Wind project hearing set for Tuesday

Construction on Highland New Wind Development's utility began this summer, and site work has been in various stages. According to state inspectors, work will stop over the winter months and the land disturbed so far will be stabilized. This aerial shot shows work done so far on the back side of Red Oak Knob, facing southwest toward U.S. 250. (Recorder photo by Geoff Cox) ALLEGHENY MOUNTAIN — Protecting a Civil War battlefield is not what Dawn Brown Barrett planned to do this fall.

But Barrett and her neighbors, Richard and Marcia Laska, have found themselves buried in research and actively working to save Camp Allegheny, a site on the National Register of Historic Places, from losing its pristine, historic landscape to the industrial wind energy utility under construction nearby.

Whether Virginia's first wind facility is meeting its permit requirements is the subject of a State Corporation Commission hearing set for Tuesday, and Barrett and the Laskas, who live near the battlefield, urge officials keep it on the docket. Their concerns are shared by Pocahontas County leaders, who say this could be the only opportunity for West Virginia residents to be heard on the record in Virginia.

This map, provided by HNWD to Virginia's Department of Historic Resources, shows the location of Camp Allegheny relative to the wind energy project array on Red Oak Knob, according to the developer. The turbines on Tamarack Ridge, in the line of red dots at top, are closer to the battlefield, but visual simulations for angles to those towers were not provided. The hearing was originally slated for September, but Highland New Wind Development has been providing new information it hopes will satisfy Virginia's Department of Historic Resources, and the hearing has been postponed twice since then.

HNWD of Harrisonburg is constructing a 38-megawatt utility of 19 towers on Allegheny Mountain in Highland County, but the embattled developer has been consistently challenged on many fronts since the proposal surfaced in 2002.

Next week, the SCC hearing focuses on allegations from DHR, which complained to Aug. 19 the company was not providing the information the agency needed to review potential impacts to archaeological and historic resources, including the visual effect on nearby Camp Allegheny, a Civil War battlefield in Pocahontas County, W.Va.

In that complaint, DHR director Kathleen Kilpatrick told the SCC, "It is our reading of the Dec. 20, 2007 final order that HNWD has been directed to enter into constructive consultation with DHR concerning the necessary studies to identify historic resources and the evaluation of the project's effects. While HNWD has consulted with DHR, it has not undertaken identification studies to the standards recommended as appropriate, and we do not believe that HNWD's efforts have been sufficient to comply with the order. Furthermore," she said, "we believe that the order assumes that if adverse effects are identified, reasonable efforts will be undertaken to address them. To our knowledge, HNWD has made no efforts to minimize effects, and has instead terminated consultation with this agency. Accordingly, we believe that HNWD has failed to comply with either the letter or the spirit of the order."

HNWD disagreed, in a brief to SCC, saying it believed it had done everything possible to comply with the order and work with DHR on these issues.

The SCC set a Sept. 23 hearing. Two days before that date, HNWD filed a motion to have any references to viewshed impacts be dropped from the proceeding. SCC agreed to hear arguments on that motion Sept. 23 instead of the full hearing on DHR's complaint. SCC then denied HNWD's motion, and rescheduled the full hearing for Oct. 13. But right before that was to take place, HNWD and DHR held a private meeting in Charlottesville; the company gave DHR more details about its archaeological surveys and site plans. On Oct. 9, DHR asked the SCC to postpone the hearing so it could have time to review the information, and the SCC rescheduled the hearing for next week, Tuesday, Nov. 10.

DHR has been reviewing HNWD's information, but has not explained what, if any, conclusions it has reached. This week, Kilpatrick said, "We have not yet received some key documentation we requested from the National Park Service. The (hearing) schedule may depend on when that material is received."

In its attempts to satisfy DHR's request for information, HNWD compiled documents detailing its archaeological survey, conducted by Dr. Linda Perry, and visual simulations by HNWD principal Tal McBride. Included were line of sight graphs that showed where McBride stood to take photographs, in relationship to where the towers will be on Red Oak Knob. There were no graphs showing simulations for the project's second array of towers, on Tamarack Ridge, which is closer to the battlefield.

