Pipeline Hearing Testimony

Bold Nebraska collected several testimonies from Nebraskans and citizens in neighboring states who could not be present at the pipeline hearings but wanted to submit testimony into the official record with the Natural Resources Committee.  We compiled the testimonies below.

Honored Legislators,

The proposed Keystone XL pipeline would cross a corner of my farm in southeast Nebraska.

TransCanada claims that the tarsands will provide a reliable source of energy from a friendly neighbor and reduce our dependence on oil from countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Nigeria. Prime Minister Harper has even taken to calling it ethical oil. It's an appealing argument politically.

However, the physical reality is very different for Nebraskans. Oil from Iran can't contaminate the Ogallala Aquifer; oil from the Saudis can't foul the Niobrara or any of our other rivers; oil from Venezuela can't render cropland useless and unproductive and oil from Nigeria can't threaten acreages, farmsteads and towns.

But tarsands from the existing Keystone and the proposed Keystone XL pipelines can do all of these things. And with the current lack of state oversight Nebraskans are powerless to respond in any way. It's as if, in our own state, we're second-class citizens with fewer rights and privileges than a foreign corporation.

TransCanada maintains that the Keystone XL will be the safest pipeline ever built. Yet according to the US Coast Guard the Keystone pipeline, in only a few months of operation, has already sprung four minor leaks at pumping stations. And there is some evidence that substandard steel from India may have slipped past the quality control process and found its way into the pipeline.

Recent oil disaster history isn't very reassuring either. The Exxon Valdez disaster damages award was litigated for 20 years; the residents of the Gulf Coast haven't been made whole by BP and just recently Enbridge has gone to court in Michigan to avoid financial responsibility in last years spill.

TransCanada appears to be an excellent, well-run corporation. But what's to prevent them, at present, from taking a similar approach should a disaster occur in Nebraska? Corporations by their very nature seek maximum profit with minimal accountability and oversight.

President Reagan once said of arms control negotiations with Russia: "Trust, but verify."  In this case the appropriate phrase might be: Trust, but oversee.

I support all three bills in front of your committee today.

Jan Buzek
Tobias, NE 

Honored legislators:

I am writing you as a loyal Nebraskan and concerned grandmother. I am sorry that I can’t be here with you today, but I am with an ill family member. I grew up in Nebraska as did my husband whose family homesteaded in Burt County in the 1800’s. I’ve lived here almost all of my life in various towns including Dorchester, Beaver City, Milford and Lincoln. My children and all of my grand children live here. My son’s family lives on farmland about 10 miles from the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline site.

On behalf of my own family and all Nebraska families and on behalf of all of our people—young and old, rural and urban, and Republican and Democrat, I urge you to support all three bills before you today.

We need stronger eminent domain laws to protect our farmers and ranchers. TransCanada should not be allowed to bully our citizens. And we want basic safety laws for the protection of our people, land and water.

Thank you in advance for taking good care of our citizens with your sensible vote.

Dear committee members:

I would like to voice my support for the pipeline regulatory bills LB 340 LB629 & LB578.

Recent events have brought to light how truly vulnerable Nebraska citizens and natural resources are without some kind of pipeline regulations in place. I find it inconceivable that our state has no control over pipelines traversing through it. Due to the potential consequences of a pipeline disaster we must enact legislation to protect ourselves, and the time is now. We can no longer stand idly by while some of our state’s greatest treasures are put at potential risk just to improve the bottom line of some giant corporation.

The granting of eminent domain gives the recipient an awesome amount of power and takes away a landowners ability to truly negotiate an agreement, so reforms are needed in that area as well. Our family’s land is in the path of TransCanada’s Keystone Xl pipeline, and TransCanada had the power of eminent domain to condemn our land well before we had any knowledge that a pipeline was even being considered. This is not right and should be corrected.

Much has been said lately about having a safe and reliable source of energy from a friendly neighbor is in our national interest. My question to you is this: Isn’t having a safe and reliable source of water in the country’s greatest agricultural sector even more vitally important to our national interest?

