Subject: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Douglas, Tina ...€ Neale Donald Walsch ...

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:05 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL

Please post in the KXL docket, HP14‐001, under Comments and Responses. ‐Patty

------------------------------------------- From: Tabitha M. Kelley[S Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:59:26 PM To: PUC Subject: Re: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Hello, My address is

Louisville KY 40220 Life Begins at the End of Your Comfort Zone

- Neale Donald Walsch- ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Tabitha M. Kelley[SM Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:03:53 PM To: PUC Subject: HP14‐001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14‐001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. Life Begins at the End of Your Comfort Zone ‐ Neale Donald Walsch‐

004611

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)


Please post in the KXL docket, HP14‐001, under Comments and Responses. ‐Patty -------------------------------------------

From: Lorri May[ Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:25:01 PM To: PUC Subject: HP14‐001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14‐001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. KXL creates no permanent jobs in SD and will bring sex trafficking into our state. The USA doesn’t even get to keep the oil ‐ it is processed down south and then shipped to China. For these reasons and more, please reject Keystone XL. Thank you, Lorri May

Madison, SD 57042 004612

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)


Please post in the KXL docket, HP14‐001, under Comments and Responses. ‐Patty ------------------------------------------- From: T[ Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:10:50 PM To: PUC Cc: T Subject: RE: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule Thomas M. Diggins

Rapid City, SD 57701 Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14‐001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. Investment in solar and wind power will create more jobs that are sustainable jobs, not temporary pipeline jobs, as well as a sustainable source of energy. Thomas M. Diggins

Rapid City, SD 57701

004613

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)



------------------------------------------- From: Katie Owens[ Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:15:50 PM To: PUC Subject: Re: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Long Beach, CA 90815

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL.

Thank You,

Katie Owens

004614

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)



------------------------------------------- From: Marty Vanderploeg Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:16:44 PM To: PUC Subject: Re: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. In addition, it provides no long term benefit to the SD economy, only risks to the States invaluable natural resources. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL.

Martin J Vanderploeg

Martin, SD 57551

004615

From: Phyllis Cole-Dai[ ] Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:44:35 PM To: PUC Subject: Re: HP14-001: No to Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Dear Commissioners Hanson, Nelson and Fiegen:

I am writing to urge you to reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-00I.

I believe that the risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. Expected!

South Dakotans shouldn't be willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oilespecially when that oil is meant primarily for export. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic.

For these reasons and more than I can possibly recite in a brief email, reject Keystone XL.

Deep peace, Phyllis Cole-Dai

Brookings, South Dakota 57006

Phyllis Cole-Dai

004616

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)



------------------------------------------- From: Alberta Rouse[ Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:29:59 PM To: PUC Subject: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. Alberta Rouse

Pierre, SD 57501

004617

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)



------------------------------------------- From: Bryan Lane Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:47:07 PM To: PUC Subject: Re: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Madison 57042

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. -- Bryan & Judy

004618

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)



------------------------------------------- From: Gardner Gray[ Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:53:32 PM To: PUC Subject: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. Tar Sands oil demand is quite reduced in the last month or so and will continue to shrink resulting in the lack of any need for the pipeline. As a semi-postscript, I might add that the President has voted against the pipeline. Strangely, he has also opened up drilling in the north at the same tome. This a canadian effort and one that will provide little to no benefit to South Dakotans. Do not approve this pipeline. Thank you, Gardner Gray

Pringle, SD 57773

004619

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:01 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: FW: HP14-001: No to Keystone XL


From: Stephen Gambill[ Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:51:44 PM To: PUC Subject: HP14-001: No to Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule It is crucial to the health, safety, and welfare of the people of South Dakota, and of America, that you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14‐001. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows that this pipeline is expected to leak ten times, at least, over the course of its lifetime. This means that risks to South Dakota’s water ‐ the Oglala Aquifer and the Missouri River and rural water systems, affecting many other states, and to people’s livelihoods, is unacceptable. Our best climate scientists have also warned over and again that the operation of the Keystone XL will push our climate crisis past a point of no return, with impacts nationally and globally. We cannot risk the safety and security of our water supply, our land, and our citizens for the most toxic and dangerous form of oil.

