Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Projects Wind topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves memorials urging review of Lava Ridge wind project over local impacts
Summary
Representative Lance Clow and Representative Jack Nelson presented House Joint Memorial 5 and House Concurrent Resolution 8, asking federal and state executives and Idaho's congressional delegation to review and consider rejecting the Lava Ridge wind project.
Get email alerts on the Energy Projects Wind topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative Lance Clow and Representative Jack Nelson presented House Joint Memorial 5 and House Concurrent Resolution 8, asking federal and state executives and Idaho's congressional delegation to review and consider rejecting the Lava Ridge wind project.
Clow told the committee the Lava Ridge project "met an unbelievable amount of resistance from the general public" and said residents were worried about the number of roads to be built, impacts to the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (described in testimony as "the size of Lake Erie"), blasting on lava rock, and the project's plan to export power to California and Nevada while local communities would absorb construction impacts.
Representative Jack Nelson said he had "never seen my community so grumpy about something like this" and echoed concerns about blasting, road building and the lack of mitigation for local communities.
Mr. Chairman, Senator Taylor moved to send HJM 5 to the Senate floor with a due-pass recommendation; Senator Cole seconded. The motion carried. Senator Taylor then moved to send HCR 8 to the floor with a due-pass recommendation; Senator Cole seconded that motion as well. Both motions carried.
Witnesses and sponsors framed the measures as requests that the governor and the state's congressional delegation press federal authorities and the president to review the Bureau of Land Management's December approval of the project and to use executive or legal authority where available. Witnesses described a 90-day presidential moratorium (described in testimony as a 90-day pause to review executive actions) and said the project approval remains under review.
The committee did not take amendments and advanced both measures to the Senate floor under due-pass recommendations.
