Welcome to UPPAC - The Upper Peninsula Public Access Coalition

The Upper Peninsula Public Access Coalition
Welcome to our Home Page

Home Page

Sign our
On Line Petition!

Interactive Message Board
& Forum

Why Get
Involved?

How To
Get Involved

News
Releases

Photo
Gallery

About
Us

Area
Maps

UPPCO withdraws shoreline management plans for Bond Falls, Prickett & Boney Falls
By Robert Evans

The Upper Peninsula Power Company (UPPCO, an Integrys Energy Group subsidiary) recently withdrew its proposed Shoreline Management Plans (SMPs) nearly four years after submitting them to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The SMPs involved UPPCO's hydroelectric project lands surrounding reservoirs on the Ontonagon, Sturgeon, and Escanaba Rivers.

In its July 25 letter to the FERC secretary, UPPCO requested that the SMPs be withdrawn "because the plans are no longer pertinent to our current business model for excess lands." There was no press release from UPPCO about the SMP withdrawal, nor is there any information about it posted on UPPCO's website.

FERC's acceptance of the SMPs would have allowed infrastructure developments on environmentally sensitive project lands that could have enhanced and added financial value to potential residential developments on non-project lands that are outside of FERC regulation. If each reservoir is visualized as the innermost of three concentric circles, the project lands are the next circle starting at the shoreline, and the non-project lands are the outermost circle. UPPCO's withdrawal of its SMPs hopefully concludes an ordeal that began in 2002 when it announced an "asset management strategy" for its Upper Peninsula lands. In that strategy, lands "not needed for hydroelectric boundaries that lay outside project boundaries" would be targeted for sale.

For most of its hydroelectric projects, including these three, UPPCO-owned lands near the reservoirs included a mix of both project and non-project lands. FERC requires that project lands be managed to provide both public benefits (such as recreation) as well as habitat for wildlife, in exchange for allowing the utility to utilize a public water resource to produce hydroelectric power.

UPPCO sold its "non-project lands" around these reservoirs in December, 2005 to Naterra Land, a Minnesota based Realty firm. Naterra then quickly announced plans to subdivide the non-project lands into lots for hundreds of residential homes. The SMP proposal outlined UPPCO's plans to develop the FERC project lands closest to the reservoirs by building lighted docks, paths from the homes to the water, marina facilities, and other amenities primarily designed to benefit the adjacent homeowners. In 2009 UPPCO bought back substantial acreage from Naterra to settle a breach of contract lawsuit in which the latter company alleged UPPCO had not provided accurate information about easements, pier placements, and future dam repairs.

UPPCO's proposal to FERC to develop the project lands met with immediate and strong opposition from a coalition of natural resource agencies (U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Agency, Michigan DNR) as well as environmental organizations such as the Michigan Hydro Relicensing Coalition, Upper Peninsula Public Access Coalition, the Northwoods Alliance, the Friends of the Land of Keweenaw, and UPEC. These agencies and organizations urged FERC to reject the SMPs on the grounds that UPPCO's proposed land development was inconsistent with FERC license requirements that project lands be managed to benefit the public and natural resources such as wildlife, including threatened and endangered species.

Although UPPCO withdrew its SMPs, FERC never rejected them. Without a FERC ruling, we don't know at this point whether arguments put forth by the resource agencies and environmental organizations would have persuaded FERC to kill UPPCO's ill-advised plans to profit from developing land intended for public benefit and natural resource protection.

For the time being, however, UPPCO's decision represents good news for the environment and good news for anyone who believes that a utility that profits from public resources (water, in this case) must abide by the terms of its regulatory license.

Click Here to view the Withdrawl Proposal from UPPCO

UPPCO has submitted their final Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for approval.

UPPCO plans to sell approximately 7300 acres of their non-project lands for real estate development. The new lot owners will not be purchasing waterfront property, yet UPPCO proposes to grant easements for private uses, including private docks, within the project boundary. UPPAC believes that private docks are not any more appropriate for these lot owners, than any other member of the public.

Hunting within the project lands would be essentially eliminated in areas adjacent to private lots, since Michigan Law prohibits discharging a firearm for hunting within 450 ft of an occupied residence.

UPPCO acknowledges in their Final SMP that "The physical presence of the proposed boat docks would have a minor, long term visual impact on the shoreline. Increased boating use on the impoundments would create long-term, intermittent-noise impacts in the immediate vicinity" and, "moderate long-term impacts to water quality" and "temporary disturbance and displacement of some area wildlife." According to UPPCO, their decision to sell most of its non-project lands to residential real estate developers will be a primary source of these pressures.

Even UPPCO's acknowledged impacts, which UPPAC believes to be major, support the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). It is critical that we continue to urge the FERC to order a new EIS. These studies would address UPPCO's proposed actions, possible alternatives and their cumulative effects on public resources such as water quality, fish and wildlife, public recreation and the aesthetic character of our flowages.