I urge you to vote “yes” on these measures.

Respectfully submitted by,

Randy Thompson
Martell, NE

Thank you Chairman Langemeier & Members of the Natural Resources Committee:

As a rural landowner, as President of Holt / Rock County Farmers Union, & lifelong Nebraskan, I am appalled at the  heavy handed tactics TransCanada (a foreign oil company) is  inflict, on my friends and neighbors.  My livelihood & way of life, as well as my neighbors’, are being threatened, & because this is my home I can not just sit aside & let this go.  I can’t watch good, hard-working Nebraskans be taken advantage of again.

I have a signed and notarized testimony I was asked to share with you by a friend in the route of the Keystone XL Pipeline. Pat Karo was pressured into signing her easement.

(Read Pats testimony)

The Keystone XL Pipeline project that has not yet been approved by the state Department and carries no eminent domain privileges. Has threatened county zoning boards with lawsuits. Is not negotiating in good faith with Nebraska landowners and is instead using threats of eminent domain to coerce landowners into signing easement should not be allowed through the fragile sandhill of Nebraska. 

I will never support this pipeline, but for the previously noted reasons I do support LB 340 because yes we do need a pipeline oversight agency to hold pipelines accountable, LB 578 because it holds companies accountable for problems that may arise in the future & take financial burden off already fiscally challenged areas, & LB 629 because everyone should have a high set of standards, just as we Nebraskans do!

Thank you again Chairman Langemeier and committee members for hearing me on this very important issue.

Lynda Buoy
Bassett, NE

Honored legislators:

I am writing to you today as a dedicated Nebraskan citizen since 1966, when I moved here with my family to so my father could seek economic opportunities.  Even though we left our homestead farm in North Dakota, our family has grown roots.  I have been proud to raise my daughter here and want to protect our resources for her future.

Unfortunately, I cannot attend today, but I want to express my concerns about protection of Nebraska's most unique and precious resource, our water.  I live Lincoln, but travel to the Sandhills to see friends, and bring my family each year to book vacations and have contributed thousands of dollars over the years to Nebraska's tourism industry by visiting the Niobrara valley, the Loup Rivers, and the Calamus. 

The Keystone XL Pipeline crosses over many Nebraska rivers and an oil leak will cause economic damage to our tourism industry.

I also work at a grocery store that specializes in supporting local Nebraska products.  We proudly carry bottled water from the Nebraska Sandhills.  This water is pumped from our uncontaminated aquifer.  The bottled water industry is enormous, and has even more potential economic growth for Nebraska as we have the best tasting in the world.  Given the complex nature of the underground water system, how could the aquifer be cleaned when an oil spill occurs?

TransCanada should not be allowed to dictate to our citizens.  We must have stronger eminent domain laws to protect our farmers and ranchers.  We need basic safety laws for the protection of our people, land and water.  On behalf of my family, and the protection of all Nebraskans, I urge you to support LB 340, LB 578, and LB 629.

Thank you in advance for wisdom and your sensible vote to provide care for our resources on behalf our citizens.

Jacqueline Barnhardt
Lincoln, NE 

I am Connie Weichman, from Stuart, NE, in Holt county. My husband Leon and I run a cow/calf operation along with our son. The pipeline runs through 4 quarters of ground that we own and lease. 

The water table here is so high we just can't imagine how this pipeline will ever stay in the ground. Plus all of the other fears of leaks into our underground water aquifer.  We want to thank you for introducing these bills and hope that the other Senators will support you.   

Nebraska currently has NO laws on the books regulating oil pipelines.  Please allow the pipeline safety bills to take the next step to becoming law.

There is nothing like the Sandhills anywhere else in the world and grassland as an ecosystem is down to <5% of what existed before development in North America.  I want business supported in this state but not at the expense of the Ogallala Aquifer and our pristine grasslands.   

