Town of Hammond Comments to the Public Service Commission

The NYS Public Service Commission responds to questiones posed by the Town of Cape Vincent

 The Honorable Urban C. Hirschey
Supervisor
Town of Cape Vincent
1964 NYS Route 12E
Cape Vincent, NY 13618

RE: case 12 – F – 0410


Dear Supervisor Hirschey:

                     I have received your January 29, 2013 letter which you posed several questions
regarding the preliminary scoping procedures established pursuant to Article 10 of the public service law. Responses to your inquiries are given below.

If BP chooses to ignore a number of items on our list of potential impacts when they submit their PSS as and we object during the comment period and argue for their inclusion, can the hearing examiner compel BP to include these impacts in a revised PSS?

No. The hearing examiner does not direct the outcome of the scoping process.After the
developer has filed a preliminary scoping statement(PSS), any person,  agency, or municipality
May submit comments on the proposed scope I serving such comments on the applicant and filing a copy with the Secretary.The developer is required to prepare a summary of the material comments and its responses to those comments within 21 days after the closing of the comment period.(See 16 NYCRR 1000.5 (g). Thereafter, it is contemplated that the developer will work with interested parties to resolve any disagreements they may have about the sufficiency of the
planned scope and the studies to be included in the application. The hearing officer's role during
the PSS phase is,among other things, to distribute intervenor funds and to mediate stipulations
among the parties, where possible.(See PSL – 163(5); 16NYCRR 1000.5( i)).

Can BP be made to reviseand resubmit their PSS?if not, then what recourse would the town
 have in this case?


No. As described above, applicants are required to prepare a summary of the material comments received regarding the PSS and to provide a reply to those comments. Once an application has
then filed, any party that is not a signatory to a pre- application stipulation may raise objections at the hearing as to the methodology or scope of any study or program of studies performed.(See
PSL – 163( 5) and 16 NYCRR 1000.5 (k)).

If BP chooses not to revise and consider any suggestions during the PSS comment period ,is it
possible they could move on to the application phase without responding to the Town and the hearing examiner?


Yes. While the law requires a potential applicant to respond to comments on the PSS,it does not
require the developer to adopted the recommendations made during the preliminary scoping phase.
As noted above, parties may raise objections to the methodology or scope at the hearing on the application.

                        If you have any additional questions or concerns relating to the PS as process,
please contact Ashley Moreno, Assistant Counsel,at (  518) 473 – 8123.

                                                                              Very truly yours,



                                                                             Jeffrey C.Cohen
                                                                              Acting Secretary

Town of Cape Vincent ~ Writes to the Association of Towns of the State of New York

The resolution The Town of Cape Vincent sent to the NY Association of Towns has made it through the resolution committee. Now we need it to be circulated throughout NY for support. Please pass it to all town boards. We need as many towns as possible to recommend that the Association of Towns put it up for a full vote January 29, 2013

Association of Towns of the State of New York

150 State Street,

Albany, NY 12207

Dear Lori,

            Here is the proposed language to fit with New York State Association of Towns.  It is based on a resolution passed by the Board of Directors of Wisconsin Towns Association.  They passed it on the 21^st of January of this year.  Their decision was based on the results of a study the Wisconsin Public Service Commission asked for; (Report # 122412-1) released December 28, 2012.  I have enclosed a copy of their resolution, and the report it is based on.  The Executive Director of the Wisconsin Towns Association is Richard Stadelman.  If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact him at (715) 526-3157.

            I am sorry for the late submission but this is a fresh study that occurred over the last month.  Thank you for your consideration.

Resolution for the New York Association of Towns

TITLE: Requesting a moratorium on wind power development in New York State

WHEREAS, the New York State Legislature recently created Article 10 of the Public Service Law to establish procedures for certifying major electric generating facilities; and

WHEREAS, wind power developers are now seeking certification from the Public Service Commission to erect industrial turbines across the state; and

WHEREAS, each application must include a study of the noise impacts of the operation of any potential wind farm; and

WHEREAS, the Wisconsin Public Service Commission recently asked four experts in acoustics to investigate whether low-frequency noise generated by wind turbines was potentially causing health issues for families living near the Shirley Wind Farm in Denmark, Wisconsin.; and

