Wind application faces thorough review By Anne Adams • Staff Writer
RICHMOND - Highland New Wind Development, LLC, had hoped to submit an application for its wind energy utility Oct. 1, but after Monday's meeting with 17 state agency officials, it looks as though it will take a little more time to get to that point. Not only will HNWD need to add viewshed studies to its application, but the environmental assessments coordinated by the Department of Environmental Quality will probably take longer than the company had hoped.
 | | Highland New Wind Development owner Mac McBride, standing, consulted state agency officials Monday to find out what they needed in the application for Virginia's first wind plant. (Recorder photo by Anne Adams) |
|
HNWD had requested the pre-application meeting to sort out the details. Principal owners, H.T. "Mac" McBride and his son Tal, brought their engineering consultant, Bruce Aitkenhead of Malcolm Pirnie Inc., and their attorney, John Flora, to meet with representatives from six Virginia agencies to find out more about what the state wants to see in the company's application for a certificate (permit) to build and operate the wind energy utility it plans for Allegheny Mountain in Highland.
The company must have a certificate from the State Corporation Commission, like all other utilities in Virginia, and one of the biggest hurdles involves environmental impact assessments spearheaded by the DEQ.
Flora assured those gathered that Mac McBride was a visionary who cares deeply about his property, and that developing a wind energy facility was not an easy decision for him.
McBride gave a brief history of what his family had done with the 4,000 some acres on Allegheny Mountain over the years, saying they had been good stewards of the land. He said he first looked into wind energy around 1960 but it wasn't feasible at the time. "About six years ago I asked Tal to get on the Internet and find out more," he said. Once he and his son had pages of documentation together on wind energy, he said they took the information to the board of supervisors to show them it would be a good plan for the county.
"Highland is a great county," he told the group, "but it needs help. There's no industry there, only about 2,500 people, and they're basically farmers … This has been tough on us, but it's good for the county and good for the country. It's just a drop in the bucket, but if you never put a drop in the bucket, the bucket never gets full."
Flora then gave a slide presentation explaining the project's location and size. The two ridgetops to be used (Red Oak Knob and Tamarack) were already cleared, he said, and no forest fragmentation in wildlife habitat would occur. The location was ideal due to its access to the 69 kv power line running through both sites and its proximity to U.S. 250, he stressed.
Wind energy development has been growing steadily overseas, Flora said, but in the U.S. the on-and-off status of the federal production tax credit has caused fits and starts. "When it exists, it's great. When it doesn't, everyone stops constructing." One of the major turbine manufacturers overseas has stopped shipping to the U.S. due to this problem, and at this point, HNWD hopes to get in line for placing an order as soon as possible, Flora said. "But we'll have trouble getting turbines before 2007."
The turbines originally proposed were 1.5 megawatts each, but HNWD now expects to have turbines 2.0 or 2.1 megawatts in capacity, keeping the number of towers to 19 total - 10 on Red Oak Knob and nine on Tamarack.
"We committed to Highland County they'd be no higher than 400 feet," Flora added.
All wiring would be underground, and one of the challenges the company faces is connecting the two sites because Laurel Fork runs between them. "This is near the headwaters, so there's not much (water) going through there, but I suspect it's something we'll have to deal with." Flora said they were considering a tunnel to carry the power lines so the stream would not be disturbed.
HNWD expects to need a permit to tunnel under Laurel Fork, one that needs joint approval from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Virginia Department of Marine Resources Quality.
"There are only four permanent residences near the project," Flora said. "This is an underpopulated, remote section on the West Virginia border; in fact, some of Mr. McBride's property is in West Virginia." Of the 4,000 acres owned by the McBrides, about 217 acres would be used for the project.
He also emphasized the economic benefit to the county, explaining supervisors had already approved a conditional use permit for the project. "Economic significance was a key factor in the decision," he said, noting the building permit alone would generate $120,000 for Highland. "That may not seem like very much in other places, but in Highland County that's a huge amount of money."
HNWD is still working on tax legislation to even out the tax revenue stream to the county, which Flora said will amount to somewhere between $175,000 to $225,000 per year coming to a county that desperately needs it. "Right now the largest taxpayer only pays $33,000 a year," he said.
The project would generate a lot of temporary construction jobs, though Flora said he didn't know how many would be sourced out, and only one or two permanent jobs would be created.
HNWD's utility would not pollute the air or water, he said, and would in fact offset polluting chemicals, including: 85,109 tons of carbon dioxide a year; 445 tons of sulphur dioxide a year; 275 tons of nitrous oxide a year; and 537 equivalent barrels of oil a day.
State officials quizzed Flora on the data and methodology of his statistics, asking several questions about how those numbers had been calculated. Flora said the statistics came from the American Wind Energy Association, and he didn't know how they were derived, but assured them he'd find out.
Of the local permits HNWD needs, Flora said the conditional use permit had been obtained, an erosion and sediment control and storm water plan had already been submitted, and the building permit would come later. It also has a preliminary entrance permit for road improvements.
As for cutting forest lands, Flora said the only trees to be cut are on the entrance to Tamarack. "Nothing of significance," he said.
