  |
Member Comments/ResponseFollowing is an email conversation between a focus group member, who is in fairly regular contact with UPPCO, and an UPPCO responder: Focus Group MemberWe have received conflicting information regarding when the decision was made to sell the lands to Naterra. When did negotiations begin to sell the land at Bond to Naterra? What is the status of the land sales at Victoria & Prickett? Shawn gave an overview of the licenses for Bond & Victoria but there was no discussion or open dialogue - we were each allowed only 1-2 minutes for questions. I am very confused regarding our role on the focus group. According to the SMP Guidelines (page ii) it states "commission staff believes that by including various stakeholders in the development of the SMP, the resulting plan will be stronger and more acceptable to all parties". The same page states the SMP is a comprehensive plan to "manage the multiple uses of the project's shoreline in a manner that is consistent with license requirements." At the last meeting we were told it is not our role to look at the license. How specifically will the focus group be used in the development of the SMP? FERC has the ultimate decision for approving the SMP but FERC also expects UPPCO and the stakeholders to discuss and work through difficult issues (not just go around the room and ask each person to state their concerns). Perhaps, 2 meetings is not a good assessment, but how does UPPCO plan for the stakeholders to work through the difficult issues? As part of the license agreement, UPPCO is supposed to minimize human disturbance at the shoreline. I realize FERC will have the final decision about docks and hopefully, some of the issues will be raised during the EA, but UPPCO must have believed docks would not impact the shoreline or they would not have prepared a draft NELA. How is it that UPPCO believes that docks, trails etc. would not impact human disturbance? Also, there is now talk of additional public access points. How is that consistent with the license? Are we in the pre-planning stage of the SMP or the actual preparation of the plan? Will the focus group be setting Goals & Objectives? Last month I asked if we would be given copies of a SMP & I was told to get one through FERC. Seems like this is something that UPPCO should provide to each stakeholder. Why does UPPCO think it is inappropriate for the focus group to review and discuss a SMP? If using the focus group as purely advisory, where we state our concerns in 1 minute sound bites, how will these concerns be related to FERC? (I asked Keith this question at the first meeting, but no one seemed to know at the time). Thanks for your help UPPCO ResponderFirst, we've been over the issue of when the decision was made to sell lands and to sell to Naterra several times. The company's asset management strategy to dispose of land not needed for safe, reliable and ongoing business operations was formed late in 2001. UPPCO began considering selling the land in 2002. In 2002, and again in 2004, UPPCO had discussions with the Michigan DNR and other agencies to gauge their interest in acquiring some or all of the land. UPPCO preferred to sell the land in large blocks to avoid additional work with selling multiple parcels to different individuals and to have better control of the use of project lands. Later in 2004, well after receiving the FERC licenses and after receiving no substantial interest from the Michigan DNR or other agencies, UPPCO began exploring the option to sell to a developer. In 2005, UPPCO chose Naterra as the buyer and began working exclusively with their representatives on the land sale (about 1,400 acres at Bond, Boney, and Cataract) - which closed in December 2005. The land sales at Victoria and Prickett are not yet finalized. UPPCO is open to discussions with conservancy agencies on the land, but has not been approached even though the the potential land sales have been widely publicized. If the land is to be sold for development, UPPCO will work exclusively with Naterra. Regarding the Focus Groups, I think you may be confusing their role with the role of the Resource Agencies in developing the Shoreline Management Plan (SMP). UPPCO, along with the Resouce Agencies, developed goals and objectives (posted on the UPPCO Web site) and has a role in determining that "the multiple uses of the project's shoreline" are consistent with the license requirements. The Focus Group's role is to raise issues that UPPCO, along with the Resource Agencies, will address in the SMP, as well as to serve as a conduit of information to and from the member's constituencies. The Focus Groups will not make decisions and need not reach a "consensus" of opinion regarding the issues raised. In fact, because of the diverse nature of the Focus Groups, consensus would likely be impossible to reach. As the SMP Guidelines indicate (Section 2.3), "Although the licensee will be the primary entity responsible for formulating, developing, implementing, and monitoring the plan, other entities will have input throughout the planning process." Further, the SMP Guidelines state, "It is important to identify potential stakeholders and their concerns, goals, and issues..." That is the role of the Focus Groups: to bring concerns, goals, and issues to the table so that UPPCO and the Resource Agencies address them in the final plan. Again, the Focus Groups will not "work through the difficult issues." That is the role for UPPCO and the Resource Agencies. Regarding the issue of docks, I think you will see from the SMP Guidelines, that dock placement is just one of many "permittable" facilities on project lands (page 3-8). Examples cited include:individual docks and piers, common docks and piers, boat houses, excavation and dredging, riprapping, fences, walkways, landscape plantings, hunting blinds, etc. UPPCO is not considering boat houses and fences, etc. on project lands, but clearly, they are "permittable" facilities under the FERC guidelines. Your implication that docks will impact the shoreline and are therefore not allowed is incorrect. During the SMP planning process, it is the responsibility of UPPCO, along with Resource Agency consultation, to balance the potential project land uses with the license requirements, including the recreation plan, public access requirements, etc. The environmental studies being completed will assist in determining what will or will not be included in UPPCO's submission of the SMP to FERC. For example, there may be areas identified that are loon nesting areas or other environmental concerns, where little or no project land uses will be allowed. UPPCO is in the pre-planning stage of the SMP. Again, the goals and objectives have been developed by UPPCO and the Resource Agencies and are available on the UPPCO Web site. Regarding a sample SMP, I hope my earlier discussions have been clear in pointing out that is it not the Focus Group's responsibility to review and discuss the SMP, but rather to raise concerns, goals, and issues that will later be addressed in the SMP developed by UPPCO, with consultation from the Resource Agencies. The Focus Group meeting summaries are forwarded to FERC. I hope to get the most recent summaries added to the UPPCO Web site within the next few days, as well. |