Stephen Gambill

Corpus Christi, TX 78404 004620

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:18 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: HP14-001

Please post in the KXL docket, HP14‐001, under Comments and Responses. ‐Patty ------------------------------------------- From: Sandra[ Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:14:07 PM To: PUC Auto forwarded by a Rule I am writing to you to request you REJECT the Keystone XL pipeline certification in docket HP1400. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety and security of South Dakota land, water and people are UNACCEPTABLE. The final Environmental Impact statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is EXPECTED to leak at least 10 times over the course of its lifetime. Have you not seen pictures of Michigan and Missouri and Montana where tar sands pipelines have leaked? It's almost impossible to clean up these messes. The leak in Michigan occurred over 2 years ago and it is STILL not cleaned up. Who in the world is going to clean up this mess when it happens in our state, especially when it occurs over the Ogalalla aquifer? This aquifer is where millions of people in the upper Great Plains get their water, this tar sands will get into the water, where do the people of our state and Nebraska get their water then? Tar sands oil will ruin our water forever‐‐think about that. Would you drink this water, where will the farmers and ranchers get their water for crops and livestock that farm in the area of the aquifer? Please, please rethink this permit, we are NOT willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla aquifer, our rural water systems, our livelihoods for the tar sands oil. The construction of the pipeline also puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment and traffic. One more thing, instead of building this pipeline through the United States, let Canada run a pipeline through their country to their west coast. This oil would be shipped to the southern coast of the US and shipped out, it will not do ANYTHING to help our country. Instead of our state investing in oil pipelines, maybe the PUC should be encouraging more green energies. At least we wouldn't be polluting our state. For all of the above reasons and more PLEASE REJECT the permit for Keystone XL. Sincerely, Sandy Dumke

Crooks, SD 57020

004621

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:26 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: FW: HP14-001: No to Keystone XL


From: Ashley Yonker[ Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:05:30 PM To: PUC Subject: HP14-001: No to Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. Further....I am from Kalamazoo, Michigan where the largest inland water spill in history occurred. To listen to those who were responsible for cleaning it up you would think it has been. To listen to those that work on the pipeline....they KNOW it hasn't been. Corexit, the same chemical used in the gulf spill was used on our river. This does not clean up the chemicals, it merely covers it up. The pipe liners know that is the case. Although they do not want to jeopardize their jobs, they make it VERY CLEAR this was a man made spill, not an accident and that it is NOT cleaned up. The wildlife and human lives will be impacted forever, and NO ONE is being held accountable. The same in the Gulf spill. Pipe liners installing in other states have stated that the inspectors that are supposed to verify the integrity of the pipes being installed are NOT doing their jobs and turn a blind eye to inadequate pipelines being installed. Regardless of the reason why they are doing it, it is guaranteeing that we will see spills all along these routes at some point. All the land, the water and the homeowners will be left with issues that can not be rectified and the taxpayers will be the ones to suffer long term. The pipeline owners don't care about it. They are looking at the profits at the end of completion. It's up to you to care! That is your job! You are in a position to right these wrongs. Stand with what is right and stop this pipeline. Show that you have the integrity that is needed to ensure that the safety of our land, our water , our communities and humanity is always first when these decisions are made. Thank you, Ashley Yonker

Kalamazoo, Mi 49006 004622

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 9:15 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: FW: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL

Please post in the KXL docket, HP14‐001, under Comments and Responses. ‐Patty ------------------------------------------- From: Nathan Peters[ Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:49:45 PM To: PUC Subject: Re: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL.

Sincerely,

Nathan Peters

Minneapolis, MN 55408

I am originally from Canistota, South Dakota - where I grew up and lived until 2004. I lived in Sioux Falls in 2011-2012.

004623

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:45 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL

Please post in the KXL docket, HP14‐001, under Comments and Responses. ‐Patty ------------------------------------------- From: Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 8:03:02 AM To: PUC Subject: Re: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule Angelica Chrysler

Orlando, FL 32808

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14‐001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. Angelica Chrysler

004624

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)



------------------------------------------- From: dawes.2009[ Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 9:50:37 AM To: PUC Subject: RE: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL.

Milford Dawson

Pine Ridge SD

57770 0525 004625

004626

From: Paulette[ Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 12:59:54 PM To: PUC Subject: Re: FW: NO KXL DAKOTA Auto forwarded by a Rule

Paulette R. High Elk

Eagle Butte, SD 57625

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment,

and traffic.

For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL

Sincerely, Paulette R. High Elk Cheyenne River Lakota

Anpetu Waste Yu ha ye! Have a Good Day! Paulette R. High Elk Cheyenne River Lakhota

"Helping others isn't just a one time thing for me; It is my Philosophy in Life" "IN GOD WE TRUST"

004627

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 2:55 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: HP14-001


------------------------------------------- From: tim oconnor[ Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 2:47:53 PM To: PUC

Auto forwarded by a Rule

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic.