Asked about noise, Flora said the closest home is three-quarters of a mile away. "These things don't make much noise," he said.
The E&S plan was submitted with the understanding there is a "significant" amount of oil in the turbines, Flora said, and the access roads to the sites are going to need widening in order to get the towers in. Once constructed, Flora said, the actual amount of property taken up by their concrete pads would amount to about four acres (19 pads about 20×20 feet, plus a substation near U.S. 250).
Tal McBride explained the turbine towers are trucked in by sections and set up by cranes on-site at a staging area. "It takes about one day per turbine," he said.
One official asked whether Allegheny Power had reviewed the proposal. Flora said the PJM feasibility study had been conducted, and its findings resulted in the 38-megawatt cap on capacity. Adding more power to the existing line would cost HNWD between $7 million and $8 million more, he said. "It's costing $1 million to hook this up," and from the power company's study, "everything looks like a go to us."
How will it affect wildlife?
Environmentalists have repeatedly stated more environmental studies on how birds, bats and endangered species were affected by industrial wind projects were needed, Flora said, but he has collected material from other wind farms, including ones out West, that contain seven studies on birds, four on bats, and one on the Northern flying squirrel (an endangered species on the McBride property). He has not found any on the water shrew (also endangered) and suspects that species will need to be addressed only if Laurel Fork is disturbed, which he doesn't expect to happen.
Flora explained the avian risk assessment study being conducted by ABR, Inc., private environmental consultants hired by the McBrides to monitor bird activity in the site area. "They are 30 days into a 60-day study," Flora said.
In addition, they expect a professor from West Virginia to arrive Saturday to begin monitoring and trapping the flying squirrel population for a study. "We're pretty comfortable they don't exist on a cleared ridge," Flora said.
Ellie Irons, program manager for DEQ environmental impact review, said she understood there were new types of turbines on the market that mitigated avian impacts.
Flora said as far as he knew, there was only still one basic type of turbine.
VDGIF asked for copies of the ABR bird studies as well. "We'd be (the department) more involved and we're interested in who designed those studies. My two biologists went to workshops and we know there is a great variety in these studies. Some are more useful than others."
"May we see the radar study proposal?" asked Andy Zadnik, environmental services biologist with the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. "I'm very interested in how (ABR researchers) are going to differentiate between bats and birds."
Flora said he would provide the study analysis when it's complete.
"I'm more interested in how the studies were designed," Zadnik said, "and if radar is their only approach. Do they have a plan for monitoring … and what kind of radar? I'm really curious about how they're going to differentiate and their overall methodology. Is this a computer analysis or human? Will the raw data be available to us?"
"From our view, the studies are state-of-the-art," Flora said.
Zadnik told The Recorder after the meeting it would have been useful for HNWD to have had its studies reviewed by his department before they got started. "These consultants are always way ahead, and the state is always trying to catch up, and we need to understand how they're conducting these studies," he said.
Zadnik also asked whether the environmental assessments would look at the cumulative impact on birds and bats as more wind utilities are constructed on Appalachian ridgelines. "If there are significant numbers of birds and bats (at the site), does that take into account projects on adjacent ridgelines?" he asked.
Mike Murphy, environmental enhancement, DEQ, said it was unclear whether the SCC ever took cumulative impacts from power plants into consideration, and Bill Stephens, director of SCC's division of energy regulation, said since some laws were changed, the SCC had lost a lot of authority over environmental issues. The officials seemed to agree that if there were any issues the other agencies didn't cover, they were fair game for the SCC to weigh in on, and if there are other wind projects in West Virginia and Maryland, the cumulative impact was a fair question to address.
How might the towers affect viewshed?
Flora told the group he always expected that aside from environmental issues, the biggest objection would be about viewshed. "And I was right," he said. "There is a huge viewshed issue. People don't like change."
Asked about whether the local conditional use permit addressed viewshed, Flora said it didn't address it at all, except to restrict the height of the turbines.
He was also asked whether the viewshed went beyond Highland County.
"Legally, I have not been given a good definition of ââ¬Ëviewshed'," Flora said. "You can see (the turbines) clearly from West Virginia, Pocahontas County, and on a clear day, I expect you could see them from other places. These will be at 4,000 feet. On a really clear day, I'm guessing you could probably see them from Snowshoe Mountain."
"Do you have an artist's rendition to show the viewshed perspectives?" Irons asked.
Flora said they didn't, but said he couldn't see how viewshed impacts could be adequately addressed.
Officials told him the cell tower industry had done a good job with the issue and had excellent software to create simulations. "This is probably something we'd like to see, and you can quantify it as objectively as possible, rather than drawing an arbitrary circle from the project, which isn't quite fair," one said.
Ken Jurman, renewable energy program manager for the Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy, said he would get some information on the software for the McBrides.
How about historic resources?
Flora said there are no historic sites within the project's viewshed recorded by the state.
"But there is one in West Virginia," said Zadnick. "We've received a lot of public concern about Camp Allegheny."
Camp Allegheny is a Civil War battlefield located in West Virginia less than a mile from the project site.