Pictured at left is the Bond Reservoir in Ontonagon County with Bond Falls in the Foreground

Photo by: E. Neil Harri
May 10, 2007

Key objectives of the Bond Falls License and related plans are to maintain or develop an unmanaged old growth forest in the Buffer Zone around the reservoir; limit human disturbances to the shoreline and protect and/or enhance habitat species, including sensitive species.

Highlights of UPPCO's proposal for Bond Flowage:

Pedestrian paths that lead from private lots to private docks that are 4 feet wide.
8 Private Individual Docks- overall length 60 ft
42 Private Cluster Docks (comprised of 2-10 slips) - overall length 150 ft
These docks will accommodate 320 private boat slips plus up to 15 additional private slips and will be stored on the project lands.

UPPAC believes none of these proposals is consistent with UPPCO's license.

Pictured at left is the Sturgeon River flowing into Prickett Dam in Baraga County

Photo by: E. Neil Harri
October 2, 2007

Article 414 of the Prickett License states "no tree cutting" within the 200-ft shoreline buffer zone. By not allowing cutting, the intent is that these lands would remain in their present condition.

Highlights of UPPCO's Proposal for Prickett Reservoir:

Pedestrian paths that lead from private lots to private docks that are 4 feet wide.
Private Individual Docks- overall length 60 ft
Private Cluster Docks (comprised of 2-10 slips) - overall length 150 ft
These docks will accommodate 87 private boat slips
Stairs & elevated walkways

UPPAC believes none of these proposals is consistent with UPPCO's license.

Proposed UPPCO Dock Proposal Plans for Cataract - Boney Falls - AuTrain Flowages

Key Elements of License/Plans

Cataract -
Aesthetic management is applied to areas that have unique qualities that require more restricted management policies or prescriptions. The goal is to provide protection of environmentally sensitive areas including forest habitat, waterfowl and endangered or sensitive species management.

Boney Falls -
The 200 ft undeveloped buffer is intended to protect the natural and scenic character of the project shoreline. UPPCO will adhere to a "no harvest" policy for timber within the buffer zone.

AuTrain -
No timber harvesting is to occur within the 200-ft buffer. Article 407, Appendix D, Private Use Guidelines, specifically prohibits docks and shoreline use.

Cluster Docks for Private Lot Owners Lighted with up to 300 watts

May be installed to achieve a maximum depth of 10 ft cannot exceed 150 ft
May not exceed 5 ft in width
May not accommodate more than 10 boats

Individual Private Docks Lighted with up to 300 watts

May be installed to achieve a maximum depth of 10 ft cannot exceed 60 ft in length
May not exceed 5 ft in width
Boat lifts must be attached to the floating dock and shall not exceed 16 ft

The display above was set up to simulate the length of just one cluster dock, as planned by UPPCO

PROPOSED DOCK VOLUMES

Cataract: 40 Private Boat Slips

Boney Falls: 33 Private Boat Slips

AuTrain: 193 Private Boat Slips

Pedestrian Paths:
Paths may be permitted to provide walking access to the high water mark of the lake and in many cases may interconnect with a public trail. These paths will be available for use by the general public (but will lead to a private residence or a private dock). Paths will be no more than 4 feet wide "Brush" less than 2 inches in diameter at a height of 5 feet and or tree limbs below 8 ft within the 4 ft path may be removed.
Stairs & Elevated Walkways:

Enhanced View Areas:
From waters edge inland for a distance of 50 ft, the enhanced view area no wider than 40 ft Within lines drawn from the 50 ft mark directly to the edges of the dwelling, the width of the outside edges shall not exceed 200 ft at the dwelling (from the example shown the enhanced view area will look like a funnel - 200 ft at the dwelling to the 50 ft mark where it narrows to 40 ft wide to the water) Can remove brush of less than 2 inches in diameter at a height of 5 ft and or trimming of tree limbs as approved by UPPCO

UPPAC believes that none of these proposals is consistent with UPPCO's license.

UPPAC Reaction to Final Shoreline Management Plans

A) The environmental assessments conducted by E-PRO, the firm hired by UPPCO/WPS, were inadequate. Their assessments did not address the impact development would have on the project lands, including wildlife species and water quality.

B) UPPCO never expressed any intention of selling or developing the lands during
the time the last Environmental Impact Study was conducted and license renewal was
granted, therefore the impact to the project lands was never considered. We want
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to order a new Environmental Impact Study
to assess the full impact to the project lands.

C) Naterra (Land development company) still has not revealed the development plans for any of the flowages. There must be full disclosure of their development plans before the impacts can be assessed any conveyances are approved.

D) UPPCO lead us to believe the consolidation of the campgrounds at Bond Flowage
was for environmental reasons, while in reality, they were planning for an extensive land sale to a major developer. The decisions to consolidate the campgrounds were made without public input. The elimination of the dispersed campsites and campground redesign should be re-evaluated as part of the Shoreline Management Plan process.

