May 24, 2012
Honorable Jaclyn A. Brilling,
Secretary
New York State Board on
Electric Generation Siting and the Environment
Empire State Plaza
Albany, NY 12212-1350
Dear Secretary Brilling,
RE: In the Matter of the
Rules and Regulations of the Board on Electric Generation Siting and the
Environment
HISTORY:
WIND POWER ETHICS GROUP LLC was
formed in 2006 due to the fact that two industrial wind turbine developers
proposed over 250 wind turbines in our small town of Cape Vincent which is five
miles along Lake Ontario and fifteen miles along the St Lawrence River. At the
time our Town and Planning Boards consisted of officials with wind turbine
leases. They appeared to make decisions based on their self interest, rather
than what might be best for the entire community. Our organization financially
invested in studies, educational presentations and awareness for the concerned
public regarding all aspects of wind turbine development. To do this we
investigated and researched the information that was provided by the wind
turbine companies. As a result of these efforts an increased number of citizens
have voted into office non-conflicted board members who are making decisions
for the best interest of the whole community. We believe in home rule and
feel that our town and planning boards should not be left out of the future
planning for any energy development in Cape Vincent.
COMMENTS REGARDING THE DRAFT
REGULATIONS:
Local laws:
First, we ask that the applying
local substantial laws continue to be the default position. The wind developers
are asking that locally laws be preempted entirely. We remind you that the
actual language passed by the legislature and governor was clear that the local
laws would be applied unless "unduly burdensome". The applicants
should bear the burden of proving local laws are burdensome. New York State is
historically a home rule state and each municipality has carefully
developed its own laws for its unique area.
1000.15
Acceptance of a Certificate
(a) Upon
issuance of a final decision by a Board granting a Certificate, an applicant
shall, within 30 days after the issuance of such decision, file either a
written unqualified acceptance of the Certificate or a petition for rehearing,
but not both. We ask
that this paragraph be amended to include the municipality has the right to ask
for a rehearing also. We find it an unfair advantage that an applicant has more
rights than the local municipality.
Public Involvement:
The NY Power Act clearly states
the Chair shall make decisions in consultation with the Board exclusive of the
ad hoc members. Considering all the rhetoric about public involvement it seems
important that the decisions be made by a vote including the ad hoc members.
The fact that the ad hoc members are not required for a quorum is additional
injury to real public involvement and should be necessary for a quorum. Siting
Board meetings should take place within the municipality where a project is
proposed.
This comment period has only
been 60 days and some of the time the PSC web page carrying the draft
regulations has been offline. Town Boards meet only once a month and this time
period is inadequate to carefully consider issues that will have a lasting
impact on their communities. A 30 day extension to this comment period is
requested.
Socioeconomic Effects:
One issue we experienced
firsthand was weighing the possible benefits of a development against the
losses. Currently the draft regulations only consider the benefits such as
jobs, PILOTS, secondary industries, and so forth. It is obvious that virtually
every development has some negative impact on the involved local community. We
ask that an economic analysis include the entire effects; not just the
benefits.
Noise Issues:
Sound studies have been a huge
issue in our community. The developers sound studies have shown a large
discrepancy with two independent sound studies. Developer studies have
completely ignored the issue of low level sound vibration and it is clear
communities need to be protected from damaging sounds and vibrations. We would
like a cap on sound: 5 dba above ambient as recommended by the DEC or not more
than 35dba at non participating property lines. Measuring low level vibration
should also be a requirement especially as more and more data is available
demonstrating harmful effects of low level vibration(C weighting) and sound in
general.
Wildlife Protection:
Ornithologists
take the position that bird and bat studies should continue for three years to
account for seasonal variation. Applicants should be expected to present
verifiable wildlife studies to protect the local wildlife. The 86 wind turbine
complex on Wolfe Island, Canada, just two miles away from Cape Vincent in the
St. Lawrence River has some of the recorded highest bird kills in the world.
Documented reports show the short eared owls moved away from the turbines, the
osprey immigrated into Cape Vincent and 15 red tailed hawks were killed within
the wind turbine development area. Valid studies take time, the regulations
should make sure studies are at least a year in length at the very minimum.
Naiveté:
As a community that has seen
the most well publicized and unscrupulous behavior from wind developers we must
point out the naiveté of this point made in the regulations: "Opponents
of noise and proponents of new facilities should be able to agree that they
share an interest in a robust review of noise issues to ensure adequate
protection against and mitigation of adverse impacts and to maintain the
viability of future projects." The wind developers in this community
presented fraudulent sound studies which are flawed in methodology and
conclusions.
Our organization has invested
many hours of research concerning wind turbine development issues and hope our
experience will be of benefit to the final regulations of Article X.
Respectfully submitted,
Sarah F. Boss, Chairman
Wind Power
Ethics Group, LLC
No comments:
Post a Comment