Clint Jones, M.D.
Kearney, NE 

To Whom It May Concern,

Our national economy and global food supply would be in peril if the Ogallala Aquifer were to become contaminated by any "accidents."

History has shown us that we are not immune to catastrophic mistakes.  Mother Nature could give us one earthquake, and our Midwest food production would cease to exist overnight.  I urge you, please do not jeopardize so much at the hands of our petroleum addiction.

Thank You,

Dear Senator Langemeier and Members of the Natural Resources Committee,

My name is Rev. Chuck Bentjen, and I serve as the Director of an Interfaith organization called, The Manna and Mercy Center for Faith in Public Life.  I am writing to offer you my personal and my organization’s support for LBs 340, 578 and 639.

Holy Scripture informs us that God created and intended that the resources of that creation are to be used for the benefit of all of creation.  Scripture further tells us that God created humankind in God’s image and gave humankind the responsibility of caring for God’s creation.  We are guided to remember that nothing is really ours, but that all belongs to God.  I heard a recent sermon in which the pastor spoke of never seeing a U-Haul behind a hearse.  It’s true.  No matter what we do or how much we have, none of it goes with at the time of our death.

As people of faith we are deeply concerned about the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline.  If it is approved, the pipeline will cross a great deal of land in the Nebraska Sandhills as well as the Ogallala Aquifer — both incredible resources with which we have been blessed in Nebraska.

We believe we have the responsibility to protect these resources.  No matter how well it markets itself, Keystone is motivated by its desire to make a profit.  We are concerned, therefore, that the company is not necessarily motivated to protect these precious resources.  LBs 340, 578 and 639 all recognize our responsibilities as citizens to protect these resources and to ensure that Keystone can skirt any of its responsibilities to care for these resources.

We therefore urge you to pass these bills on to the full legislature.

In God’s Peace,

Rev. Chuck Bentjen, JD, Director
The Manna and Mercy Center for Faith in Public Life
Beatrice, NE  

Please include my comments in the record for LB340, LB578, LB629.  I urge the committee members to vote YES on all three bills.

I am a resident of Marion County, Kansas and live very near the Keystone Cushing Extension Pipeline that was constructed this past summer from Steele City, Nebraska to Cushing, Oklahoma.  I have observed first hand the large scale of the project and the ever present potential for environmental damage by the construction and the operation of the pipeline.  I became quite involved in trying to have some input on stream crossings, preservation of riparian areas and issues with groundwater contamination. 

The experience left me with an awareness of just how little oversight and regulation there is in regards to the construction of pipelines.  The Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Bureau of Water, Industrial Program Chief told me, quite frankly, that interstate pipeline construction has basically been given a pass on Clean Water Act requirements, and permits issued by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are "one-size-fits-all" boilerplate.  I came away from this with a feeling that the States need to fill this gap in requiring good stewardship and ensure the environment is not harmed by the construction of pipelines.

The importance of a lengthy approval process before starting pipeline construction and the need for "proof of financial responsibility" was brought home this summer with the Enbridge Pipeline spill this summer in Michigan.  Perhaps more oversight before construction could have anticipated and prevented the problems that lead to the burst pipe that dumped one million gallons of tar sands crude into the Kalamazoo River.  

Six months after the spill it has been reported that Enbridge is now denying responsibility for the spill and using legal tactics to dodge paying for damages. Establishing a trust fund will provide financial assistance when a spill occurs.

I applaud your efforts in protecting the landowners interests, environment, and water resources in the State of Nebraska.  I hope your committee approves the bills and that they make it successfully through the legislative process to become law.

Thank you,
Harry E. Bennett
Marion, KS 

Honored legislators:

Nebraska is a place of incredible natural beauty and resources.  My family has had a farm in the Holt county area since the homesteading years.  We take a lot of pride in our land and hope that it stays as beautiful and safe for our future generations.  Although I live in Chicago, I am very close to the TransCanada Keystone XL and am very against it.  

How is it that our country is being promised change and betterment if we say yes to something that puts us back into our old ways (aka - using oil)?