For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. Sincerely, Tim OConnor( Cantril,Ia. 52542

004628

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 2:52 PMSubject: HP14-001

Thank you for your message to my fellow commissioners and me regarding the Keystone XL Pipeline. It will be posted in the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission's formal pipeline siting docket, HP14-001, under Comments and Responses. Since this is an open docket before the commission, any correspondence involving a commissioner must be posted in the open, public docket so that other commissioners and all parties to the case have access to it. Chairman Chris Nelson South Dakota Public Utilities Commission www.puc.sd.gov

004629

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 4:04 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: FW: HP14-001: No to Keystone XL


------------------------------------------- From: Mark Sanderson Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 9:28:19 AM To: PUC Subject: HP14-001: No to Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Dear PUC Commissioners: I am against the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. I won’t bore you with all the reasons which I am sure you are weighing. Just note – my social network, those people I know well, are against the construction of this pipeline. I wish you well in your deliberation – tough decision. Mark Sanderson

Sioux Falls, SD 57104

004630

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 4:06 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: FW: HP14-001: Please Say No to Keystone XL

Please post in the KXL docket, HP14‐001, under Comments and Responses. ‐Patty ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Wilson, Norma Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 8:50:16 AM To: PUC Subject: HP14‐001: Please Say No to Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: Please reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14‐001. This pipeline and its construction pose numerous risks to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We must not sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. Please say no to Keystone XL. Sincerely, Norma C. Wilson

Vermillion, SD 57069

004631

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)



------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Knight[ Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 3:15:03 PM To: PUC Subject: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. Thank you, Melissa Barker

Rapid City, SD, 57702

004632

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 4:19 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: FW: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL

Please post in the KXL docket, HP14‐001, under Comments and Responses. ‐Patty ------------------------------------------- From: Jerry Wilson[ Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 2:59:43 PM To: PUC Subject: Re: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: America does not need dirty tarsands oil, and we should not facilitate its transmission across our land to Texas for refining and export. The more tarsands are developed, the more destruction in Canada and the greater the climate change. And there is also the real risk--in fact almost the certainty--that the pipe will leak and do environmental damage in South Dakota. Please reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic.

Sincerely, Jerry Wilson

Vermillion, SD 57069

004633

004634

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 5:15 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL

Please post in the KXL docket, HP14‐001, under Comments and Responses. ‐Patty ------------------------------------------- From: judiann Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 10:09:00 PM To: PUC Subject: Re: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Summersville, MO 65571

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14‐001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. Sincerely, Judiann Edwards‐Burrus

004635

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)



------------------------------------------- From: Jessica Miller[ ] Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 10:13:16 PM To: PUC Subject: Re: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Auto forwarded by a Rule

Rapid City, SD 57701

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: I am writing to you to request you reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. The risks this pipeline and its construction pose to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people are unacceptable. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Moreover the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. Sincerely, Jessica Miller

004636

1

Douglas, Tina (PUC)

From: Van Gerpen, PattySent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 5:17 PMTo: Douglas, Tina (PUC)Subject: FW: Reject KXL (docket HP14-001)

Please post in the KXL docket, HP14‐001, under Comments and Responses. ‐Patty ------------------------------------------- From: Gena Parkhurst[ ] Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 11:35:57 PM To: PUC Subject: Reject KXL (docket HP14-001) Auto forwarded by a Rule

Dear South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners Hanson, Nelson, and Fiegen: Please reject the Keystone XL Pipeline certification in docket HP14-001. This pipeline and its construction pose unacceptable risks to the health, safety, and security of South Dakota's water, land, and people. The final Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the State Department shows the pipeline is expected to leak at least ten times over the course of its lifetime. We are not willing to sacrifice and risk the Missouri River, the Ogalalla Aquifer, our rural water systems, and our livelihoods for dirty tarsands oil. Additionally, the construction of the pipeline puts rural communities at risk with the drastic influx of people, equipment, and traffic. For these reasons and more, reject Keystone XL. Sincerely, Gena Parkhurst

Rapid City SD 57709

004637

004638

Subject: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Douglas, Tina ...€ Neale Donald Walsch ...

Documents

Transcript of Subject: FW: HP14-001: No on Keystone XL Douglas, Tina ...€ Neale Donald Walsch ...