WHEREAS, the experts reported on Dec. 28, 2012 that low-frequency noise was found in some homes surrounding the turbines; and

WHEREAS, the experts’ opinion was that low-frequency noise could be a “serious issue, possibly affecting the future of the industry” and that immediate, more in-depth study was needed; and

WHEREAS, the Wisconsin Association of Towns, on the basis of this report, passed a resolution calling on its Public Service Commission and its legislature to put a moratorium on all permitting and installation of industrial wind turbines until further studies could be completed and solutions found; and

WHEREAS, the goal of the New York Association of Towns is the protection of the health and safety of its residents

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the New York Association of Towns calls on Public Service Commission and the state Legislature to halt the Article 10 certification process for industrial wind turbine development until studies regarding the health impacts of low-frequency noise generated by turbines can be completed, solutions found and the state’s Article 10 rule can be modified to mitigate any adverse health impacts, if necessary

Respectfully yours,

Urban Hirschey – Town Supervisor

Brooks Bradgon – Deputy Supervisor

John Byrne – Town Council

Clifford Schneider – Town Council

Michelle Oswald – Town Council

Richard Macsherry – Planning Board Chairman

Robert S. Brown – Planning Board

Cyril Cullen – Planning Board

Paul Docteur – Planning Board

Dennis Faulknham – ZBA Chairman 

Ed Hludzenski – Zoning Board

Resolution for the New York Association of Towns

TITLE: Requesting a moratorium on wind power development in New York State

WHEREAS, the New York State Legislature recently created Article 10 of the Public Service Law to establish procedures for certifying major electric generating facilities; and

WHEREAS, wind power developers are now seeking certification from the Public Service Commission to erect industrial turbines across the state; and

WHEREAS, each application must include a study of the noise impacts of the operation of any potential wind farm; and

WHEREAS, the Wisconsin Public Service Commission recently asked four experts in acoustics to investigate whether low-frequency noise generated by wind turbines was potentially causing health issues for families living near the Shirley Wind Farm in Denmark, Wisconsin.; and

WHEREAS, the experts reported on Dec. 28, 2012 that low-frequency noise was found in some homes surrounding the turbines; and

WHEREAS, the experts’ opinion was that low-frequency noise could be a “serious issue, possibly affecting the future of the industry” and that immediate, more in-depth study was needed; and

WHEREAS, the Wisconsin Association of Towns, on the basis of this report, passed a resolution calling on its Public Service Commission and its legislature to put a moratorium on all permitting and installation of industrial wind turbines until further studies could be completed and solutions found; and

WHEREAS, the goal of the New York Association of Towns is the protection of the health and safety of its residents