Nebraskans especially are being torn in two directions.  We are either fighting oil pipelines or going to info sessions on wind turbines.  I'm not saying that wind turbines are the answer, but at least it is a step away from our bad habits of oil use.

If the pipeline does pass, I hope that someone will force those benefiting from the pipeline (TransCanada and the Houston oil refineries) to protect the landowners, state, and nation from paying for any disaster that may occur.  I think the Gulf tragedy proved to all of us that we can't really trust all companies to make the best decisions for the greater good.  From what I understand, currently it is written that the landowner must pay for everything in a disaster.  That REALLY doesn't make sense.

The more and more I read about the TransCanada Pipeline, the more I really can't understand why this is even an issue.  How could this actually get passed?  I find myself a person with a lot of hope and optimism about our country and the way it is going.  Hopefully the decision behind this pipeline doesn't taint my outlook!

Thanks for listening,
Christine Troshynski 

I wish to express my full support for the three bills that are the subject of this hearing:  LB 340, LB 578 and LB 629. 

As a registered voter, a dedicated birder, an occasional traveler and camper in the Sandhills and a participating member of the local Wachiska chapter of the Audubon Society, I feel that this legislation may serve as a hedge against the risk of irreparable damage to our precious natural resources and groundwater resources in Nebraska.

It is a troubling prospect to imagine how a failed pipeline might affect the Nebraska lands through the proposed route of the Keystone XL project.  Since it has never occurred in our unique environment, we can only wonder why the proponents are so blithely confident that no protective measures are needed before the project gets underway.  What could be the reality of such a disaster?  Can we picture range livestock in the Sandhills facing an unfamiliar, iridescent sheen swirling the surface water at a trusted cattle tank, long frequented by their herd? 

One dreads the emergence of oil-slicked shorebirds or of petrol-slathered waterfowl or shorebirds, bitumen-caked burrowing mammals, should a pipeline rupture onto these prairie-grass dune fields, which are so unstable to blowout erosion.  Without a thorough study of the particulars of these effects and the recovery rates, if any, of damage to the vulnerable Sandhills ecology, riparian systems and groundwater quality, we can only guess.  We can only brace our concerns with proposals such as these bills before your committee.

The extraction of tar sands presents a significant problem for safely transporting the raw product of corrosive bitumen to refineries.  The petroleum industry seems to have conceived the distribution component of their project in haste.  I wish to reference the burdensome costs and slow recovery of recent, similar pipeline failures in N. Dakota and Michigan.  There appear to be many unresolved risks that corporate spokespersons are still eager to overlook or gloss over in view of these disasters. 

To invite yet another industrial catastrophe into our pristine Sandhill range lands is unwise. 

Corporate assurances of exactly how a spill might be contained with minimal impacts seem incomplete, if not unfounded.  The resulting responsibility for handling any pipeline compromise and resulting damage of the porous (and therefore vulnerable) Sandhills environment definitely needs to be addressed by LB 578 and LB 629.  I urge the members of this committee to support this legislation on behalf of Nebraskan citizens, landowners and our environment.

The day will soon come when fresh water is far more precious than oil. 

We must be diligent in protecting the Ogallala Aquifer.  But instead of doing that, we are being asked to protect TransCanada’s bottom line.  That’s the only reason I can see why an alternate route – perhaps parallel to the existing pipeline – is not under consideration for transportation of this very-destructively produced tar-sands oil.  TransCanada’s extraction methods, their route selection for the KeyStone XL pipeline, and their request to use thinner than standard walls for the pipe clearly illustrate their disregard for the safety and protection of vital natural resources.

Like many others, I urge you to support the three bills before you today.  All three put very important protections in place.  But none of them can restore the Aquifer should a disaster occur.  Nor can any number of jobs, nor any reduction in our dependence on Middle-Eastern oil.

So I urge you even more strongly, if the destructive process used to obtain the oil cannot be stopped, please at least do all you can to compel TransCanada to change the route to go around the Aquifer.

