FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Steens proposals spur debate over size, placement of energy projects

By Kate Ramsayer, Bend Bulletin

Conservation groups have asked the state to toughen the rules permitting renewable energy projects to ensure that wildlife habitat and scenic views are protected, citing concerns about three wind farm proposals near Steens Mountain.

The groups are concerned that energy development companies could sidestep stricter state regulations in favor of dealing with local counties by splitting large projects up into smaller pieces, and they use the Steens Mountain project in Harney County as an example.

But an energy company official dismissed the concerns, saying the company is trying to work with the conservation groups. And the county said the local permitting process is just as stringent as the state's.

Currently, the renewable energy projects that will produce less than 105 megawatts of power do not have to go through the state's Energy Facility Siting Council; developers can instead get the OK from the local county.

Conservation groups, including the Bend-based Oregon Natural Desert Association, are concerned that companies can simply carve up what is essentially one big project into multiple smaller projects, each producing less than 105 megawatts, to bypass the state's rules.

“I do think we could see, or we are currently seeing, developers that might bypass more stringent (state) review for a less stringent local review,” said Liz Nysson, climate change coordinator with ONDA.

“It isn't a widespread abuse, but it is an abuse,” she said.

But if projects share boundaries, financing, transmission lines, maintenance facilities and other features, and are essentially proposed by the same developer, the state should consider them to be one project, she said.

The Bend group, along with the Audubon Society of Portland and Defenders of Wildlife, sent a petition calling for that rule change to the governor, the Oregon Department of Energy and the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council.

“We're not asking for every project that's situated in close proximity to another project to go through state review,” Nysson said. “But when all the signs point to the fact that it might be one project, we think that it needs to be evaluated as one project.”

The Steens project

The organizations highlight the three wind farms proposed by Columbia Energy Partners near Steens Mountain as an example.

“In that situation, you have three projects just under 105 megawatts each, sharing boundaries, in close proximity to each other, going through individual reviews,” Nysson said.

In the Steens area, Columbia Energy Partners has received a conditional permit for the Echanis wind project from Harney County. Columbia Energy had originally proposed two other projects — the East Ridge and West Ridge wind farms — but withdrew those applications from the county after ONDA objected. Now, company officials say they are considering resubmitting the applications for state review.

Chris Crowley, the president of Columbia Energy Partners, said that although it might look like one big project, the Echanis effort was already permitted before the company had signed agreements with landowners to go forward with the other two wind farms.

And the company has offered to go through the state's Energy Facility Siting Council for the East Ridge and West Ridge projects, if ONDA will work with it, Crowley said.

“To have that just completely discounted, and be advertised as the poster child for how this needs to be fixed, is frankly very frustrating to me,” he said.

Still, Crowley said he thinks the county permitting process could make more sense for wind farm facilities.

“The county knows the country, they know the issues, and they will live with the project,” he said.

State review

The conservation groups are concerned about the impact of the projects on wildlife habitat, especially for animals that depend on the sagebrush ecosystem, like sage grouse, Nysson said.

Under a state permitting process, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will review a permit and issue recommendations, like how to make up for potential habitat damage, she said. But the counties aren't required to consult with the agency.

Sage grouse are sensitive to developments that break up their habitat, she said, and with many wind turbines in the same area, the cumulative impact of the development should be considered before a project gets approved.

The same holds true for issues like the visual impact of several groups of turbines, she said, and the possibility of the turbines striking and killing raptors.

“No industrial wind project is without impacts,” Nysson said. “You have to look at the entire project footprint and consider all the impacts that that project is going to have.”

Judge Steve Grasty, Harney County's top administrative official, said the county looked at the state's permitting process before developing its own method for reviewing wind farms.

“I think it's every bit as rigid, or more so, than the (state) process,” he said, noting that the county included 47 conditions the Echanis project has to meet. “We're not going to be run over by developers.”

And the county does benefit from having multiple smaller projects instead of one big one, Grasty said, because it receives multiple payments instead of one, which helps pay for county services.

Oregon's counties have been working to set common guidelines for permitting wind power facilities, he said, and the conservation groups' petition would change the rules mid-game.

“This equates, to me, like playing basketball, and at the halftime, the referees come in and say, ‘We're playing by different rules,'” Grasty said.

The petition now goes to the Energy Facility Siting Council's board. Board members could consider it at their next meeting, but one has not yet been scheduled.

###