Board doesn't want to be rushed on wind project

MONTEREY —Highland supervisors Tuesday decided to make sure they are included in Highland New Wind Development’s meetings with state and federal agencies.

HNWD, which proposes Virginia’s first industrial wind energy project here in Highland, is trying to meet all the conditions attached to both its county permit and the state permit.

According to supervisor David Blanchard, the county’s conditional use permit indicates supervisors have a right to be involved as HNWD works with agencies to meet requirements.

“My main concern is that we are into the second year on the conditional use permit, and as we all know, months seem to go by, and here another month goes by, and we are not hearing from them (HNWD) and aren’t being presented with a site plan,” Blanchard said. “I have a concern that all of a sudden it is going to sneak up on us, and they may drop this pile of material but we may not have time to review it all before the conditional use permit runs out.”

The county’s conditional use permit resolution states the developer must receive “all required state and federal approvals and reviews … (and) in connection with obtaining required federal and state regulatory approvals, (HNWD) shall file with the county administrator, prior to or at the time of initial filing, copies of any environmental impact statement or environmental assessment filed with any federal or state agency in order to allow the county the opportunity to comment or otherwise participate in the applicable regulatory review or proceeding.”

Blanchard made a motion for HNWD to invite or include the board of supervisors to its meetings with state and federal agencies, pursuant to the conditional use permit. The motion was approved unanimously.

HNWD’s monthly update to the board was canceled in September and again this month. County administrator Roberta Lambert explained that HNWD owner Henry T. “Mac” McBride told her he was unable to attend because he was out of town. HNWD’s attorney, John Flora, could not be present because his son had been hospitalized.

“I didn’t know if it would be good for us to put in sort of a timeline, or a date that we need to have this material in, to provide us enough time to review so we are not hurried,” Blanchard said.

Supervisor Jerry Rexrode said HNWD previously submitted a partial site plan, but Blanchard said a finalized site plan is necessary for further evaluation.

“I realize it is probably more trying times for them (HNWD) as far as the economy is going, and looking for investors, and it all hinges on the site plan; and it is not they have only had two years to work on this project — it has been an ongoing project,” Blanchard said.

Rexrode said HNWD has done site testing and it shouldn’t take more than 30 days to complete. “They usually do these things in stages,” he said.

Blanchard said HNWD is scheduled to meet with the Department of Historic Resources and the board should be included. “I think it would be nice if the board were extended an invitation to that meeting,” Blanchard said.

DHR told The Recorder in September it planned to meet with the developer to resolve issues surrounding DHR’s request for a site plan, view shed studies, and architectural and archaeological surveys — information HNWD argued wasn’t necessary, and was too costly to provide. The meeting is scheduled for Oct. 14 next week, and Blanchard says supervisors should attend.

Of particular concern to DHR is the wind project’s impact on Camp Allegheny, a well-preserved and important Civil War battlefield and encampment located less than a mile from the wind energy utility site.

“That is part of their permitting process,” Rexrode said, referring to HNWD’s need to negotiate with state agencies and their requests. “That is something they have to deal with. We can be abreast of it. It is like I said: any one of those permits, if he (McBride) doesn’t get it, I’m not sure he can proceed.”

Under stipulations in the conditional use permit, the county is allowed to participate in the applicable regulatory review or proceedings, Blanchard said.

“You are interpreting that as, the board should be included in every one of the state meetings?” county attorney Melissa Dowd. “If that is the way you want to proceed, go ahead and make a motion so that Roberta can go figure out the point person is with the (State Corporation Commission) at this point and make sure that that you guys are invited to each of these meetings.”

Blanchard made the motion, which was approved by the board.

Supervisor Robin Sullenberger wanted to know if such meetings would be open to the public. “With all those public agencies, they are all open to the public anyway, any meeting that they have with them, right?” he asked.

“It depends, is the answer,” said Dowd, “because some of the hearings dealing with the economic pieces of this project were not open to the public at all, because they were proprietary, so I can’t say all of them are, but most of them, probably.”

The Recorder contacted DHR last week to ask whether a newspaper representative could attend, but the request was denied.

If supervisors attend the meeting, however, it will be open to the public.

Blanchard also insisted the correct date HNWD’s conditional use permit expires should be determined, and the company notified, so there would be no question about the deadlines involved.

“The conditional use permit was issued in July 2005, and then it was extended a day for every day it was litigation,” Lambert explained.

“It seems to me,” said Dowd, “it is a year from September, so next September I think it expires,” Dowd said.

The county permit was legally challenged from the time it was issued until the Virginia Supreme Court ruled in favor of the county’s permit decision in September 2007, just more than a year ago. The permit carries a two-year deadline for HNWD to get its project under construction, with extensions allowed for the time it was legally tied up in court.

“Now do you count … they asked the Supreme Court for a rehearing; the Supreme Court didn’t rule on that until November,” Lambert asked.

“I think we need to find that date out,” Blanchard said. “We need to nail down what that time is. It is good for us and good for them to know also.”

“They can do that, or ask for an extension, or one of the two. They can do whatever they wish. It is going to be up to them; the ball is in their court now, and they know that,” Rexrode added.

By M.K. Luther
Staff Writer

The Recorder ^[1]

9 October 2008

URLs in this post:

[1] The Recorder: http://www.therecorderonline.com/news/2008/1009/news/008.html

This article is provided as a service of National Wind Watch, Inc.
http://www.wind-watch.org/news/
The use of copyrighted material is protected by Fair Use.