My great grandparents, my grandparents, my father and many aunts, uncles and cousins farmed the rich earth of York County.  Both my parents were born there, and so was I.  My parents lived in York for the last three decades or so of their lives, and I lived in York for six years in the 1980’s. Our family farm is not far from where TransCanada proposes to put the pipeline.  I care deeply about the land and the people there.

Sincerely,

Janet Carlson
Lincoln, NE

Dear Senator Langemeier and the Natural Resources Committee,

I am writing with regard to LB340, LB578, LB629.  Please consider my comments below for the record. 

I was born and raised in Nebraska, and I graduated from Hastings College.  My parents live in Lincoln and my older sister and nephews live on a farm in Hastings.  I attended hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Keystone XL project in both Nebraska and Kansas.  I am hopeful the committee will approve LB340, LB578, LB629. 

If we are going to host risky pipelines for Canadian oil companies, at the very least we need assurance Nebraska landowners will be protected.  Research from Plains Justice suggests the Keystone XL pipeline isn't needed and that far cheaper and less risky options are available ( http://plainsjustice.org/files/Keystone_XL_Pipeline_Not_Needed_2010-05-07.pdf ). 

At the Environmental Impact Statement hearings the State Department hosted, domestic oil producers testified that their operations could be displaced by this project.  We shouldn't be jeopardizing our land and scarce water resources to make room for outside oil companies unless we have assurance the pipeline will be safe, that the pipeline is needed, and that landowners will be protected.  It appears there are more liabilities associated with the Keystone XL project than there are benefits. 

I have spoken with both landowners and county commissioners in Kansas who are dissatisfied with the construction of the Keystone pipeline in Kansas and the underwhelming benefits it brought to their communities. 

Nebraska's steps to protect landowners is a responsible and necessary action.  Please support  LB340, LB578, LB629. 

Sincerely, 

Stephanie Cole 
Overland Park, KS 

Honored Legislators of the Natural Resources Committee,

We live in a rural area of Washington County north of Omaha.  For 32 years my family has cherished the beauty and resources of Nebraska.  We find no area more beautiful than the noble Sandhills.  We have been watching with growing dismay the TransCanada pipeline plans to rip through this precious part of our state.

Thankfully, three bills have been proposed that will put some measure of control on the TransCanada plans:  LB 340, LB 578, and LB 629.  Imagine the destruction that could have been averted if our country had placed similar controls on the BP oil wells in the Gulf.  The sponsors of these three bills appear to have learned a valuable lesson from that tragedy.

Please think carefully before voting about the importance of protecting our land and citizens from rich and powerful corporations.

I cannot be at the hearing but I hope you will accept the earnestness of my family's plea to vote YES on all three bills.

Thank you,

Pam, Dan and Luke Daly
Fort Calhoun, NE 

Dear Natural Resources Committee,

I am a landowner with property in Merrick County in the path of the Keystone XL Pipeline.  The propose pipeline crosses our pasture and cattle pond and is approximately 1000 feet from our family vacation home and 12 acre lake, currently enjoyed by four generations of our family and we hope many more to come. 

I am writing to thank the Natural Resources Committee for any action they may take in preserving our Ogallala Aquifer, our rivers, farm and ranchland, and the fragile and unique ecosystem of the Nebraska Sandhills from foreign or domestic corporations who wish to build pipelines across our state.  It is inconceivable that we have no current regulations regarding pipelines crossing our state, but we apparently have statutes granting foreign companies the right to invoke the power of eminent domain if we refuse to hand over our property before the US State Department has even granted a permit!

The economic benefits of the currently proposed Keystone XL are grossly inflated, because they are calculated through the "life of the project".  The "life" of the proposed project according to the TransCanada website's Perryman Group analysis is 100 years.  We need assurance that the economic benefits greatly exceed any potential danger to the environment.  I am not yet convinced!

