Western Catskill Preservation Alliance

Welcome to home page of the Western Catskill Preservation Alliance (WCPA). The WCPA was formed in the late summer of 2006 to fight what we believe is an ill-conceived industrial wind energy project which will have a devastating impact on our rural lands and wilderness. The WCPA is concentrating its efforts in the Towns of Stamford, Roxbury and Gilboa where Invenergy, a Chicago based wind energy company, has proposed to build a industrial wind farm consisting of 34 turbines, each standing 410 feet tall.

The WCPA members include working families and retirees, full-time residents and second homeowners, professionals and farmers. If you would like to join our cause please email us at wcpa06@aol.com.

Our home page provides regular updates on the status of the Industrial Wind issue. We also maintain a history of the updates so that newcomers can quickly learn about the issue.

Wind Turbine Failures

Not exactly an oil well blowout, but even “green” energy has its problems …

Click the images below to view them full size.

WCPA Update

To Friends of the WCPA,

I hope you are all well.

This update will be quick. There is no news to report. Invenergy had said that they were going to be submitting the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) to the Roxbury Planning Board in the December ‘09 time frame. Here it is in May and they still have not issued it. Also, there has been very little activity at the office in Stamford. To the best of our knowledge the Roxbury Planning has not been given a revised date for the FEIS.

We really can’t do much more until the FEIS is formally submitted to the Planning board and has gone through a review process with LaBella (the town’s engineering firm).

I will keep you all posted.

Happy Mother’s Day!

Regards,
Ron

WCPA Letter to the DEP

To Friends of the WCPA,

I hope all is well.

Attached please find a letter that we sent to the DEP. The letter requests the DEP to consider a ban on industrial wind turbines in the NYC watershed. Feel free to pass this letter along.

Thanks,
Ron Karam
President, WCPA

Click here to read the letter

Wind Turbines in the News

Ice-tossing turbines: myth or hazard?
Wind project suspended after turbine fire
Mt. Storm turbine catches fire
Locust Ridge wind turbine fire still under investigation
Summary of Wind Turbine Accident data to 31 December 2009
Cut wind turbine

Western Catskill Preservation Alliance Press Release

WESTERN CATSKILL PRESERVATION ALLIANCE
PRESS RELEASE (Available for immediate release)
January 7, 2010

WCPA Challenges Turbine Setback Requirements

The Western Catskill Preservation Alliance (WCPA) has taken official steps to request the towns of Roxbury and Stamford to increase setbacks from wind turbines to a minimum of 1300 feet. WCPA attorney, Peter Henner, has formally requested that the towns revisit the ordinances governing the placement of Industrial Wind Turbines based on setback requirements defined by Vestas, the manufacturer of the V90 turbines being proposed for the Invenergy project. Henner Letter to Roxbury - Henner Letter to Stamford

The “Safety Regulations for Operators and Technicians – V90-3.0MW Turbines” manual published by Vestas and included in the Stamford Application and Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is the safety manual for the V90 turbines being proposed for the project. The document states: “Do not stay within a radius of 400m (1300ft) from the turbine unless it is necessary.” - Vesta V90 Safety Manual

The Roxbury wind ordinance requires that a turbine be placed 1.5x the height of the turbines from a neighboring property line. The V90 turbines being proposed for the Invenergy project are 410 feet tall therefore establishing the setback to 615 feet, less than half the distance of the recommended setback as defined in the safety manual. In Stamford, the setback is 1000ft to a property line, 300 feet short of the requirement.

“This is pure and simple an environmental safety issue that needs to be addressed by the towns. As new and relevant information becomes available about industrial wind turbines the ordinances should be updated accordingly to protect its citizens” Says Ron Karam, WCPA president.

“There is also a deeper issue we are concerned about. Once Invenergy realized that the setback defined in the safety manual was greater than the setback defined in the ordinances and therefore would adversely affect the placement of the turbines, the safety manual was abruptly removed from the website that contained all of the application documents.” Says Karam, “When we asked Invenergy about it, they said that it was a confidential document and should not have been included. They also stated that the setback in the safety manual wasn’t really relevant.”

“If the towns do not change the setback requirement to property lines and turbines are placed within 1300’ of a neighboring property line, than that portion of the neighbor’s property will become un-usable or essentially condemned.” Say Karam, “Given this, we certainly hope the towns take the necessary action to revise the ordinances, adhere to the safety requirement and protect the property owners.”

Company says turbine was operating normally…

From 9wsyr.com:
Click here to read the whole story.
Fenner, Madison County (WSYR-TV) - The company that owns the wind turbine that failed a few weeks ago in the Madison County town of Fenner has determined that the wind turbine was operating normally when it collapsed.

The company said the investigation is continuing.
Continue reading here.

WCPA Update - FEIS by year end?

To Friends of the WCPA,

I hope everyone is doing well.

Well it appears Invenergy is finally getting ready to submit the Final Environmental Impact Study (FEIS) by year end (it’s been a year and a half in waiting). This was annouced at both the Stamford Village Board meeting and the Roxbury Planning Board meeting last night.

The submission of the FEIS will determine our next course of action to stop the project. My guess is that the FEIS will be woefully inadequate in addressing and mitigating the concerns from public comments.