Barrett and Richard Laska told the DHR and SCC they found the analysis lacking for that reason, among others. They also took issue with Perry's report, and complained to West Virginia Congressman Nick Rahall, saying Perry crossed a line in using her connection with the Smithsonian Institute when she submitted her survey for HNWD (see related story).

Camp Allegheny, Barrett told The Recorder this week, "is widely regarded as one of the most wellpreserved and beautiful Civil War Battlefields in the nation. I have spent most of the past three months working to bring the historical, archaeological and physical facts about Camp Allegheny to the attention of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources and the Virginia State Corporation Commission. I've enlisted letter writers from across West Virginia and the nation to educate Virginia officials regarding the location, significance, and rare beauty of this hallowed ground.

"This is not what I planned on doing this fall," she said. "I'm not a Civil War historian, archaeologist, or preservationist. I'm not an activist. But desperate times, as the saying goes, call for desperate measures. And when I found out, quite by accident, that a Virginia wind developer had received SCC approval to erect 400-foot-tall, nearly 300-foot-wide wind turbines adjacent to Camp Allegheny, I was compelled to do something about it."

Barrett and Laska wrote to DHR after seeing the latest information HNWD had provided — details on the archaeological survey, and a report from HNWD consultant Heidi Lestyan of Antares Group. They told Kilpatrick they believed that information "repeats and expands several of the distortions presented in earlier documents."

First, they point to HNWD's claim that Camp Allegheny is more than a mile and a half from the nearest wind turbine. "This is an improvement over Highland New Wind's previous assertions that Camp Allegheny is more than two miles from the closest turbines," they said, "however, it is not a statement of fact. Line of sight analysis from the primary battlefield area to the nearest turbines on Tamarack Ridge show a distance of 1.2 miles. Line of sight analysis from the Varner monument and the Varner homestead show a distance of one mile, 640 feet."

Also, HNWD said the towers on Tamarack Ridge will be visible from the battlefield at a distance of about two miles.

Barrett and Laska disagree. "Line of sight analyses have revealed that all of the turbines on Tamarack Ridge will be visible from the primary battlefield area at a distance of as little as 1.2 miles. Nine of ten turbines on Red Oak Knob will be visible at a distance of 2.4 to 3.3 miles," they told DHR.

Further, they note that Tamarack is described as the project area most visible from Camp Allegheny, but "none of the photos included in this report are of Tamarack Ridge. If they include the turbine locations at all, they show Red Oak Knob, which is much farther away."

They also looked at the angles used in HNWD's report. "Viewpoints were selected for angles of view that allowed for intervening ridges and summer foliage to block line of sight to the turbines on Red Oak Knob. (HNWD's charts) were taken 'from in front of the Stone House.' This house, located on the west side of Buffalo Mountain Road, and well in excess of four miles from the Red Oak Knob turbines, is not a Civil War-era structure and is not customarily considered part of the battlefield," they said. "It is considerably below the gun emplacements, command redoubt, trenches and cabin remains on the knob at the western end of Camp Allegheny. A professional, and unbiased visual impact analysis would not fail to include photo simulations from the primary battlefield area,

"Since this report does not include photo simulations of the Tamarack Ridge turbines, it is entirely unhelpful in understanding the impact of the Tamarack Ridge turbines on the scenic and historic integrity of Camp Allegheny."

Susan Pierce, director of the West Virginia Division of Culture and History, said she also received HNWD latest reports from DHR but has not reviewed them thoroughly yet. Asked whether she was requested to provide comments, she said, "Yes, I guess so. They gave them to me, so yes."

This week, Barrett said, "My overwhelming concern regarding both studies is that neither report appears to have been developed from an objective perspective. Lacking objectivity, no study purporting to be scientific can be said to be truly scientific. If the Antares Group was interested in depicting actual simulations of the visual impact of the turbines on Tamarack Ridge, those that their report identifies as being closest to Camp Allegheny, then their report would have included photos of Tamarack Ridge. Since the report lacks such photos, the report lacks the very data necessary to evaluate the impact of the closest turbines on the scenic integrity — the visual and auditory experience— of Camp Allegheny.

