SCC rejects citizens' request for wind plan investigation

By Anne Adams • Staff Writer

RICHMOND — Citizens will not have an investigation into the Highland wind energy project they requested recently.

Highlanders represented by attorney James Jennings asked the State Corporation Commission to investigate and, if appropriate, file a motion to show cause requiring Highland New Wind Development to "explain the reason for its violation of the (SCC) order" and have the SCC prohibit construction "until the violations are remedied."

The citizens claimed HNWD was failing to meet at least three of the requirements attached to its state permit for the 38-megawatt utility — submitting a final site plan to reviewing agencies; conducting archeological and architectural surveys; and protecting natural resources during construction. "We contend if the HNWD project is permitted to go forward at this time, the requirements and intent of the SCC final order will be effectively circumvented," Jennings told the SCC. "Accordingly we request the SCC take steps to prevent further construction activities by HNWD and to obtain confirmation from reviewing agencies that HNWD has complied with conditions of the SCC final order before allowing the project to proceed."

SCC's chief counsel William Chambliss replied to Jennings last week, saying since state agencies reviewing the project had not asserted any non-compliance issues, there was no reason for the agency to investigate further.

Since the SCC's final order was issued Dec. 20, 2007, the commission "has received no request from any of the reviewing agencies … nor from Highland County, itself a reviewing agency, for any investigation of non-compliance with the commission's final order," Chambliss said, "nor any allegation from these entities that HNWD had failed, or intends to fail, to comply with any of the conditions set out in the final order."

Further, Chambliss said, "in the absence of specific allegations of non-compliance by the reviewing agencies … I find no basis upon which the staff of the SCC should undertake the investigation or initiate the legal activity you have suggested in your letter."

On the same day Chambliss wrote that letter to Highland citizens, however, one reviewing agency did assert HNWD was not complying with the SCC's conditions. Virginia's Department of Historic Resources told Chambliss it believed Highland was not meeting the SCC's requirement to coordinate surveys DHR needs to evaluate potential impacts of the project.

The SCC promptly set a hearing on the matter for Sept. 23.