E) UPPAC is opposed to any private, individual and cluster docks or viewing corridors at any of the flowages. None of these activities is consistent with the current license.

F) UPPAC would like to see a cost of service study conducted for each of the
developments. The public needs to see both the benefits and costs to the taxpayers
because the pristine character of these flowages will be lost forever.

Take Action Today!

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has issued the notice for soliciting Comments, Motions to Intervene and Protests. The comment period ends January 29, 2008. See the letter below which was issued for Bond Flowage. When submitting comments, be sure to use the correct project numbers as outlined in the FERC letter. FERC does not accept email comments. They must be filed electronically (see www.ferc.gov under e-filing) or by surface mail.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Upper Peninsula Power Company Project No. 1864-083

NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND SOLICITING COMMENTS, MOTIONS TO INTERVENE, AND PROTESTS
(December 28, 2007)

Take notice that the following application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

a. Application Type: Shoreline Management Plan (SMP)

b. Project No: 1864-083

c. Date Filed: November 29, 2007

d. Applicant: Upper Peninsula Power Company (UPPCO)

e. Name of Project: Bond Falls Hydroelectric Project

f. Location: The project is located on the Ontonagon River in Ontonagon and Gogebic Counties, Michigan, and Vilas County, Wisconsin, and partially on lands within the Ottawa National Forest.

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 USC ' 791(a)-825(r).

h. Applicant Contact: Shawn C. Puzen, Environmental Consultant, Integrys Business Support, LLC, 700 North Adams Street, P.O. Box 19001, Green Bay, WI 54307-9001, (920) 433-1094

i. FERC Contact: Any questions on this notice should be addressed to Lesley Kordella at (202) 502-6406, or by e-mail: lesley.kordella@ferc.gov.

j.
Deadline for filing comments and / or motions: January 29, 2008.

All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DHAC, PJ-12.1, 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20426. Please reference the project number (P-1864-083) on any comments or motions filed. Comments and motions filed need to carefully specify the appropriate project number in order to avoid confusion with the SMP’s concurrently filed by UPPCO for four other projects (see item k below). Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site under the "e-Filing" link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.

k. Description of Proposal: UPPCO filed a proposed SMP for the Bond Falls Project to address the land use pressures and potential impacts anticipated from the sale of adjacent non-project lands to residential real estate developers. The project includes the Bond Falls, Bergland, Cisco, and Victoria impoundments; the SMP applies only to the Bond Falls and Victoria impoundments. UPPCO is also requesting articles 416 (recreation plan) and 413 (buffer zone plan) of the license be amended. SMP’s for the Au Train Project (P-10856-061), the Cataract Project (P-10854-080), the Escanaba Project (P-2506-144), and the Prickett Project (P-2402-108) were filed concurrently with the SMP for the Bond Falls Project, and are being noticed separately by the Commission.

l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website at www.ferc.gov using the "eLibrary" link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or call toll-free 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene -- Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents -- Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title "COMMENTS", "RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS", "PROTEST", OR "MOTION TO INTERVENE", as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application.

Agency Comments -- Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.

Please send written comments regarding UPPCO's planned private uses of the project lands to:

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Re P1864, P2402, P2506, P10856, P10854
888 First Street NE
Washington, DC 20426

We Need Your Help!

We are a total volunteer organization donating our time and paying all the bills. We are grateful to the businesses and individuals who have helped spread the word. But there is more to be done if we are to save the flowages in the Upper Peninsula and have now retained legal assistance. Any amount you can donate will be appreciated.

Click here

to donate online

If you prefer, you can
send contributions to:
Northwood Alliance Inc.
6063 Baker Lake Rd.
Conover, WI 54519

ALL DONATIONS ARE TAX DEDUCTIBLE.

The Upper Peninsula Public Access Coalition (UPPAC) is a citizens group concerned with the sale of land owned by Upper Peninsula Power Company/Wisconsin Public Service Corporation and its impact on surrounding project lands around several wild flowages in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.

The land UPPCO is proposing to sell includes approximately 7,300 acres of undeveloped and partially developed land adjacent to AuTrain, Boney Falls, Bond Falls, Cataract, Prickett and Victoria Flowages in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Please get involved and help us demand a new environmental impact study.

The easiest way to get involved is to sign our On Line Petition! Also visit our "Getting Involved" page for information on writing and sending letters to FERC, your local representatives and area newspapers.

Important Background Documents
(Many of these are large PDF files - be patient while they load)

The FERC Compliance Handbook	Bond Falls License Agreement of 2003
FERC Order Approving Buffer Zone Plan	FERC Order Approving Recreation Plan
FERC order approving wildlife and land mgmt. plan
FERC Order Approving & Modifying Nuisance Plant Control Plan
License Agreement drafted by UPPCO in December 2005
Shoreline Management Plan	UPPAC Shoreline Management Plan Guidelines