"Further, if Antares Group had been charged with providing the most accurate visual impact data, rather than data that appears purposely designed to show virtually no visual impact, then Heidi Lestyan would have contacted USFS or American Battlefield Protection Program historians to define the limits of Camp Allegheny. If she had done so, then she would have, one hopes, found herself professionally obligated to include photos taken from the core battlefield area, in the vicinity of the Varner Monument," Barrett said. "Ms. Lestyan's report includes only photos taken from the western end of Camp Allegheny, two or more miles from Tamarack and nearly four miles from Red Oak Knob. This veiwpoint is, quite literally, as far away from the turbines as possible. Very few trees exist on this high knoll, yet every photo is taken from behind one. Objective? I don't think so."

Barrett is equally frustrated by the process. "How could Virginia approve an industrial development adjacent to a site listed on the National Register of Historic Places without a federal review process or any public input?" she said. "After years working in regulatory compliance, I knew that what was happening on the border of West Virginia and Virginia amounted to a denial of the regulatory process, a miscarriage of justice with implications far beyond Pocahontas and Highland counties. National Register sites belong to the citizens of the nation. We grant certain special places this status because we agree that there is something about them that's worth protecting and preserving. If elected and appointed government officials can simply withdraw such protection behind our backs—without citizen input—then, as practical matter, no place is sacred. Every place is open for business.

"This is wrong," she said. "We, all of us, know in our hearts that some places have value far greater than whatever short term profit might be extracted from them through their destruction. We, all of us, know in our hearts that some places transcend the limits of a single human life and in so doing connect us to history, to the fleshand blood lives of those to whom we owe our own. Camp Allegheny Battlefield is such a place — a place where one can stand in the wind-swept, empty silence, look out on row after row of mountain ridges and travel through time. Buffalo herds and Indian camp fires. Infant deaths and church socials. Musket blast and bugle call. Scythes and axes and train whistles. Cries of grief and shouts of laughter. Young Yeagers and Varners and Confederate soldiers playing together in the December snow. The past is present here, and much more real than in any museum. Camp Allegheny matters because all such places matter. If 'We, The People' don't have a voice in saving Camp Allegheny, then all our sacred places are at risk. A nation without such places is a nation lost.

"In the short time I have been involved in drawing attention to Camp Allegheny," Barrett added, "I've noticed a curious pattern. Because I live within a couple miles of Camp Allegheny, my statements about it are often dismissed as not objective. Data I have submitted to the agencies involved, and to the historic preservation community in general, is looked at with a certain distrust. As if what I say couldn't possibly be factually accurate since its motivated by nothing other than personal passion — a love of place and a respect for the regulatory process and the rule of law. Understanding this bias, I have been exceptionally careful to be accurate, and even conservative, in my depictions regarding the impact of Highland New Wind on Camp Allegheny. Yet the same government officials who are predisposed to doubt the accuracy of my data, are equally predisposed to trust data presented by so-called 'experts' paid by Highland New Wind. The motivations of these experts remain unexamined, and their conclusions too-often simply accepted on faith. Whereas the motivations of citizens like myself, who are simply seeking a just process, where costs and benefits are fairly examined, are viewed with suspicion, and too-often, too-easily dismissed.

"My hope for the Nov. 10 hearing is this: That the DHR insists that the visual impact and archaeological studies submitted by Highland New Wind on Oct. 9 are entirely unsatisfactory according to the terms of the SCC's final order, and that the SCC, agreeing with DHR, withdraws their certificate until such time as objective, professional visual and archaeological analyses are conducted and a plan for minimizing impact on Camp Allegheny is developed."

At this point, the hearing remains on the docket as planned in Richmond — Tuesday, Nov. 10 at 10 a.m. in the Tyler Building downtown — although Kilpatrick says the schedule may depend on critical information DHR has requested from the National Park Service, which it has not yet received.