DOCSLIB.ORG

Merit Brief Submitted on Behalf of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Merit Brief Submitted on Behalf of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio In The SUPREME COURT OF OHIO Champaign County, et al., : Case No. 2014-1210 Appellants, Appeal from the Ohio Power Siting V. Board, Case No. 13-360-EL-BGA, In the Matter of the Application of Buckeye The Ohio Power Siting Board, Wind, LLC, to Amend its Certificate Issued in Case No. 08-666-EL-BGN. Appellee. MERIT BRIEF SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF OHIO Kevin S. Talebi (0069198) Michael DeWine (0009181) Champaign County Prosecuting Attorney Attorney General of Ohio Jane A. Napier (0061426) Assistant Prosecuting Attorney William L. Wright (0018010) Counsel of Record Section Chief 200 N. Main Street Werner L. Margard III (0024858) Urbana, Ohio 43078 Counsel of Record 937.484.1900 (telephone) John H. Jones (0051913) ktalebigchampaignprocesutor.com Assistant Attorneys General jnapiergchampaignprosecutor com Public Utilities Section 180 East Broad Street, 6th Floor Columbus, Ohio 43215-3793 Counsel for Appellants, 614.466.4397 (telephone) Champaign County and Goshen, Union 614.644.8764 (fax) and Urbana Townships werner.margardApuc. state, oh.us j ohn.j ones(&puc. state. oh.us Counsel for Appellee, Public Utilities Comrnission of Ohio ;z i _^-%; ---- __..'%'%^' .:....................`^ M. Howard Petricoff (0008287) Counsel of Record Michael J. Settineri (0073369) Miranda R. Leppla (0086351) Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP 52 East Gay Street, P.O. Box 1008 Columbus, OH 43216-1008 614.464.5414 (telephone) 614.719.4904 (fax) mhpetricoffkvor.^ s. com mjsettineriAvo . s.com inrleppla(a^vor s.com TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ............................................................................................. iii INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................. 3 STATEMENT OF THE FACTS ......................................................................................... 4 STANDARD OF REVIEW ................................................................................................ 9 ARGUMENT . .. ... .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ... I 1 Proposition of Law No. I: The Board properly applied the statutory criteria in R.C. 4906.07(B) to limit the scope of the hearing on Buckeye's amendment application . ............................................................ 11 A. The Board's decision is supported by sufficient evidence in the record . ..................................................................... 13 B. The Board has broad discretion in the conduct of its hearings . ........................................................................................... 16 Proposition of Law No. II: Appellants' first and second propositions of law fail to offer a coherent legal theory, which is grounds for rejecting their arguments. In re Complaint of Wilkes v. Ohio Edison Co., 131 Ohio St.3d 252, 963 N.E.2d 1285 ¶ 10; Util. Serv. Partners, Inc. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 124 Ohio St.3d 284, 921 N.E.2d 1038, ¶ 53 ........................................................................................ 18 Proposition of Law No. III: Appellants forfeited their right to argue that the ALJ and Board failed to cite sufficient record evidence in support of the decision not to hear certain issues, and their due process claim, because they failed to present them to the Board in their rehearing application. ......................................................................... 22 TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) Proposition of Law No. IV: Appellants' allegations of traffic and right-of-way issues were fully litigated in Case No. 08-666-EL-BGA, and thus are barred from re-litigation based on principles of resjudicata and collateral estoppel . ................................................................................ 25 A. Appellants' right-of-way issue is precluded under res judicata and collateral estoppel . ...................................................... 27 B. Appellants' traffic claim is precluded under res judicata ............................................................................................. 29 Proposition of Law No. V: Appellants have failed to show that the order has a prejudicial effect . ........................................................................................................... 30 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 33 PROOF OF SERVICE ...................................................................................................... 