Docket Number	Docket Name	Company
UM 2394	STOP B2H COALITION REQUEST TO RESCIND OR AMEND ORDER NO. 23-225

Created Date	Comment Type	First Name	Last Name	Comment
11/13/2025 12:36:59 AM	General Comment			Dear Public Utility Commissioners: I am writing to urge you to rescind the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (Order No. 23-225) due to the material and fundamental changes which the project's justification have recently undergone. These material changes are the following: PacifiCorps, in their 2025 IRP (Docket LC 85), has removed B2H from its preferred portfolio. Their "justification" is that the B2H's purpose is no longer to serve the public--the approximately 800,000 PAC customers--but instead to serve a specific customer, identified as a data center. This transformation constitutes a material deviation that undermines the public use and public convenience and necessity criteria necessary for the CPCN--and thus, the authority to condemn private property to build the line. This alone is reason to revoke the CPCN and halt all further condemnation proceedings against private landowners--farmers and ranchers, primarily--in Eastern Oregon. In addition, PAC is on shaky ground financially due to the larger number of wildfire-related claims ($55 billion), which exceed the company's reseves ($2.85 billion). PAC's recent "sale-leaseback" financing scheme is a desperate move, which does not give consumers (nor should it give the OPUC) confidence! If the B2H were in fact financially viable, it wouldn't need a bailout from Berkshire-Hathaway. Due to these factors--the material changes to the Order, and PAC's fiscal vulnerability--as well as PAC's lack of transparency in communicating these changes to the Commission in a timely manner--I strongly urge you to rescind the order for B2H and cease all condemnation proceedings against landowners. Sincerely, Dr. Matt Cooper 302 C Ave. La Grande, OR 97850
11/13/2025 12:37:01 AM	General Comment			After all the time, money, and questionable activities to get the B2H lines thru, now it's still crossing public lands and the threats of taking over lands for Amazon. Nope, shouldn't happen........wrong. Maxine Hines 307 2nd St La Grande, Or. 97850 541 910-3522
11/17/2025 12:37:16 AM	General Comment			To members of the Oregon Public Utility Commission: I am writing in support of the above mentioned filing. Many aspects of the B2H project have changed significantly since the B2H project was approved by OPUC. These include foundational aspects of finance, need, and use of power. * The material purpose has changed from Public Asset to Private Interest. Alternatives must be re-examined in light of this narrowed need. * BPA has required a cluster study process, compromising the status of the project and the original business case. * PacifiCorp's failing credit risk undermines IPC's ability to finance B2H. These constitute significant changes and require OPUC's reconsideration of prior approvals with regard to public good and protection from risk. Thank you for your considered response, Kathryn Andrew
11/17/2025 12:37:19 AM	General Comment			PUC I read the mission statement of the OPUC this morning: "Our mission is to ensure Oregonians have access to safe, reliable and fairly priced utility services that advance state policy and promote the public interest. We use an inclusive process to evaluate differing viewpoints and visions of the public interest and arrive at balanced, well-reasoned, independent decisions supported by fact and law.” Idaho Power will claim that the line is desperately needed and that obstructionists have delayed the infrastructure the line represents; they will claim that this project should have been built long ago and approved quickly due to its public necessity. Idaho Power was given federal approval I believe in 2016 for its right of way. Only then did it change the route due to a single landowner’s objections, instead routing the line through environmentally sensitive areas and nearer and requiring an increase in the number of condemnation proceedings on private lands. This is why the line was fought against by the local population and the subsequent delays in construction. (This is all available in the public Record.) Now, at this late date, we hear that the plans have changed just prior to the PUC final approval: 1). That the B2H is no long a “cost effective resource” for its customers, the public, but instead will now be serving a “special customer” data center amid “special contracts”. 2). That this “special customer” nonsense was withheld from OPUC in 2025. They must have known that the OPUC 2023 approval was issued without the knowledge of what was in the works. OAR’s state that this “significant deviation” must be re-evaluated by you, the OPUC. 3). The risk of default with Pacific Power’s credit risk can not be ignored. Pacific Power’s history with wildfires and their shoddy maintenance of lines is what put them in this place. Downgraded credit ratings and approval of a project this large should never be mentioned in the same project. 4). Perhaps this is why only very recently have we learned that Pacific Power would like to do another switch, allowing Berkshire Hathaway and “affiliated interest transaction”, to buy the loan and lease it back. Are their finances really that precarious that they have to do these sort of last minute switches? Pacific Power is propping up B2H with insider financing. Do you, the OPUC believe that the public will not be on the hook for costs if there are problems down the road with this boondoggle? And adding another corporate entity will keep rates as low as possible, really? I don’t think Berkshire Hathaway is getting involved out of the goodness of their heart. Profit man, follow the $. Please, OPUC, go back to the drawing board on this one. You can not look at any of these latest morphings of the Project and think that it is ready for your final approval. You’re obviously intelligent people. Think! Look at the facts and review your authority to allow for the condemnation of land for the Project. Revoke your approval for the condemnation of public lands for this project. You’ve been shown one plan, and given another at the last minute. If you believe in your mandate, do this in the public’s interest, not in the interest of a data center (which is decidedly not public), Berkshire Hathaway, Pacific Power nor Idaho Power. Please revoke your public land condemnation approval. Thank you. Kevin March 206 Main Ave. La Grande, OR 97850 541 962 5726 kmarch1961@gmail.com<mailto:kmarch1961@gmail.com>