In New England, opposition is getting serious

By Veronica Burns

After prolonged negotiations, Connecticut finally has regulations in place governing industrial wind turbines. Senator Kevin Witkos applauds the effort. “Colebrook has been identified as an area where wind power can prosper,” he stated in an e-mail. “The passage of these regulations will allow the installation of wind turbines to resume in the state.” Witkos added that while the state must continue to invest in renewable energy resources, “we must always make sure that these sources are safe and that the public is protected.”

The health and safety issue is a priority for Joyce Hemingson, president of the group, FairWindCT. The grassroots organization, which opposes the proposed BNE Energy wind farm in Colebrook, has campaigned for regulations for more than three years. But Hemingson says more needs to be done. “Setbacks and noise are the two big issues,” she says, “and the new regulations do not consider them.” Experience elsewhere shows that a setback distance of 1.5 times the height of the turbine to a property line is not sufficient in residential areas. Many municipalities are indeed learning the hard way about the adverse effects of wind turbines.

Falmouth, Mass., residents initially welcomed the installation of wind turbines but have since become embroiled in litigation and protest. The town of Falmouth has recently filed a second lawsuit against its own Zoning Board of Appeals after a judge issued a temporary order that two 397-feet-tall industrial wind turbines in Falmouth must be shut off overnight Monday through Saturday and shut off all day on Sundays and three major holidays to protect the health of homeowners who live about 1,320 feet away.

After three years of litigation, a recent Superior Court decision has found in favor of wind turbine neighbors complaining about excessive noise from three nearby 1.5 megawatt GE wind turbines in Vinalhaven, Me. This particular finding goes against the Maine Department of Environmental Protection. In Connecticut, Hemingson says, “outdated state noise regulations allow turbine noise of 51 dbA at night and 61 dbA during the day at property lines. This is extreme, especially for rural towns.”

Besides noise and setback distance, another bone of contention has been decommissioning wind turbines. Many municipalities worried that they could be left with the financial burden of removal. The new regulation states that any application must include “financial assurance to ensure that sufficient funds are available for decommissioning the facility.” Among the assurances listed are a performance or surety bond, corporate guarantee, escrow and insurance.

Tom McKeon, Colebrook’s First Selectman thinks they have addressed the decommissioning issue, but adds, “Colebrook is not affected because BNE Energy was exempted from any new regulations.” Colebrook officials have met with BNE “a couple of times” to try to work out a community host agreement, but, McKeon says, “we haven’t heard from them in about eight months.”
Also still pending is the critical next step in the process: the decision of the Connecticut Supreme Court in the FairWindCT appeal, which is months away. “If I were BNE,” says McKeon, “I wouldn’t do anything until that case comes down. And until it does, Colebrook remains in limbo.”

The three Wind Colebrook South turbines proposed for Flagg Hill Road will be within 2,000 feet of 19 residences, including one in Norfolk (the Crossman residence at the lower end of Beckley Road). There are nine other residences within Norfolk’s borders that will be within a mile radius of the turbines: Whalen, Anstett, Tonan & Consolini (ancillary property), Whitford (ancillary property), Brokaw, Jasper, Holcomb, Garside, Mali and Rotolo.