34 APPENDIX PAGE In the Matter of the Application of Buckeye Wind, LLCfor a Certificate to Construct Wind-Powered Electric Generation Facilities in Champaign County, Ohio, Case No. 08-666-EL-BGN (Opinion, Order, and Certificate) (Mar. 22, 2010) ............................................................................................. 1 In the Matter of the Application of Champaign Wind, LLCfor a Certificate to Construct Wind-Powered Electric Generating Facility in Champaign County, Ohio, Case No. 12-160-EL-BGN (Opinion, Order, and Certificate) (May 28, 2013) ......................................................................................... 106 R.C. 4903.10 Application for Rehearing ........................................................................ 212 R.C. 4906.01 Power Siting Definitions ........................................................................... 213 R.C. 4906.03 Powers and Duties of Power Siting Board ................................................ 215 R.C. 4906.07 Public Hearing on Application ................................................................. 216 R.C. 4906.12 Procedures of Public Utilities Commission to be Followed ..................... 217 Ohio Adm. Code 4906-5-10 Amendments of Accepted, Complete Certificate Applications and of Certificates ................................................................ 217 ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Cases AKSteel Corp. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 95 Ohio St.3d 81, 765 N.E.2d 862 (2002) . ...................................................................................................................... 14,32 Allnet Communications Serv., Inc. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 70 Ohio St.3d 202, 638 N.E.2d 516 ( 1994) ................................................................................................... 21 AT&T Communications of Ohio, Inc. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 51 Ohio St.3d 150, 555 N.E.2d 288 (1990) ..................................................................................... 18, 22 Cincinnati Bell Tel. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 92 Ohio St.3d 177, 2001- Ohio-134, 749 N.E.2d 262 ............................................................................................. 17 Cincinnati Gas & Elec. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 103 Ohio St.3d 398, 816 N.E.2d 238 .... ................................................................................................................. 23 Cincinnati v. Pub. Util. Comm., 151 Ohio St. 353, 86 N.E.2d 10 (1949) ................... 24, 30 Cleveland Elec. Illum. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 46 Ohio St.2d 105, 346 N.E.2d 778 (1976) .......................................................................................................... 18 Cleveland Elec. Illum. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 76 Ohio St.3d 163, 666 N.E.2d 1372 ( 1996) ........................................................................................................ 10 Columbus v. Pub. Util. Comm., 10 Ohio St.3d 23, 460 N.E.2d 1117 (1984) ................... 18 Consumers' Counsel v. Pub. Util. Comm., 58 Ohio St.2d 108, 388 N.E.2d 1370 (1979) .................................................................................................................... 10 Consumers' Counsel v. Pub. Util. Comm., 16 Ohio St.3d 9, 475 N.E.2d 782 (1985) ............................................................................................................................. 27 Consumers' Counsel v. Pub. Util. Comm., 70 Ohio St.3d 244, 638 N.E.2d 550 (1994) ......................................................................................................................23 Day v. N. Indiana Pub. Serv. Corp., 164 F.3d 382 (7t' Cir. 1999) ..... .............................. 22 Discount Cellular, Inc. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 112 Ohio St.3d 360, 859 N.E.2d 957 ..................................................................................................................... 24 Duff v. Pub. Util. Comm., 56 Ohio St.2d 367, 384 N.E.2d 264 (1978) ...................... 12, 17 iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES (cont'd) Page(s) Fort Frye Teachers Assn., OEA/NEA v. State Emp. Relations Bd. (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 392, 692 N.E.2d 140 (1998) ........................................................................ 27 Grava v. Parkman Twp., 73 Ohio St.3d 379, 653 N.E.2d 226 (1995) .............................. 27 Holladay Corp. v. Pub. Util. Comm., 61 Ohio St.2d, 402 N.E.2d 1175 (1980) ............................................................................................................................. 30 In re Application ofBuckeye Wind, LLC, 131 Ohio St.3d 449, 2013-Ohio- 878 ........................................................................................................................ 3, 11, 26 In re Application of Columbus S. Power Co., 128 Ohio St.3d 512, 947 N.E.2d 655 ....................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Northwest Ohio Aug 8 2013 OPSB App.Pdf
