Articles filed under Legal
EDP Renewables Canada Inc. is the company responsible for building the wind farms and according to a release from the company the decision comes as a surprise and the company is assessing all avenues of legal action.
The county moved to kill a wind farm project years after agreeing to support it by “fast-tracking” a zoning ordinance and changing the rules for building permits and tax incentives, the project’s developers claim in a federal lawsuit.
On Friday, Mr Justice Simons said the developer was precluded by law from re-agitating the argument that the as built turbines are authorised by a 2011 planning permission. The developer had a full opportunity to make its case before the board and it did not challenge the decision they were not exempt under Section 5 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, he said. The developer could not, therefore, reopen the board’s findings in the High Court proceedings.
Critics of the rule change worry that granting older projects the credits -- certificates known as CELs -- will reduce their value and undermine clean energy investment. While the appeals court decision technically only guarantees the value of the credits for the company that requested the initial injunction, Zuma Energia subsidiary Santa Maria 1, lower courts are likely to follow suit.
The Supreme Court has upheld a ruling that a district council acted unlawfully when, in granting planning permission for a wind turbine, it took into account a proposed donation to a local community fund. ..."they were proffered as a general inducement to the Council to grant planning permission and constituted a method of seeking to buy the permission sought, in breach of the principle that planning permission cannot be bought or sold."
Keep the North Shore Country announced it gave a 40-day notice to the wind farm, Na Pua Makani, and its owner, the AES Corp. The group alleges the project failed to obtain an environmental review after it added five additional parcels of land to its plans. Those parcels were not part of the project’s 2016 environmental impact statement, the group said in a news release.
The petition claims that the Wheatland Township Planning Commission’s vote on Ordinance 16.25 took place after the meeting had been adjourned, in violation of Michigan’s Open Meetings Act. It also alleges a conflict of interest among several Board members, who did not recuse themselves during a later, July 12, 2018 vote to adopt the ordinance.
The wind farm was regarded as one of the largest in the EU when a landslide occurred during its construction in October 2003 by an ESB subsidiary, Hibernian Wind Power. At the time, large areas of forest and peat up to a depth of 5.5 metres on the top of the Cashlaundrumlahan mountain had been removed, causing the 2km-long “environmentally devastating” slide. Fish were killed and waterways polluted when half a million tonnes of peat and debris was displaced.
The lawsuit is the second one filed over the project. In July, a Massachusetts woman who owns property near the proposed wind farm filed suit against the county and EDF Renewables over the granting of right of way for the company to run underground electrical cables on her land. Saline County residents also have alleged a number of improprieties in the extension of the conditional use permit, including open-meetings violations and conflicts of interest.
According to court documents, the defendants “have never submitted a valid application for a conditional use permit to construct and operate a wind energy project in Saline County.” Plaintiffs also allege the CUPs that were filed on behalf of the wind project are invalid, as development was supposed to be completed two years following the Board of Commissioners’ approval in 2016.
Chief Justice David Maraga has appointed a new three-judge bench to hear a land case between Lake Turkana Wind Power Ltd and Marsabit residents after the previous judges recused themselves. ...The residents say they cannot access the expansive land for grazing, and want nullification of the title deed issued to the wind power company which seeks to inject 310mw into the national grid.
Pending appeal, a decision handed down in state Supreme Court Monday could spell the beginning of the end of the proposed $775 million Alle-Catt Wind Farm. State Supreme Court Judge Terrence Parker ruled the Freedom Town Board acted illegally in approving its new wind law at the urging of Invenergy, the developer of the proposed 340-megawatt wind farm spread across five towns.
“Today is not the end. We’re still going to be fighting,” said Kamalani Keliikuli, vice president of Ku Kiai Kahuku. “We just don’t want the turbines, and we want them to listen to us. We’re in it for the fight.” The arrests started Thursday night in Kalaeloa, where hundreds gathered to try to stop the equipment from leaving a base yard for the North Shore.
The Intermediate Court of Appeals is reviewing whether a key component of the windmill project’s environmental review is adequate. The challenge by Keep the North Shore Country is likely to carry on in court well into next year. “Should we prevail then these guys might not be able to operate,” said Sen. Gil Riviere, who represents the area at the legislature and is part of the Keep the North Shore Country group.
To date, the county has spent $22,725 on lawyers for work related to the Expedition Wind project since National Renewable Solutions purchased the project from an earlier developer. The county spent $2,973 on legal expenses with the earlier developer. County clerk Tina Spencer said Expedition has reimbursed the county $16,600 of those expenses.
Final ruling on the construction of 17 turbines on Dan's Mountain expected Oct. 16
Before his downfall, Nicastri operated as many as 43 wind and solar energy companies and had 98 properties. At the time of his arrest and asset seizure, in 2013, the BBC quoted the head of the Palermo-based anti-mafia agency, Arturo de Felice, as saying "This [wind energy] is a sector in which money can easily be laundered."
The suit was filed Tuesday and names EDP Renewables, Arkwright Summit Wind Farm LLC, Horizon Wind Energy LLC, Tetra Tec EC Inc., Tetra Tech ES Inc., Tetra Tech Construction Inc., URS Corp., West Inc. Fisher Associates P.E., L.S., L.A. of New York, P.C., Fisher Associates, P.E., L.S., L.A., D.P.C., White Construction of Indiana LLC and any other corporations who may be liable to the plaintiffs. No court date has been set yet, though an answer by the companies is due in either 20 or 30 days depending on how the companies are served paperwork.
Commissioner’s ‘apparent collaboration’ with wind farm opponents an issue in lawsuit
The other contention is that the project developer failed to acquire control of the state-owned site for the wind farm within a PUC deadline. Collins said the developer missed a 120-day deadline because it didn't receive a permit for incidental Hawaiian hoary bat deaths until six months after the PUC approval. "You don't have an incidental take permit, you don't have site control, " he said.