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the New York Association of Towns calls on Public Service Commission and the state Legislature to halt the Article 10 certification process for industrial wind turbine development until studies regarding the health impacts of low-frequency noise generated by turbines can be completed, solutions found and the state’s Article 10 rule can be modified to mitigate any adverse health impacts, if necessary
~~~~

Link to  The letter Assemblyman Jacque wrote to the Wisconsin PSC to stop all wind projects until further studies are complete

BP’s public involvement

“Four hostile newspapers are more to be feared than a thousand bayonets.” — Napoleon Bonaparte

Part of the Article X control siting wind energy projects is the Public Involvement Program. PIP is a written plan for engaging, interacting with and informing the community about the wind proposal. In Cape Vincent, British Petroleum has written what they consider their PIP. While that PIP is weak and vague, it seems there is another more powerful public involvement program quietly afoot. BP wind leaseholders and members of Voters For Wind, a group BP claims credit for assisting to form, filed a lawsuit last summer that seeks to subdue and quiet our local blogs’ voices.

[Watertown Times]

Town of Cape Vincent sends The Public Service Commission a list of things they expect BP to include in their Scoping Statement

Entire letter including recommendations

Town of Cape Vincent Letter to the PSC 1-29-13 by pandorasboxofrocks

Thousand Islands Land Trust Comments To the Public Service Commission Concerning ~ The Cape Vincent Wind Farm

January 18, 2013

Hon. Jaclyn A. Brilling
Secretary to the Commission
New York State Public Service Commission
Three Empire State Plaza
Albany, New York  12223

Dear Secretary Brilling,

From Lake Ontario to Morristown, the Thousand Islands region has been targeted as a prime location for industrial wind development. With active projects in the towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme, as well as Clayton, and  towers in the Town of Hammond, the entire region is being considered for such development.

As a non-profit land trust with preserves and conservation easements in all of the towns stretching from Cape Vincent to Hammond, we have a vested interest in conserving the environmental integrity of our Regional ecosystem. Working to conserve the natural beauty, wildlife habitats, and recreational opportunities of the Thousand Islands, TILT has conserved over 8,000 acres of habitat for migratory waterfowl, grassland restoration for nesting songbirds, and multiple outreach efforts to provide local communities with information as well as hands on expertise required to continue to protect and conserve the Region's unique natural resources.

Lacking a regional comprehensive plan regarding the impact of multiple industrial wind projects in the Thousand Islands region, we respectfully request that the Article X Siting Board pay close attention to the work conducted by our local municipalities.  The towns, including smaller adjacent communities currently involved with industrial wind proposals, have consistently said that, through the development of local comprehensive plans, and more importantly, the elections and appointments of local boards, they seek to protect the health, safety, and welfare of their communities.

New York State has wisely chosen to be a Home Rule state, meaning that municipalities have been given the right to determine local land use decisions for their communities. We respectfully request that the Article X Siting Board respect the wishes and concerns of the electorate in the Thousand Islands region.

Sincerely,


Jake R. Tibbles
Executive Director
Thousand Islands Land Trust
PO Box 238
Clayton, NY  13624

The Public Service Commission responds to Lyme ~ Concerning the Ad hoc public Siting Board Members

Public Service Commission responds to the Town of Cape Vincent's concerns over BP's ethical propriety

NYS BOARD ON ELECTRIC GENERATION SITING
AND THE ENVIRONMENT
STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICE

Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223-1350
www.dps.ny.gov/sitingboard

GARRY A. BROWN
Chair                                                                                                                
JEFFREY C. COHEN
Acting Secretary
KENNETH ADAMS
JOSEPH MARTENS
FRANCIS J. MURRAY, JR.
NIRAV SHAH, M.D.
Members

January 10, 2012
The Honorable Urban C. Hirschey
Supervisor

Town of Cape Vincent
1964 NYS Route 12E
Cape Vincent, NY 13618

Re:Case l 2-F-0410

Dear Supervisor Hirschey:

I have received your December 20, 2012 letter in which you again raise concerns regarding donations that you assert were provided by Cape Vincent Wind, a potential applicant for an Article 10 certificate, to local community organizations.

You state in your letter that you are concerned about the ethical propriety of a potential applicant "giving money to stakeholders prior to the time these stakeholders will be asked what they think" of the proposed project. Further, you suggest that a program of donation's should be included in an applicant's Public Information Plan ("PIP").

As a general matter, the Siting Board does not review an applicant's policies regarding donations to community service groups. However, several state laws do restrict gifts to public officials and employees. If you believe that an applicant has made an improper donation to such an individual, then a referral of the matter to the Joint Commission on Public Ethics may be warranted.

The Siting Board would make a referral if it has evidence that a violation of the State's ethics laws has occurred; however, the information provided in your letters does not suggest there is a basis for such an action here. You are free to make a referral directly to the Joint Commission on behalf of the Town at any time.

A project developer is free to engage in community-focused activities not listed or identified in a PIP unless those activities have the effect of undermining Article 10's public participation goals by either misinforming the public about the project or hindering interested parties from participating in the Article 10 process. A donation to a community group does not, by itself, demonstrate that those goals have been or will be compromised.