    568;1=.9; 6126 =25- /*84! 7*<3-250 ,6<5;>! 6126 *4.5-.- *LLHGA?NGKJ NK NFC 6FGK 7KQCM 9GNGJE +K?MB /KM ? ,CMNGDGA?NC KD .JPGMKJICJN?H ,KIL?NG@GHGNR ?JB 7O@HGA 5CCB 9O@IGNNCB +R 568;1=.9; 6126 =25- .5.80>! 33, ,*9. 56" $&"#$)'".3"+05 *4.5-.- *7732,*;265 *<0<9; (! %#$& August 8, 2013 COLUMBUS I CLEVELAND Ms. Betty McCauly CINCINNATI-DAYTON Administration/Docketing MARIETTA Ohio Power Siting Board th BRICKER&ECKLERLLP 180 East Broad Street, 11 Floor 100 South Third Street Columbus, OH 43215-4291 Columbus, Ohio 43215-3793 MAIN: 614.227.2300 FAX: 614.227.2390 Re: Northwest Ohio Wind Energy www.bricker.com Case No. 13-197-EL-BGN [email protected] Dear Ms. McCauly: Sally W. Bloomfield 614.227.2368 [email protected] Enclosed, please find an original and five copies of the Amended Application of Northwest Ohio Wind Energy for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need under Chapter 4906-17 of the Ohio Administrative Code (OAC). Pursuant to OAC 4906-5-03(A)(3), the applicant makes the following declarations: Name of Applicant: Northwest Ohio Wind Energy LLC c/o National Wind, LLC 706 Second Avenue South, Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Name/Location of Proposed Facility: Northwest Ohio Wind Energy wind farm Townships of Blue Creek and Latty Paulding County, Ohio Authorized Representative Technical: Marcus V. da Cunha National Wind LLC 706 Second Avenue South, Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 746-6617 E-Mail: [email protected] 6555997v1 #2/-0.2 ! $-01.2 "**'(&$,) "* %"+ Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Exhibit 5 Resources (Ver. 2) 6 4 14.Xlsx
    EIPC Target 2 - Input Data and Assumptions Exhibit 5 - Resources, Reference Gas Demand Scenario and Reference Gas Demand Scenario Update IESO Capacity (MW) Reference Scenario Reference Update Resource Name 2018 2023 2018 2023 Fuel 1 Fuel 2 Tech Type Zone Name Abitibi Canyon GS #1-5 311.0 311.0 311.0 311.0 WAT HY ON_N Adelaide Wind Energy Centre 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 WND WT ON_W Adelaide Wind Power Project 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 WND WT ON_W Aguasabon #1-2 41.0 41.0 41.0 41.0 WAT HY ON_N Alexander #1-4 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 WAT HY ON_N Amherst 76.0 76.0 76.0 76.0 WND WT ON_E Andrews GS #1+2+3 46.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 WAT HY ON_N Armow Wind Project 180.0 180.0 180.0 180.0 WND WT ON_W Arnprior #1-2 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 WAT HY ON_E Atikokan #1 227.0 227.0 201.0 201.0 OT ST ON_N Barrett Chute #1-4 154.0 154.0 154.0 154.0 WAT HY ON_E Beck 1 GS EBUS 507.0 507.0 507.0 507.0 WAT HY ON_W Beck 2 GS #11-26 1499.0 1499.0 1499.0 1499.0 WAT HY ON_W Beck 2 PGS #1-6 122.0 122.0 122.0 122.0 PS PumpStore ON_W Bluewater Wind Energy Centre 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 WND WT ON_W Bornish Wind Energy Centre 73.0 73.0 73.0 73.0 WND WT ON_W Bow Lake Phase 1 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 WND WT ON_N Bow Lake Phase 2 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 WND WT ON_N Bramalea GS #13 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 NG SCCT ON_C Bramalea GS #2 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 NG SCCT ON_C Brighton Beach Generating Station CCCT 575.0 575.0 575.0 575.0 NG CCCT ON_W Bruce A #1 781.0 781.0 781.0 781.0 UR ST ON_W Bruce A #2 750.0 750.0 750.0 750.0 UR ST ON_W Bruce A #3 750.0 750.0 750.0 750.0 UR ST ON_W Bruce A #4 0.0 760.0 0.0 760.0 UR ST
    [Show full text]
  • MEP Testimony
    CH2M HILL 2485 Natomas Park Drive Suite 600 Sacramento, CA 95833 Tel 916-920-0300 Fax 916-920-8463 December 20, 2010 DOCKET 382914 09-AFC-3 Mr. Craig Hoffman Project Manager DATE DEC 20 2010 California Energy Commission RECD. DEC 20 2010 1516 Ninth Street Sacramento, CA 95814-5512 Subject: Mariposa Energy Project (09-AFC-03) Applicant’s Testimony Dear Mr. Hoffman: Attached please find 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy on CD-ROM of the Mariposa Energy Project Applicant’s Testimony. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact me at (916) 286-0348. Sincerely, CH2M HILL Doug Urry AFC Project Manager Attachment cc: C. Curry, Mariposa Energy, LLC. B. Buchynsky, Mariposa Energy, LLC. Mariposa Energy Project (09-AFC-03) Applicant’s Testimony Submitted to California Energy Commission Submitted by Mariposa Energy, LLC With Assistance from 2485 Natomas Park Drive Suite 600 Sacramento, CA 95833 December 2010 Contents Section Page Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 1 Electrical Transmission ................................................................................................................. 9 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................... 13 Biological Resources .................................................................................................................... 25 Cultural Resources .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A BIBLIOGRAPHY of BAT FATALITY, ACTIVITY, and INTERACTIONS with WIND TURBINES
    A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF BAT FATALITY, ACTIVITY, and INTERACTIONS WITH WIND TURBINES Prepared by: Gregory D. Johnson Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 2003 Central Avenue Cheyenne, WY 82001 and Edward B. Arnett and Cris D. Hein Bat Conservation International P.O. Box 162603 Austin, TX 78716 1 June 2004 (Updated February 2014) Unpublished Reports on Bat Fatality and Interactions at Wind Facilities in North America Anderson, R. L., D. Strickland, J. Tom, N. Neumann, W. Erickson, J. Cleckler, G. Mayorga, G. Nuhn, A. Leuders, J. Schneider, L. Backus, P. Becker and N. Flagg. 2000. Avian monitoring and risk assessment at Tehachapi Pass and San Gorgonio Pass wind resource areas, California: Phase 1 preliminary results. Proceedings of the National Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting 3:31-46. National Wind Coordinating Committee, Washington, D.C. Download File Arnett, E. B., editor. 2005. Relationships between bats and wind turbines in Pennsylvania and West Virginia: an assessment of bat fatality search protocols, patterns of fatality, and behavioral interactions with wind turbines. A final report submitted to the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative. Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas, USA. Download File Arnett, E. B., J. P. Hayes, and M. M. P. Huso. 2006. Patterns of pre-construction bat activity at a proposed wind facility in south-central Pennsylvania. An annual report submitted to the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative. Bat Conservation International. Austin, Texas, USA. Download File Arnett, E. B., M. D. Strickland, M. L. Morrison. 2007. Renewable energy resources and wildlife: impacts and opportunities. Transactions of the 72nd North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 72: 65–95.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment for Proposed Habitat Conservation Plan and Incidental Take Permit
    DRAFT Environmental Assessment for Proposed Habitat Conservation Plan and Incidental Take Permit Blue Creek Wind Farm, LLC Van Wert and Paulding Counties, Ohio December 2019 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ohio Ecological Services Office 4625 Morse Road, Suite 104 Columbus, Ohio 43230 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR PROPOSED HCP AND INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMIT BLUE CREEK WIND FARM, LLC Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Project Background ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1.1 Blue Creek Wind Farm Project .............................................................................................................. 1 1.1.2 Habitat Conservation Plan Permit Area ............................................................................................ 2 1.2 Regulatory and Policy Background ............................................................................................................... 2 1.2.1 National Environmental Policy Act ..................................................................................................... 2 1.2.2 Endangered Species Act ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.2.3 Ohio Department of Natural Resources ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Us Ports and Vessels Innovation
