The Town of Cape Vincent tells the Public Service Commission they are concerned that...

Attorneys at Law

250 South Clinton Street, Suite 502

Syracuse, New York 13202-1262

(315) 424-8944 FAX: (315) 424-8205

www.shulmanlawpc.com

May 1,2013

Acting Secretary, NYS Board of Electric Power

Generation Siting and Environment

Three Empire State Plaza

Albany, New York 12223-1350May 1,2013

Re: Case 12-F-0410 Cape Vincent Wind Power, LLC

Dear Acting-Acting-Secretary Cohen:

Two recent issues came to the attention the Town and we would appreciate an opinion

and some guidance.

Our first issue concerns intervenor funding. The Town is concerned that special interest

groups, such as Voters for Wind, may request funding for expert opinions, perhaps for the

purpose of denying or limiting funds that might otherwise go to parties that are perceived to be

critical of BP's project. We question the legitimacy of distributing BP's intervenor funds to a

group that is already affiliated and funded by BP.

For example, the following description of BP's relationship with Voters for Wind was

included in BP's initial Public Involvement Plan:

"In 2007, BP retained the services of Marion Trieste and her team of public outreach

experts to assist with planning events to educate and engage the public. As part of this

effort, BP assisted a group of local wind power supporters in the Towns of Cape Vincent

and Lyme to form a group known as Voters for Wind "

As we near completion of our requests for Pre-Application phase intervenor funds, we are

concerned there will be sufficient funds to engage all of the Town's experts. We bring this matter

to your attention at this time so that if a funding request is submitted by an affiliate of the

applicant that there will be sufficient time to examine the issue prior to the scheduled intervenor

funding conference.

Our second concern relates to a reference BP used to waive portions of the Town's zoning

law as described in their Preliminary Scoping Statement (PSS) filed on April 19, " ... the Public

Service Law general preemption of local laws should relieve CVWF of the obligation to comply

with this section." DPS in its review of BP's PSS (p.46) also found the general preemption

statement by BP to be bafiling ,"The revised PSS should clearly identify what CVWP means

when asserting that, "the Public Service Law general preemption of local laws" will relieve the

applicant of its obligations to comply with a local standard" Because the waiver of local laws is

the heart of this case, the Town requests the same clarification and identification as DPS, but the

Town would prefer see a clarification sooner rather than later.

Very truly yours,

PJC/

SHULMAN CURTIN

& GRUNDNER, P.C.

Paul J. Curtin Jr.