Towns affected by energy generation projects are lobbying for more input in the Public Service Board’s permitting process, but the chair of that board says the current process works well for the state as a whole.
Karen Horn, director of the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, spoke on towns’ behalf during a joint Committee on Natural Resources and Energy meeting Wednesday.
Horn said towns have little say in projects under Section 248, the state statute guiding energy generation and transmission siting procedures.
Section 248 requires that state energy projects be approved by the quasi-judicial Public Service Board.
Horn said she is not suggesting that towns have veto power over the board’s decisions, but she does want the statute’s language changed to give towns an effective voice in the process.
Communities have become concerned over the permitting process because of the impact some energy generation projects, such as the 21-turbine wind project on Lowell Mountain, have on the surrounding landscape.
The Public Service Board’s task, as described in Section 248, is to decide whether projects are in the state’s public interest, according to Jim Volz, chair of the board.
Volz said unlike in the past, when utilities sited their own projects, in recent years, private companies came into the state to set up small to medium-sized energy generation projects, which require statewide regulation and approval.
He said the current approval procedure for these projects is good for the state as a whole.
“I think fundamentally the decision-making process that we have for the board, I think results in sound decisions that are well supported,” Volz said.
Though critics say the board’s approval process is a “black box” that lacks transparency, Volz countered that the permitting process includes public hearings, and the disclosure of public documents and written opinions outlining the board’s reasons for decisions.
“It’s very transparent, from my perspective,” Volz said. “In that sense, I think we are doing things correctly.”
Volz urged lawmakers to be cautious about making changes to the current siting procedure; the board, he said, would adopt alterations to Section 248 if they are given appropriate funding to do so.
“I’m not against making improvements to it, but I would be very careful how you go about doing that,” Volz said.
The Vermont Energy Generation Siting Policy Commission’s April report recommended several revisions to the permitting process.
One of the commission’s suggestions to improve transparency is to give the board a case manager, who would serve as a spokesperson for the board.
Volz said the only guidance a case manager or spokesperson could provide to the public would be details about the board’s procedures, not necessarily the details of confidential project cases.
The siting policy commission recommends a four-tiered procedure for approving projects that would increase the public’s involvement in energy generation projects.
The commission’s recommendations assign four separate permitting processes for installments that produce different amounts of energy. Under the recommendation, smaller projects, that generate up to 500 kilowatts, would be approved faster than larger projects, such as those with output of more than 15 megawatts.
June Tierney, general counsel for the Public Service Board, said the tiers should be delineated not only by energy output, but also by a project’s overall size, including the amount of land it covers.
Rep. Tony Klein, D-East Montpelier, who chairs the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee, said the future siting process for energy generation projects will likely be less controversial than those in the recent past.
“The scene, the stage, is changing rapidly,” he said. “All of this focus, OK, on changing a lot of things to address something that has already occurred, to change it for the future, is probably unnecessary.”
He said he does not expect to see another large-scale wind project for about 10 to 15 years.
Private landowners, whose income may depend on selling land for projects, should not have their deals overthrown by local opposition, Klein said.