    OFFSHORE WIND REPORT POSITIONING FOR U.S. EXPANSION: U.S. PORTS AND VESSELS INNOVATION MARCH 2021 © Carsten Medom Madsen/Shutterstock TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................1 OFFSHORE WIND FARMS AND VESSELS ................................................. 2 OFFSHORE WIND FORECAST ........................................................ 2 EMERGING CHALLENGES ............................................................ 3 WIND FARM VESSELS ............................................................... 3 CLASSIFICATION OF WIND FARM VESSELS ............................................4 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK .........................................................4 EAST COAST PORTS AND INFRASTRUCTURES ............................................ 5 PORTS ............................................................................ 5 WIND DEVELOPMENT AREAS ....................................................... 7 TURBINE SIZES ................................................................... 10 TURBINE FOUNDATION ............................................................ 10 VESSELS SUPPORTING OFFSHORE WIND FARM DEVELOPMENT ............................12 FUNCTIONAL TRENDS ..............................................................13 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE .........................................................17 ABS SOLUTIONS - PILOT CASES AND COMMERCIAL PROJECTS ............................20 BLOCK ISLAND ...................................................................20
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Offshore Wind Technology Data Update
    2019 Offshore Wind Technology Data Update Walter Musial,1 Philipp Beiter,1 Paul Spitsen,2 Jake Nunemaker,1 Vahan Gevorgian,1 Aubryn Cooperman,1 Rob Hammond,1 and Matt Shields1 1 National Renewable Energy Laboratory 2 U.S. Department of Energy NREL/TP-5000-77411 October 2020 Table of Contents Slide Numbers 1 Data and Methodology 3‒6 2 U.S. Offshore Wind Data 7‒25 3 Global Offshore Wind Data 26‒36 4 Global Floating Offshore Wind Data 37‒47 5 2019 Offshore Wind Technology Trends 48‒62 6 2019 Offshore Wind Cost Data 63‒70 7 References 71‒77 7 Notice and Acknowledgments 78 Data and Methodology Data Sources This update draws data from the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL’s) internal offshore wind database, which is built on internal research and a wide variety of data sources, including peer-reviewed literature, press releases, industry news reports, manufacturer specification sheets, and global offshore wind project announcements. For the database, NREL has verified and sourced data from the following publications: • The 4C Offshore Wind Database (4C Offshore 2020) • Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) Renewable Energy Project Database (BNEF 2020) • 4C Offshore Vessel Database (4C Offshore 2020) • Wood Mackenzie Wind Turbine Trends (Wood Mackenzie 2020). • Link to 2019 Data Table NREL | 4 Scope and Pipeline Definitions • This work defines the offshore wind project pipeline as potential offshore wind development indicated by developer announcements or by areas made available for offshore wind development by regulatory agencies. • The scope of this report covers the global fleet of projects in the pipeline through December 31, 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Financial Report
    Annual financial report Iberdrola, S.A., and subsidiary companies Year 2019 www.iberdrola.com AUDITOR’S REPORT KPMG Auditores, S.L. Torre Iberdrola Plaza Euskadi, 5 Planta 17 48009 Bilbao Independent Auditor's Report on the Consolidated Annual Accounts (Translation from the original in Spanish. In the event of discrepancy, the Spanish-language version prevails.) To the Shareholders of Iberdrola, S.A. REPORT ON THE CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL ACCOUNTS Opinion___________________________________________________________________ We have audited the consolidated annual accounts of Iberdrola, S.A. (the "Parent") and subsidiaries (together the “Group”), which comprise the consolidated statement of financial position at 31 December 2019, and the consolidated income statement, consolidated statement of comprehensive income, consolidated statement of changes in equity and consolidated statement of cash flows for the year then ended, and consolidated notes. In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated annual accounts give a true and fair view, in all material respects, of the consolidated equity and consolidated financial position of the Group at 31 December 2019 and of its consolidated financial performance and its consolidated cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as adopted by the European Union (IFRS-EU) and other provisions of the financial reporting framework applicable in Spain. Basis for Opinion__________________________________________________________ We conducted our audit in accordance with prevailing legislation regulating the audit of accounts in Spain. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor's Responsibilities for the Audit of the Consolidated Annual Accounts section of our report. We are independent of the Group in accordance with the ethical requirements, including those regarding independence, that are relevant to our audit of the consolidated annual accounts in Spain pursuant to the legislation regulating the audit of accounts.