"What is the viewshed issue if you're a Civil War buff on Camp Allegheny?" Flora asked. "There's only one little plaque, there's not a good road, just a pot-holed rough road. Not many people go there."
But DHR and DCR officials said they'd want to contact their counterparts in West Virginia, plus the Civil War Trust and the Monongahela National Forest would want to comment on the project, as would members of the public.
Flora said it was hard to determine exactly how many things to study, and how far away a study needs to take resources into account.
Roger Kirchen, project review archaeologist with the Department of Historic Resources, said not every resource has viewshed issue, but in the case of Camp Allegheny, the question was whether the wind turbines would interfere with visitors' understanding and feeling of the battlefield. "I'm not saying it's a problem but it needs to be analyzed. We need to take an inventory, and maybe a topo analysis is the best way."
There is no recorded information showing historic resources in the area, one said, but then again, there hasn't been much assessment either, and a baseline survey needs to be conducted.
Officials told Flora when more than 15 acres of ground are disturbed, studies need to be conducted on possible archaeological resources. "These are the types of things we'll be looking for, and we'll encourage (West Virginia agencies) to look at them. We'll request their comments," Flora was told.
Lynn Crump, environmental program manager with the Department of Conservation and Recreation, noted that Laurel Fork is a potential scenic river. "It may be steep enough you won't see (the turbines) from the river, but it's an issue."
Flora said it was not designated as such.
"But it could be a scenic designated river. It may not be now, but it could be," Crump said. "And the other issue is U.S. 250, which has the potential to be a scenic byway. That needs to be addressed."
Another official pointed out there were also some conservation lands north of the project that needed to be addressed, and asked HNWD to provide plenty of mapping in its application, and to identify these types of resources.
Will federal agencies be involved?
Asked whether HNWD had contacted any federal agencies about the project, Flora said the Corps of Engineers had been contacted, and told him there were no wetlands in the area.
He explained HNWD had applied for a U.S. Department of Agriculture grant in 2003 in which federal agencies had been involved. "We actually received the grant, but then (USDA officials) ascertained they shouldn't have granted it to us until the environmental assessments were complete, and they only gave us three months." He figured U.S. Fish and Wildlife would have "the most to say" about the project on the federal level.
In a federal process, agency officials agreed, there would be an opportunity for the public to have input, but in this case that may not happen. "I'd be anxious to find out whose jurisdiction this would fall under," one said. Officials pointed out the Corps of Engineers has historically been allowed to consider a site as a whole under its jurisdiction.
Is the application on a fast track?
SCC and DEQ representatives told Flora that since they'd never seen an application for a wind utility in Virginia before, it may be useful for HNWD to submit its application simultaneously to both agencies. They were aware their reviews would set a precedent for any other wind utilities established in Virginia.
Flora asked about the SCC's "streamlined" application process for utilities under 50 megawatts, noting this was only the second utility that size to apply, and the first one was not a wind plant.
Flora asked the group about the timing of HNWD's application. He said the avian radar study would be completed mid-October but it would be another month before ABR completes its written report. "We're very interested in moving this along," he said. "Would it be helpful to file now, or wait for the study report?"
Officials told him the more complete the application the faster it would move, but noted the agencies have no clock ticking on their reviews. SCC representatives said the most time-consuming work would be at the DEQ. They told him if they had to have a public hearing, that would also add to the timeline, but that the environmental reviews were "critical" and that DEQ can ask for any kind of information it wants to.
Renee Hypes, in the heritage program at DCR, said from her department's perspective, "the more information we have, that will allow us to comment in a quicker fashion."
Flora asked SCC officials whether there was a difference in the number of environmental reviews needed for large projects or those under 50 megawatts in the streamlined application process.
Stephens, and assistant director Cody Walker, explained the differences lie more in what the SCC needs, not the DEQ, and that not many environmental reviews were eliminated under the streamlined process. "The rules don't speak to environmental issues, and we can't impose a streamlined process on the DEQ," Stephens said.
Flora asked whether it was in HNWD's best interest to do more environmental assessments, but officials told him they could not make that decision for him.
Murphy said to his knowledge, the relationship between the DEQ and SCC had been made "quite clear" in General Assembly discussions. "They didn't want each to second-guess the other," he said. "DEQ decides what it needs, and SCC doesn't second guess it. We don't have complete information and we can't provide guidance on the studies. Just give us as much detail as you can, the areas of impact, and the size and height of the turbines."
One official said utilities in the past have sometimes floated a "draft application" and suggested this might be a way HNWD could scope out what it may or may not need from the various agencies.
"Before I came to this meeting I was ready to file after the bird and bat study," Flora told the group. "I was hoping everything could be taken care of by the end of the year … I was hoping to file by Oct. 1, but we might delay that a little bit now."
Flora also said HNWD would like to avoid a public hearing, but officials said there was a lot of time for them to review the application, and whether a public hearing was held had more to do with how much opposition there was to the proposal. "A hearing may not be scheduled, unless you have public protest," one said.
"We'll have that," Flora replied.
"If you're pretty sure you have public opposition, you're better off to ask for (a hearing)," an SCC official advised.
"They'd (the McBrides) rather not have one but I see the wisdom in it," Flora said.
| 