There is no satisfactory plan for decommissioning the pipeline and no apparent "insurance fund" to cover the damages in the event of a spill, because TransCanada doesn't anticipate that this new and untested thinner steel will ever leak.  In the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the project, under Section 3.13.5.8 of the Oil Spill Risk Assessment and Environmental Consequence Analysis, the final sentence states, "Response to oil spills could generate positive local economic activity for the duration of the spill response activity."  I found this statement to be quite unsettling to say the least.

Clearly we Nebraskans need legislation to protect our citizens and our environment from outside interests having no regard for our unique natural resources.  Thank you for your interest.  I urge you to support bills regulating pipelines crossing our state.  Even if such legislation is too late for the current pipeline project, at least we will have some peace of mind regarding future proposals.

Sincerely,

Shirley A. Condon
Lincoln, NE  

Nebraska State Legislators:

We are concerned Nebraska citizens who appreciate the beauty and importance of our prairies, farms and ranches, wetlands, and wildlife. We have been encouraged and inspired by our daughter who served for a year with AmeriCorps teaching grade and middle school children about nature and environmental ecology, and working with the Lincoln City Mission to plant, tend, and harvest a vegetable garden. She represents the stewardship that protects Nebraska’s sustainable future by using her Biology and Environmental Studies education to restore Nebraska’s fragmented native prairie grasslands with a nonprofit organization.

The TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline’s proposed route runs within miles of some of this restored prairie land which is bordered by the Platte River.

We implore you to listen to the environmental groups who advocate for the protection of our land and water resources, the landowners and ranchers whose livelihood is threatened, and concerned citizens who know the importance of a clean energy economy for our children’s future.

We strongly urge you to support LB340, LB578, and LB629 to protect our state’s citizens, land, water, and wildlife from pipeline companies, like TransCanada, who are threatening our safety and health for their own profit. We cannot passively stand back and allow a foreign international company put our way of life at risk with the ability to walk away after the damage is done.

This is unconscionable and we need to enact these bills immediately and make them retroactive before it is too late. The state of Nebraska needs to protect every citizen from the Canadian and TransCanada’s bullying entitlement mentality with dishonest threats of eminent domain.

We thank you for your consideration and support of these important bills before you today.

Sincerely,

Britton and Barbara Bailey
Lincoln, NE 

I am concerned about the future of Nebraska's ability to continue to provide our citizens as well as our industries, especially agriculture and transportation a reliable and reasonably priced supply of fuel to meet the need of these mobile industries.

Thus, I believe the TransCanada pipeline needs to be built.

Having said that, I also believe that sufficient safe guards (if they do not exist, should be enacted) to detect leaks in the pipe line as well as protection to land owners for damages during construction and/or repair of the pipeline.  However, I am also concerned that these safe guards will not be so stringent as to make it impossible to accomplish the needed construction.

I have read many letters from citizens expressing their fears that a leak in the pipe line will contaminate the entire Ogallala Aquifer or constructing of the pipe line will cause wide spread erosion or we should be more concerned about using natural gas for mobile power needs instead of petroleum based fuels.

As to the leak in the pipeline causing contamination of the entire aquifer:  The water flow of the aquifer is from west to east (more like north west to south east).  Thus, any leak from the pipeline would not move any measureable distance North West of the pipeline.  Further, legislation to insure that guidelines are in place to provide sufficient shut-offs and monitor wells would provide the means to detect any leaks and to stop oil flow until repairs could be made.

The idea that we should be making more use of natural gas is good.  However at the present time, the infrastructure to provide Northeast Nebraska with reliable supplies of natural gas is not in place.  I believe Senator Flood can speak to the fact that within the last 4 or 5 years, a group of investors wanted to construct a soybean processing plant in Norfolk, but the natural gas supplier could not guarantee them a constant supply of natural gas.  Further, trucks and tractors are almost all powered by diesel fuel and cannot be easily or economically converted to natural gas.

The concern about erosion following the construction of the pipeline certainly is real.  However, information on managing and restoring eroded land in sand hills pastures is available from the Department of Agronomy and horticulture.  These renovation practices can be costly, thus legislation to provide for this problem should be in place.