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Markets Day 2018
    Capital Markets Day 2018 DISCLAIMER This presentation contains certain forward-looking statements, including but not limited to, the statements and expectations contained in the “Financial Outlook” section of this presentation. Statements herein, other than statements of historical fact, regarding our future results of operations, financial condition, cash flows, business strategy, plans and future objectives are forward-looking statements. Words such as “targets”, “believe”, “expect”, “aim”, “intend”, “plan”, “seek”, “will”, “may”, “should” ”anticipate”, “continue”, “predict” or variations of these words, as well as other statements regarding matters that are not historical fact or regarding future events or prospects, constitute forward-looking statements. Ørsted have based these forward-looking statements on its current views with respect to future events and financial performance. These views involve a number of risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those predicted in the forward-looking statements and from the past performance of Ørsted. Although, Ørsted believes that the estimates and projections reflected in the forward- looking statements are reasonable, they may prove materially incorrect and actual results may materially differ due to a variety of factors, including, but not limited to market risks, development of construction and production assets, regulatory risks, operation of offshore and onshore wind farms, cost of electricity for offshore and onshore wind power. As a result you should not rely on these forward-looking statements. Please also refer to the overview of risk factors in “Risk and Management” on p. 47 of the Annual Report 2017, available at www.orsted.com. Unless required by law, Ørsted is under no duty and undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement after the distribution of this presentation, whether as a result of new information future events or otherwise.
    [Show full text]
  • Offshore Wind Transmission Study Comparison of Options
    Offshore Wind Transmission Study Comparison of Options prepared for New Jersey Board of Public Utilities December 29, 2020 Page 1 Table of Contents I. Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................1 Recommendation ................................................................................................................................. 4 II. Background ................................................................................................................................5 Radial Export Cables ............................................................................................................................. 5 Ocean Grid ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Hybrid System ....................................................................................................................................... 8 Power Corridor ..................................................................................................................................... 8 III. Information Gathering Process ................................................................................................. 10 July-August 2020 OSW Transmission Stakeholder Meetings ............................................................. 12 IV. European Lessons Learned .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • BEECH RIDGE ENERGY WIND PROJECT Habitat Conservation Plan FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
    Final Environmental Impact Statement For Proposed Issuance of an Incidental Take Permit For the Beech Ridge Energy Wind Project Habitat Conservation Plan, Greenbrier and Nicholas Counties, West Virginia September 2013 US Fish and Wildlife Service West Virginia Field Office 694 Beverly Pike Elkins, WV 26241 BEECH RIDGE ENERGY WIND PROJECT Habitat Conservation Plan FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT For Proposed Issuance of an Incidental Take Permit For the Beech Ridge Energy Wind Project Habitat Conservation Plan Greenbrier and Nicholas Counties, West Virginia For Further Information Contact: Laura Hill Assistant Field Supervisor West Virginia Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 694 Beverly Pike Elkins, WV 26241 e-mail: [email protected] Phone: (304) 636-6586, ext. 18 FAX: (304) 636-7824 September 2013 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE BEECH RIDGE ENERGY WIND PROJECT Habitat Conservation Plan FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................... XIII CONTENT AND FORMAT OF FEIS ........................................................................................................ XVI PREFACE ................................................................................................................................................ XVII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hefore the Public Utilities Commission of the State of South Dakota
    HEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF CROWNED RIDGE, LLC FOR A FACILITIES PERMIT TO CONSTRUCTION 300 MEGAWATT WIND FACILITY Docket No. EL19-003 REBUTTAL TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS OF RICHARD LAMPETER May 24, 2019 004370 Page I of 11 1 INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS 2 Q. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS. 3 A. My name is Richard Lampeter. My business address is 3 Mill & Main Place, Suite 250, 4 Maynard, MA 01754. 5 6 Q. BY WHOM ARE YOU EMPLOYED AND IN WHAT CAPACITY? 7 A. I am employed at Epsilon Associates, Inc. ("Epsilon"). I am an Associate at the 8 company and manage the Acoustics Group. 9 10 Q. PLEASE DESCRIBE YOUR BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS 11 A. I have over 15 years of experience in conducting impact assessments for vanous 12 developments across the United States. Prior to joining Epsilon, I graduated from Lyndon 13 State College in Vermont with a B.S. in Environmental Science. While at Epsilon, I have 14 been involved in approximately 90 wind energy projects evaluating potential impacts 15 from sound and/or shadow flicker. The projects I have worked on ranged in size from 1.5 16 megawatts ("MW") to over 300 MW. I utilize the WindPRO software package to 17 calculate shadow flicker durations in the vicinity of a project on both a worst-case and 18 expected basis. As part of project evaluations, I have assisted in refinements in wind 19 turbine layouts to minimize shadow flicker at residences, evaluated curtailment options, 20 and analyzed the impact of existing vegetation to modeled shadow flicker durations.
    [Show full text]