Thank you for your letter. Please do not hesitate to contact the Siting Board if you have any other concerns in the future.

Very truly yours;

Jeffery C. Cohen
Acting Secretary

A letter to the Public Service Commission... Where are the new studies ?

I would like to point out that in addition to BP refusing to answer many of the reasonable and fair questions from our local representatives, all of the noise, environmental impact, and visual impairment studies previously conducted by both BP and formerly Acconia were conducted for windmills much smaller than the currently proposed 499 foot towers. The change in size is a significant change to the project and will have a much more harmful affect on the residents of our community.
 Where are the new studies to show the noise reach, visual impairment, damage to wildlife migration and danger of ice throw caused by these larger monstrosities that will rival the tallest buildings in upstate New York?

Town of Lyme submitts additional information to the Public Service Commission Re; BP's Cape Vincent Wind Farm

Honorable Jaclyn A. Brilling                                                                                
Secretary, NYS Board of Electric Generation Siting and the Environment                   
3 Empire State Plaza                                                                                           
Albany, New York 12223-1350

Regarding:      12-F-041 0 Cape Vincent Wind Power

Dear Secretary Brilling:

Please do not override our carefully researched and well thought out Law that will protect the residents of our community. BP has made no progress in engaging in a dialog with our Town. Information has not been forthcoming on many of the aspects of this project that concern our Town. A project of this size will industrialize (the words of a wind developer) our rural community, devalue our properties, and create a divide in our Town. This has not only been addressed by this process; it has exacerbated it. Although the transmission line will divide our entire Town and Lyme will be surrounded by industrial

turbines; there has been little attempt to engage with public officials or our residents. We also suspect that the initial proposal of turbines in Cape Vincent, will soon give way to Phase 2, and those leaseholders in the Town of Lyme will also get turbines on their property. The tactic of divide and conquer is one the wind developer uses freely. The Town of Lyme will have industrial wind turbines located just off their boundaries which in turn will impact property values.

Although initially, the idea of green, clean and free energy from industrial wind turbines was acceptable, if not agreeable to most of the residents of Lyme, over the past 6 or 7 years there has been a change of attitude. This was the partially the result of the wind developers own actions, as rumors of the wind development arrived long before there was any formal contact with the Town of Lyme. There also seemed to be collusion among the developers, as the area seemed to have been divided among the various companies before anyone was informed. Secret leases were signed. There was a division in our

small community over the money that was promised. Reports of free electricity, no taxes, or promises of new fire trucks or other goodies were misleading and caused a rift between various groups. There was a deliberate effort on the part of the developers to divide waterfront and year round residents. Even now in various comments to the PSC there is often a statement, "I am a long term resident," although many of the summer cottages have been in the same family for generations, and the owners have winterized

and moved into their beloved family home year round. As we all know, the promise of money is a powerful lure. It makes me wonder how many of the vocal proponents of this project are solely concerned with the environment, or have a cash stake in the project.

We have a real dilemma in the Town of Lyme. How do we balance the needs of all our residents? Those who value the rural nature, quiet beauty, the wildlife, including bald eagles, osprey, owls and bats; the beauty of the stars at night, with those who would impose the noise, view and blinking lights of industrial wind turbines on the entire community. Towers of this size cannot be mitigated in our flat landscape, as admitted by the developers, so they offered money,. The Town commissioned two groups to research the problem and weigh the benefits with the negatives. The groups were clear in their results; the negatives outweighed the positives. Guided by these documents, as well as several different public surveys and hearings, with the assistance of the Jefferson County Land Use Planning Department, the Town of Lyme passed a Zoning Law to protect the health and welfare of its citizens.

Now BP and our own State are ignoring the Town of Lyme, our Comprehensive Plan and our Zoning Law. This is not new, as Lyme has been marginalized in the entire process. BP is behaving like a poor student as they are doing the minimum to get by and check off the various requirements of the process. Richard Chandler of BP repeatedly stated in the first meeting that they would not come where they are not wanted. After each member of Cape Vincent and Lyme's Town and Planning Boards questioned him, it was made very clear that BP did not, in fact, have the support of the community, however he stubbornly insisted that he did.

Perhaps you don't care, perhaps you and the other officials on the siting board are simply doing as BP is, the minimum that is required by law, checking off a box in the steps of a process that ignores the wishes of the residents of a small community. The wishes of people, just like you; with homes and families that live in a place they love. People that have worked tirelessly, for years, to protect their community and neighbors. People that would like to put this unhappy period of discord behind us and return to working together, in our fire departments, our school, our community groups, and our Town and Village to improve the quality of life for all of our residents.

Sincerely,

Town of Lyme, Town Board

Supervisor Scott Aubertine

Councilman Donald R. Bourquin

Councilwoman Anne Harris

Councilman Daniel Villa

Councilman David Henderson