Kevin Rooney
New member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2003
- Messages
- 3,667
- Reaction score
- 354
From the Times-Argus newpaper:
Vermont agencies split on wind turbine project
March 29, 2006
By Darren M. Allen Vermont Press Bureau
MONTPELIER — Two state agencies continue to take differing views on the future of a closely watched Vermont wind project, according to filings made Tuesday.
The rift between the Agency of Natural Resources — which supports the rejection of the East Haven Wind Farm — and the Department of Public Service — which, like the governor, wants the four-turbine project to go forward — was once again on display in briefs filed with the Public Service Board. The board is the three-member regulatory panel charged with deciding on utility projects.
Tuesday was the filing deadline set by the board on a proposed order issued earlier this month that said the project should be rejected because of its impact on the surrounding area and on birds and other migratory species. In addition to the two state entities, comments were received from an environmental group, a renewable energy coalition, the state's largest utility and the wind project's developer.
East Haven is being closely watched because it is the one wind project in the state that has the support of Gov. James Douglas and is widely considered to be the one with the least challenges: It is planned for an abandoned radar base atop a mountain with an already existing road.
The fate of the East Haven project could have a signifi-cant impact on five other Vermont wind proposals, including projects on Glebe Mountain in Londonderry and Little Equinox in Manchester.
On March 11, a PSB hearing officer recommended that the East Haven project be rejected primarily because it sits on a mountain surrounded by thousands of acres the state is trying to preserve. The so-called Champion Lands — a 133,000 swath in the Northeast Kingdom that is protected from most development — would be unduly compromised if the project were approved, the hearing officer wrote.
"While this renewable-energy project would provide undeniable benefits, those benefits would come at a significant cost: the project, with four, 329-foot-tall wind turbines, would be located in the midst of extensive lands that have been protected from development through years of effort and the expenditure of millions of dollars of public funds," PSB hearing officer Kurt Janson wrote.
In addition, he suggested that the project's developers did not adequately study the impacts the wind turbines would have on endangered birds and bats.
That conclusion was challenged by the project's developers, the state's largest utility company, and some environmental groups. It also was challenged by the state's Department of Public Service, which supports the wind project.
"The project will not unduly interfere with the orderly development of the region because it will not create any direct interference with the dominant land uses in the lands surrounding the project site," DPS wrote. "The dominant land uses in the surrounding lands are timber harvesting and recreational activities."
That view was shared by Central Vermont Public Service Corp., the Rutland-based electric company that is the state's largest utility. In its filing Tuesday, the company went further, suggesting that if East Haven is not approved, the future of wind power statewide is in serious doubt.
"The evidence in this case demonstrates the strong desire and commitment of a Vermont-based developer, with strong renewable-energy ties to Vermont, seeking to construct a wind energy project on an existing Vermont industrial site," CVPS said. "If this wind power project can not be sited in Vermont, what project can?"
The project's developer — Montpelier-based renewable energy developer Matthew Rubin — said the hearing officer was wrong.
"The decision (the board) reaches on this petition will send a strong signal to renewable energy developers — and to all Vermonters — about the prospects for diversifying our energy portfolio to include these clean, safe and stably priced energy resources," Rubin's company said in its filing.
The hearing officer's recommendation has already had some fallout. PSB Chairman James Volz has decided to recuse himself from a decision in the case — a move the former consumer advocate for the Public Service Department made at the request of at least two parties in the project debate.
Some members of the Legislature also have taken the unusual step of seeking to persuade the PSB to reject its hearing officer's recommendations.
The fact that two state agencies under the control of Douglas are in disagreement is a sign of just how politically volatile the issue of wind has become. Douglas has come out in favor of this project, but has been chilly to the idea of any other commercial wind developments.
In its brief filing Tuesday, the Agency of Natural Resources reiterated its opposition to the East Haven project, saying the danger to birds and bats was too great.
The Nature Conservancy — which played a significant role in the preservation of the Champion Lands — agreed, suggesting that the project's developers have "not met their burden to demonstrate that populations of birds and bats will not be detrimentally effected by the proposed wind turbines."
Specifically, the group is worried about two rare species — Bicknell's thrush and the yellow-nosed vole.
The PSB can accept its hearing officer's findings — which it usually does in utility cases — or it can accept part of it, or reject it completely. The board will rule at a later date.
