MEETING SUMMARY

OCTOBER 30, 2007

WIND POWER TASK FORCE MEETING

I.  Introductory Matters

           

Meeting focus.  Chair Alec Giffen welcomed those in attendance and opened the meeting by outlining its informational goals and focus (see meeting agenda).

 

Community wind.  Representative Fitts reported that the Community Wind Subcommittee met and discussed a range of subjects including the possibility of developing a model ordinance for municipalities and exploring ways of providing assistance to communities in their efforts to determine the feasibility of community scale projects.  The Subcommittee will meet again on November 9th.  

 

II.  Presentation by Robert Grace

 

Robert Grace, Sustainable Energy Advantage, presented an analysis of how much wind power will be needed to satisfy New England RPS policies and regional greenhouse gas reduction goals; and realistic goals for Maine for installed wind by 2015 and 2020.  The analysis was funded by the Natural Resources Council of Maine, the Conservation Law Foundation, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Environmental Defense.  A summary of Mr. Grace's analysis is found at the Task Force's website - http://www.maine.gov/windpower (follow "Meeting Materials" link) 

 

Task Force members were invited to submit questions and proposed alternative assumptions to Mr. Grace through Pete Didisheim.  Within budget and time constraints, Mr. Grace will address these questions and apply the study methodology to alternative assumptions. 

 

III. Discussion of Issues and Options

 

Todd Burrows reviewed a draft that sets out issues identified by the Task Force and presents options to address them.  This "Issues and Options" paper is found at the Task Force's website - http://www.maine.gov/windpower (follow "Meeting Materials" link)          

 

In response to the question of whether issues and options were missing from the draft, Task Force members identified the following additional subjects:

 

• Development of more complete state-wide information about natural resources:  Possible resources for this effort include:

            a).  Applicants' fees used to fund state efforts

            b)  Aggregation of information from applicant studies into a state database

           

It was noted that, at this time, such a state database would not replace site-specific studies.

 

• Potential of pooling resources for power distribution lines

 

• For off-shore projects, examination of state leasing options

 

• Options for maximizing public benefit to Maine

 

The Task Force chose to focus its discussion on Part B of the issues and options paper (Decision-making body and process). 

 

Task Force members identified the following general views and concerns:

 

• Decision-makers should have a strong understanding of land use issues.

 

• Expertise within existing agencies should be built upon.

 

• The decision making framework should provide the appropriate balance between environmental and energy expertise, and combine the policies seamlessly.  There is now an imbalance because the current decision making framework does not provide expertise in energy policy.  Assigning decision-making to the PUC could create an imbalance the other way, such that environmental and land use expertise and policy would not be given appropriate weight.

 

• The process must have credibility to the public.  There may be concern over decisions by Governor's appointees.

 

• The proposal should not be so complicated and difficult to understand that it will fail.

 

• The various agencies have different cultures and philosophies that must be carefully considered.

 

• Hearings must be manageable.

 

• The process must be supported by adequate resources.

 

• The proposed solution must fix the identified problems. 

 

Related Next Steps: 

 

The Task Force asked staff to develop a paper that compares a "truing up" approach with a straw proposal for a siting board, and includes discussion of how well each addresses issues identified, as well as potential unintended consequences.  The Task Force also suggested that the analysis consider a phased-in approach.

 

The Task Force identified the following elements for a straw proposal for this analysis:

 

• Interagency Board  (Appellate Board):

 

BEP Chair 

LURC Chair 

PUC Chair  

DOC Commissioner 

DEP Commissioner

DMR Commissioner (for off-shore proposals)

Environmental NGO Representative

Electrical Generator Representative

 

• Staff support from: SPO, IFW/DMR, DOC, LURC, PUC, DEP, DECD

 

• Decision-making Concept:  Certification from appropriate agencies concerning:

 

1.  Compliance with environmental siting standards at the specific site

2.  Compliance with land use planning requirements

3.  Consistency with energy policy (needed and consistent)

 

The Task Force also suggested consideration of an optional process - available if there is payment of a mitigation fee; and provision for consideration of benefits to Maine rate payers.

 

The Task Force also discussed the following aspects of Part A of the issues and options paper (Standards of Approval):

 

Issue A-1 (Air Emissions Benefits):

 

The Task Force reached tentative agreement that air emissions benefits should be considered in "undue adverse impact" and comparable tests under approval authorities.

 

Issue A-2 (LURC)

 

The Task Force discussed the concept that LURC's comprehensive land use plan (CLUP) and Chapter 10 rules (land use districts and standards) should be amended to provide for wind power as a permissible use in some or all General Management zones, and in some areas that are now zoned as P-MA.  This rezoning would be based on available information concerning natural resources.  A Task Force member suggested that LURC should zone some areas as being unavailable for wind projects, and where a rezoning application would not be entertained.

The Task Force discussed the concept that if rezoning is required, criteria for wind projects should be changed to require that applicants address standards concerning environmental impact, but should not required to address the following standards in as provided in LURC's current rules for rezoning to planned development district:

 

·        Substantially equivalent protection

           

·        Best available site

 

·        Demonstrated need

 

·        Consistent with CLUP

 

The Task Force also discussed whether mitigation might be required for siting in certain high mountain areas.  A Task Force member suggested that zones could be designated by the Legislature.

 

The Task Force will return to discussion of all these issues.

 

Issue A-3:  Develop more wind-specific standards

 

The Task Force noted that is likely to recommend that the appropriate agencies develop consistent and, where appropriate, more specific standards on the pertinent topics, rather than having the Task Force address the substance of such standards.

 

Issue A-4:   Develop detailed guidance

 

Maine Audubon distributed proposed guidance to applicants concerning wildlife issues.   It was explained that the proposed guidance is a Maine Audubon work product that reflects the input of a diverse range of stakeholders, including other environmental organizations, wind power developers, and state agency representatives.   The proposed guidance was presented as an example of the type of detailed guidance that could be developed concerning a range of issues, and for the content of the guidance concerning wildlife issues.   

 

Issue A-5:  Mitigation

 

The Task Force discussed this issue, and will return to discuss it further at subsequent meetings.

 

Issue A-6:   Decommissioning

 

The Task Force reached tentative agreement that this standard should be included.

 

Issue A-7:   Maine municipalities

 

The Task Force will discuss the issues raised in future meetings.