County, Palouse Wind file opposition to appeal

Gazette Editor

A 21-page brief in opposition to the court challenges filed by Roger Whitten of Oakesdale to halt the Palouse Wind turbine project was filed Monday in Whitman County Superior Court. The opposition brief was filled by Whitman County Prosecutor Denis Tracy with preparation work done by Susan Drummond, Seattle land use attorney who represents Boston-based First Wind, parent firm of Palouse wind.

Whitten’s petition asks the court to throw out the decision which granted First Wind a conditional use permit to develop a 65-turbine installation on Naff Ridge, Granite Butte and Steam Shovel Hill northwest of Oakesdale. He also asks the court to overrule the hearing officer’s dismissal of challenges to the environmental impact statement which was filed by First Wind as part of permitting process under the State Environmental Policy Act.

A hearing on the Whitten appeals has been scheduled here Sept. 12 before Judge John Strohmaier of Lincoln County. Judge Strohmaier was appointed after Whitman County Judge David Frazier recused himself from presiding at the hearing. Judge Frazier noted he was raised in the area and knows many of the people involved in the dispute.

Wenatchee attorney Andrew Kottkamp, appointed as a special hearing officer, granted the conditional use permit for the turbines and disqualified appeals of the environmental impact statement in a special hearing at Colfax May 23.

Eighteen area residents filed the appeals.

The opposition brief on behalf of Whitman County and Palouse Wind notes the conditional use permit complies with the county’s Wind Facility Siting Ordinance which went on the books before the county considered the turbine farm permit.

It notes Whitten could have preferred different provisions in the ordinance before it was passed, but once the ordinance was on the books any court challenge has to be measured on whether or not the action complies with the ordinance.

The conditional use permit approved by Kottkamp includes 164 conditions for operating the wind turbine farm in the county’s ag zone.

The brief also said the impact statements comply with basic provisions which restrict towers from being sited at least four times their height from an occupied residences and a setback of one times their height from property lines.

The report states a 50 decimal noise limit was listed in the statement which is the highest protection currently under Washington law. It adds the Environment Impact Statement complies with Department of Ecology noise measurements. The DOE noise measure is not a scale for low frequency noise which is a target of the Whitten appeal.

The brief notes the impact statement dealt with whether on not Whitten’s views on noise level have been broadly accepted by the scientific community and determined that they had not.

The brief states newer generating turbines use an upwind configuration including acoustical optimized blades which have largely eliminated low frequency pulses.

It noted the swishing sound from turbine blades is often mistaken for low frequency noise.

Whitten has also argues installation of the turbines will devalue property in the area. Market values for rural residences will drop when the area is impacted by turbine installations.

The counter brief notes state’s SEPA regulations do not require a socio-economic impact analysis.