Contact Darren M. Allen at [email protected].
Vermont agencies split on wind turbine project
March 29, 2006
By Darren M. Allen Vermont Press Bureau
MONTPELIER — Two state agencies continue to take differing views on the future of a closely watched Vermont wind project, according to filings made Tuesday.
The rift between the Agency of Natural Resources — which supports the rejection of the East Haven Wind Farm — and the Department of Public Service — which, like the governor, wants the four-turbine project to go forward — was once again on display in briefs filed with the Public Service Board. The board is the three-member regulatory panel charged with deciding on utility projects.
Tuesday was the filing deadline set by the board on a proposed order issued earlier this month that said the project should be rejected because of its impact on the surrounding area and on birds and other migratory species. In addition to the two state entities, comments were received from an environmental group, a renewable energy coalition, the state's largest utility and the wind project's developer.
East Haven is being closely watched because it is the one wind project in the state that has the support of Gov. James Douglas and is widely considered to be the one with the least challenges: It is planned for an abandoned radar base atop a mountain with an already existing road.
The fate of the East Haven project could have a signifi-cant impact on five other Vermont wind proposals, including projects on Glebe Mountain in Londonderry and Little Equinox in Manchester.
On March 11, a PSB hearing officer recommended that the East Haven project be rejected primarily because it sits on a mountain surrounded by thousands of acres the state is trying to preserve. The so-called Champion Lands — a 133,000 swath in the Northeast Kingdom that is protected from most development — would be unduly compromised if the project were approved, the hearing officer wrote.
"While this renewable-energy project would provide undeniable benefits, those benefits would come at a significant cost: the project, with four, 329-foot-tall wind turbines, would be located in the midst of extensive lands that have been protected from development through years of effort and the expenditure of millions of dollars of public funds," PSB hearing officer Kurt Janson wrote.
In addition, he suggested that the project's developers did not adequately study the impacts the wind turbines would have on endangered birds and bats.
That conclusion was challenged by the project's developers, the state's largest utility company, and some environmental groups. It also was challenged by the state's Department of Public Service, which supports the wind project.
"The project will not unduly interfere with the orderly development of the region because it will not create any direct interference with the dominant land uses in the lands surrounding the project site," DPS wrote. "The dominant land uses in the surrounding lands are timber harvesting and recreational activities."
That view was shared by Central Vermont Public Service Corp., the Rutland-based electric company that is the state's largest utility. In its filing Tuesday, the company went further, suggesting that if East Haven is not approved, the future of wind power statewide is in serious doubt.
"The evidence in this case demonstrates the strong desire and commitment of a Vermont-based developer, with strong renewable-energy ties to Vermont, seeking to construct a wind energy project on an existing Vermont industrial site," CVPS said. "If this wind power project can not be sited in Vermont, what project can?"
The project's developer — Montpelier-based renewable energy developer Matthew Rubin — said the hearing officer was wrong.
"The decision (the board) reaches on this petition will send a strong signal to renewable energy developers — and to all Vermonters — about the prospects for diversifying our energy portfolio to include these clean, safe and stably priced energy resources," Rubin's company said in its filing.
The hearing officer's recommendation has already had some fallout. PSB Chairman James Volz has decided to recuse himself from a decision in the case — a move the former consumer advocate for the Public Service Department made at the request of at least two parties in the project debate.
Some members of the Legislature also have taken the unusual step of seeking to persuade the PSB to reject its hearing officer's recommendations.
The fact that two state agencies under the control of Douglas are in disagreement is a sign of just how politically volatile the issue of wind has become. Douglas has come out in favor of this project, but has been chilly to the idea of any other commercial wind developments.
In its brief filing Tuesday, the Agency of Natural Resources reiterated its opposition to the East Haven project, saying the danger to birds and bats was too great.
The Nature Conservancy — which played a significant role in the preservation of the Champion Lands — agreed, suggesting that the project's developers have "not met their burden to demonstrate that populations of birds and bats will not be detrimentally effected by the proposed wind turbines."
Specifically, the group is worried about two rare species — Bicknell's thrush and the yellow-nosed vole.
The PSB can accept its hearing officer's findings — which it usually does in utility cases — or it can accept part of it, or reject it completely. The board will rule at a later date.
Contact Darren M. Allen at [email protected].