In conclusion, it is highly probable that the need for petroleum based fuel will increase with time, not decrease.  Also, the stability of the oil producing regions in the Mid East, Russia and Venezuela is questionable.  Thus, action to help assure that this present and future petroleum need is met is extremely important.  Again, the pipeline needs to be built with sufficient but not impossible safe guards in place.

Thank you for your consideration,
Kenneth D. Frank

Dear Senator Christensen and the Natural Resources Committee,

I am writing to you today to ask you to support the bills on the agenda Wednesday afternoon (LB340, LB578, and LB629).

I live in Lincoln, but as a citizen of this state and this planet, I strongly believe that we must do everything we possibly can to protect the valuable natural resources that we have left.  These bills will provide oversight and assurance of consequences to TransCanada if there are spills or the land cannot be reclaimed after the pipeline is constructed.

I understand this new pipeline will be carrying heavy hot corrosive oil through buried steel pipes whose walls are less than half an inch thick.  The potential for disaster is too great to not have the safeguards these bills would provide in place. 

Can you please write back letting me know if you will vote "yes" to pass these bills to protect our land and water?

Thank you,

I will not be able to attend the hearings on 9 February 2011, but I would like to urge you to support all three bills before you on Wednesday. We need stronger eminent domain laws to protect our citizens and we need safety laws to protect our people, our land and our water.

Thank you in advance for supporting all three bills.

Joyce Genoways
Lincoln, NE

All three of the above bills, LB 340, sponsored by Sen. Dubas, LB579, sponsored by Sen. Haar, and LB 629, sponsored by Sen. Sullivan have to do with tightening Nebraska's laws so that we can protect ourselves from careless acts on the part of the pipeline company, in case they do get permission to build it across our state.  At this point we have NO laws pertaining to pipelines in this state at all.  We have a right to do legislate what they can and cannot do.  A company based in a foreign country, even a friendly one like Canada, should not be allowed to build something that might affect our future water supply adversely.    

Please support all three of these bills.  It is very important that we protect our land, our water supply, and our farmers and ranchers.  A spill or an explosion of a pipeline carrying this oil would be a disaster!  The first Keystone pipeline has had several leaks and think about the damage that was done in Michigan by another Canadian-owned tar sands pipeline, which broke this past summer.  And obviously, from the experience of a rancher who lives along the Elkhorn River, and whose land is crossed by the first Keystone pipeline, they don't know much about building in sand either.

And no matter what TransCanada says, they were a gas pipeline company, and don't have much experience with oil.  This pipeline will be dangerous not only because of the oil itself, but also because of the chemicals they send along with it to keep it moving, and because it has to be heated to get it to flow.  No one has spoken about the potential danger of grass fires from such a pipeline.

Why should Nebraskans allow a foreign company to bully and threaten their landowners, and endanger what is the largest aquifer in North America?  Water is priceless and will become more and more valuable as this century progresses.  Those of you who think it will bring jobs are kidding yourselves. Locals are less than 12% of people employed by companies like this. Pipeline workers move from project to project, no matter what the state.

Please don’t gamble with our water!   We can’t drink oil!  Please include this in the testimony for the hearing this coming Wednesday.

Sincerely,

Debbie Hunsberger
Omaha, NE 

Please accept my wife's and my sincere THANKS for your support of LBs 340, 629, and 578.

It is time for the Nebraska Unicameral to establish laws that govern oil pipelines and you both have recognized this need.

I am a retired Air Force officer who had two tours of duty at Offutt AFB.  And although I am not a Nebraska native my wife and elected to retire in Papillion and we've been here for 32 years.

My wife and I are concerned with the tactics used by TransCanada to force the landowners in Nebraska to allow the pipeline to cross their land. The most egregious of these is the threat of eminent domain to force their way onto the land.

Again, thanks for supporting the proposed legislation.

Sincerely,

David A. (Dave) Sidwell
Papillion, NE