Group seeks to dismiss wind application By Anne Adams • Staff Writer
FRANKLIN, W.Va. - Residents and landowners long opposed to a wind energy project in Pendleton County have taken their stance to a new level this week.
Monday, grassroots opposition group Friends of Beautiful Pendleton County filed with the West Virginia Public Service Commission a motion to dismiss an application for a wind utility planned by Liberty Gap Wind Force LLC of Wexford, Pa., a subsidiary of Delaware-based U.S. Wind Force - a project with a total output of up to 125 megawatts.
The developer hopes to construct its plant, estimated at $175-$190 million, along the ridge of Jack Mountain, about 10 miles south of Franklin right up to the border with Highland County, Va. in the Doe Hill area.
The company also plans a 138 kv transmission line connecting the wind turbines with a substation in Franklin at a distance of more than 17 miles. The T-line has been a bone of contention with county landowners who fear the company will use the powers of eminent domain to take private property for that purpose.
FOBPC, represented by Monroe County attorney James W. McNeely, asserts that USWF failed to file an application complying with minimal requirements for information disclosure required by the West Virginia Public Service Commission.
The group makes the following charges:
• USWF did not publish an adequate map in its public notice in the Pendleton Times on Dec. 22 last year. It claims the map did not properly show the location of a proposed transmission line for the project. Liberty Gap, in response to complaints from residents, did publish a new map Jan. 19, but FOPBC says the second map did not make up for the initial deficiency in public notice. "The application as filed must stand or fall upon that initial notice," the motion states.
In addition, the group alleges USWF failed to meet PSC requirements, saying:
• The developer failed to adequately disclose the route of the proposed transmission line with certainty, since it included alternative routes. "There is unacceptable uncertainty as to the location of the route," the motion states. "It would appear that Liberty was, as of the date of application, uncertain and undecided as to the actual location of the transmission line."
• The application did not use objective, rational siting criteria and methodology that would permit the PSC to examine the reasons why Jack Mountain was chosen as a site. The motion charges that Liberty Gap's siting process is "marked by a complete lack of objective criteria and appears to have been a subjective, undocumented process that lacked the degree of professional rationality that would permit the commission or interested parties to examine or challenge the said siting process."
• The application did not include aerial photographs, as required by PSC siting regulations.
• It failed to include information about existing water wells and springs within one mile of the project site.
• It did not include a study of noise impact. "Liberty's tortured argument to establish, in effect, that wind turbines make no noticeable noise in rural areas does not survive even a brief stop to observe, and hear, existing operating wind turbines," the motion states.
• It did not include any studies of the estimated impact on historic, scenic, religious or archaeological areas or places of cultural significance. In particular, the motion notes, the developer has not prepared a phase 1 archaeological study. "Liberty has known of the need for a phase I study since at least Feb. 20, 2002. The letter submitted with the application was dated June 21, 2004, and that letter again stressed the need for such a study. Liberty has apparently ignored those letters … Its failure to provide such a study, even with several years notice of the need for the same, could therefore well be seen as deliberate."
The motion claims that all information was required to be included in the application unless USWF got a waiver from the PSC.
In its motion, FOBPC notes it has requested a full and complete copy of the Liberty Gap application and all its materials, "but Liberty has not yet responded to that request."
FOBPC has already filed its petition to act as an "intervenor" in USWF's application review with the PSC, similar to legal "respondents" acting in the same way with Virginia's State Corporation Commission.
Liberty Gap asserts in its application for a certificate to operate that it is not a public utility within the meaning of West Virginia statutes, and therefore it is not subject to all the same rules. It has requested a waiver of PSC requirements for information such as proposed rates, project construction costs, financing and operating revenues and expenses.
In addition, it claims that since its utility will not be regulated by the PSC, it should be granted a waiver of all the commission's filing and reporting requirements - everything from customer relations, inspections and tests, standards and quality of service, and uniform accounting requirements to the requirements allowing the PSC to inspect books, papers, reports and statements.
If built, the Liberty Gap project would be poised to extend into Highland County, perhaps adding another 100 megawatts to its capacity along Jack Mountain (see related story).
Pendleton County residents and landowners meet with Liberty Gap officials this week in a moderated question and answer meeting. See next week's Recorder for details. FOPBC will hold a follow-up meeting Friday, Feb. 10 in the Pendleton County High School auditorium at 7 p.m.
No comments have been posted. Be the first!
| 
