared area and the existing right-of-way and constructing access roads. The proposed expanded line and new towers would impact the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area; the Middle Delaware National Scenic and Recreational River and National Recreation Water Trail; and the Appalachian National Scenic Trail.

The EIS will analyze a reasonable range of alternatives to meet project objectives; evaluate potential issues and impacts to the resources and values of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, Middle Delaware National Scenic and Recreational River, and the Appalachian National Scenic Trail park units, and identify mitigation measures to lessen the degree or extent of these impacts.

There are numerous ways for the public to provide comments on the public scoping phase of the planning process, including leaving a message on the Park Planning Information Telephone Line (570-426-2491), submitting comments online through a link on the National Park Service Planning, Environment and Public Comment site, (select Appalachian NST or Delaware Water Gap NRA), or by mailing comments to:

National Park Service
Attention: DEWA PPL EIS Planning Team
Denver Service Center-Planning Division
P.O. Box 25287
Denver, CO 80225-0287

Detailed information about the need for the EIS and the project timeline
can be found on the National Park Service Planning, Environment and Public
Comment site: