Mary Gorden has grounds for protesting Southern California Edisonís proposed powerline path.

The local historianís protest submitted to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in early July follows Edisonís preferred Route #1 from Visalia up through Lemon Cove citing the historical landmarks and environmentally sensitive locations along the way. From Native American burial grounds to habitation sites Gorden cited several books, articles and maps on local history.

Gorden also examined the historical and environment impacts on the other two alternative routes submitted in the San Joaquin Cross Valley Loop Transmission Project.

The Project would consist of the construction of a new, high voltage transmission line that would connect an existing 220-kV transmission line, located between SCEís hydro-electric facilities in the Sierras and SCEís Springville Substation east of Strathmore, into the Rector Substation, located southeast of Visalia.

Other local historians agree with Gorden on the impact Route #1 would have on local historical sites.

ìMaryís resources are valid and she brings up good points about historic and prehistoric sites,î said local historian and Exeter Historical Museum Director Chris Brewer. ìIt seems to me that the proposed route 1 has not the least environmental impact but the highest one.î

In her protest Gorden said that while a ìwindshield methodî of surveying the proposed routes was used, SCE failed to consult local historical organizations. She added that this method was ìnot only inadequate, but unscientific at best.î

According to the July 21 response to protests filed by Edisonís attorney, Michael Mackness SCEís initial research into cultural resources has been simply vague.

In the response, Mackness said ìa few of the Protesters expressed concern about cultural resources.

Other than documenting and recording components of the Big Creek Hydro System Historic District (approximately 26 original single-circuit lattice steel towers will be removed), mitigation measures are not known to be necessary at this time to avoid impacts to cultural resources,î Mackness continued.

ìDue to a lack of access, some areas of the Project were not surveyed in advance of filing the application. A comprehensive survey of unsurveyed portions of the Project right-of-way would be undertaken prior to construction. Redesign or mitigation would be used if necessary.î

The submit an application now, research later approach has shrouded the project in even more controversy from local opposition. Brewer agrees.

ìShe indicates someone did a windshield survey to get answers and that it wasnít good enough. This is true and I would be surprised anyone would try to get away with shabby work like that,î said Brewer. ìFor this kind of installation a full EIR/EIS will be in order with specialty studies in Cultural, Paleo, biology, etc. This also includes the viewshed that the lines will be damaging.î

In her protest, Gorden explains that located in and around Route #1 is ìtotal of 136 places within the traditional territories of the first people who occupied Kaweah River Country.î

The personal story of Hale Tharp, the first Caucasian to settle in the Kaweah River canyons posted as part of a detailed history on the Sequoia National History Associationís website confirms this. Tharp wrote, ìI first located my ranch where I now live in the summer of 1856. There were about 2,000 Indians then living along the Kaweah Rivers above where Lemon Cove now stands.î

Gorden also indentified Hogwallow Preserve, in Lindcove just outside Exeter.

The Tulare County Historical Society identified Hogwallow Preserve as one of their 25 marked historical sites.

According to the TC Historical Societyís website, ìthe rough, mounded land is typical of what much of the Tulare County prairie along the base of the Sierra looked like before farming began.î

In her protest Gorden said that the Wukchumni called the hogwallows, Powkawkwitch and they said this was where people left mounds after they finished making the Sierra Nevada Mountains.

Numerous Native American villages were cited as well burial sites in Gordenís protest including: the Woílasi principal village of Dawa Nawshid, the main Yododo village, Yokoíl located near Merriam Ranch and the site of the historic Exeter Golf Course, the Wukchumniís principal village , Daiíaípnusía and two smaller villages called Tawponga east of Lemon Cove.

She also added the 324 acre Kaweah Oaks Preserve to the list of sensitive grounds that would be impacted.

Gorden said in her protest, ìwithin 0.5 miles of the proposed lines are unrecorded prehistoric burials that have not been disturbed at the present time.î

Gorden lastly cited in her overview of Route #1 the importance of the historic citrus industry in Lemon Cove and how Route #1 ìruns directly through the citrus belt.î

Gorden could not be contacted as of press time to comment on the protest.

Filing protests are part of the process the CPUC undergoes when reviewing a proposed utility project.

The CPUC is a state regulatory agency that sets electricity rates and issues permits for the construction of new and rebuilt transmission lines and substations.

The CPUC will review the project in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and will seek public comment on the project.

Southern California Edison submitted an application in May with Proposed Route #1 as their power line path. Thus began whatís called a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity Process (CPCN).

The CPCN Review coincides with the California Environmental Quality Act Process (CEQA).

While the CPCN Review focuses on rates, market competition and structure, needs of people and other economic factors, the CEQA looks only at environmental considerations such as mitigation measures and public awareness to environmental impacts, as well as other alternatives.

Starting in September the review process will include public scoping meetings and in January of next year a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be circulated for agency and public comment. Public comment meetings are scheduled for February.

The CPUC will consider and respond to comments and publish their final EIR in April. In May they will either approve the Project as filed, approve the project with modifications or deny the project.

If approved, construction of the project is estimated for completion in 2011.

The CPUC Pubic Advisorís Office provides procedural information and advice to groups and individuals who want to comment or advocate positions in the CPUCís formal proceedings.

The Public Advisorís staff helps answer questions, locate information or refer callers to the appropriate staff person as well as attend community functions and assist the public in participating in town hall meetings, etc.

The San Joaquin Valley Loop Project case number is A0805039.

For more information call (866) 849-8390.

Direct questions about the workshops to Jensen Uchida, Project Manager, CPUC c/o Environmental Science Associates, (415) 962-8409, sjxvl@esassoc.com or Judy Cooper, Public Advisors Office, CPUC, (415) 703-2188 or jms@cpuc.ca.gov.

For more information on how to voice your opinion about the San Joaquin Cross Valley Loop Project visit www.pace-sos.com. Informal protests or comments have no deadline for submittal to the CPUC. Use the docket number A08-05-039 and title ìSan Joaquin Cross Valley Loop Transmission Projectî or the letter may be lost. You may also e-mail your letter to the Public Advisorís Office at public.advisor@cpuc.ca.gov.

Print this story

Email this story

Return to Index