Last night at the Roxbury meeting Eric Miller from Invenergy was present. Miller told the board that the FEIS would probably be finished by the end of the year. Eric was questioned by a WCPA member about why the 1300 ft safety setback information from the Vestas Safety Manual was removed from the public documents. His reply in front of the Roxbury Planning Board was that Vestas was very upset with Invenergy for releasing that information. Then he said Vestas just used that number (1300 ft) but it really didn’t mean anything. He went on to say he is under the turbines all the time, and there was nothing to worry about.

This is just one example of how frivolously Invenergy is dealing with important environment and safety issues: there are dozens more like this. It is hard to believe.

The WCPA will be formally requesting that both Roxbury and Stamford Town Boards to revisit their set backs requirements in light of 1300′ safety setback defined by Vestas (Vestas is the manufacturer of the proposed 410′ tall turbines).

Things should start heating up come the new year. We will keep you posted every step of the way and we will continue to need your support to stop this project.

Happy Holidays to all our friends!

Regards,
Ron Karam
President, WCPA

Wind Farm Substation Damaged by Blaze

Read more about wind farm substation is damaged by blaze.

Update - Roxbury/Stamford Wind Project Status

To Friends of the WCPA,

It’s been a while since the last update on Invenergy’s attempt to build an industry wind turbine farm in Roxbury and Stamford.  The main reason for the delay is that there hasn’t been a lot of activity to report on as we are still awaiting Invenergy response to the public’s DEIS comments.There have been rumors that the project has gone away.  Trust me, nothing is further from the truth!!  Despite what seems to be overwhelming challenges, Invenergy is still plugging away to get the project approved.  Given the capital markets, the challenge of trying to mitigate the environmental impacts, lack of landowner support and vehement all around opposition, my belief is that the executives at Invenergy in Chicago are clueless as to what is really going here in Roxbury and Stamford and their people on the ground are not providing a true picture.  Any other business would have shut this project down a long time ago.  BUT THE PROJECT IS STILL BEING FUNDED AND STILL MOVING FORWARD! Update:

As you may know the project is in New York State’s environmental quality review process (SEQRA).   Invenergy is in the process of responding to well over 100 material comments it received on its draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).  These comments were generated during and immediately following the public commenting period which occurred in the spring of 2008.  These comments include comments from the general public (you and me) but also from the state agencies who are also considered the “public” for purposes of the review.  Is is now going on 17 months since the comments were submitted with no specific end date being discussed.  The end comes with the submission of an FEIS (Final EIS) from Invenergy to the Roxbury Planning Board.  The Roxbury Planning Board will likely have another public commenting period and then will make a decision to approve or reject the FEIS.

If the Roxbury Planning Board acts “arbitrary & capricious” in approving the FEIS or doesn’t properly follow SEQRA protocol, the decision can and will be challenged through an Article 78 legal process.  The Article 78 can be initiated by anyone; an individual, an organization such as the WCPA or a state agency.

To this end, we already know that a challenge will occur if the FEIS is approved.  Several areas of concern: the bird study, blasting/wells, the lack of a detailed Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP), lack of proper setbacks in Roxbury, etc, etc…  For the bird study, the Avian Study submitted with the DEIS was woefully inadequate.  This was the position of the WCPA and many of the state agencies.  The common position was that at least a one year study at the proper location was required to study the annual migrations that occur over the ridge line.  The Roxbury Planning Board (to the best of our knowledge) agreed to allow Invenergy to conduct a 1 month study (presumably completed this past May) going against the recommendation of the experts. With regards to the impact on our wells due to the blasting that is required to put in the cement foundations for the turbines, Invenergy is still telling the public as recently as last month’s Stamford Village Board meeting that blasting is not an issue and won’t be required for most of the turbines (according to NYS the Moresville Ridge is solid bedrock).  Another issue is the lack of a detail SWPPP.  This was omitted from the DEIS and is absolutely required for a proper evaluation of the project.  These are just a few of the 100 or so issues that will be subject to your review.

Probably the most important activity we are tracking now is the pending decision by the Stamford Village Board to approve or deny Invenergy’s proposal to use the Village property at the top of Mt Utsayantha to access the ridge line and to waive the setback requirements to the property line and to the education center.  Your letters are a BIG help; please keep them coming.  We are counting on the Village to make the right decision and deny the request.  The land at the top of Mt Utsayantha was donated to the Village for purposes of building a park and giving the public access to enjoy the one-of-a-kind views; it was not intended for commercial use, especially for a project that would significantly deteriorate the scenic value.

As a last note, with regards to donations, as you know we have not asked for donations for well over a year (maybe two).  We will not ask for donations until we know for sure our next legal moves which won’t occur until the FEIS is submitted. I will let you all know if and when this happens and when donations will be required.  Thanks to those who have been sending periodic donations!

As always please don’t hesitate to call me if you have any questions or concerns.  201-414-7506.

Best Regards,
Ron Karam
President, WCPA

June 21st Update - Letter to Mayor Jacobs

To Friends of the WCPA,

I hope all are doing well.

First of all I would like to remind everyone that our website contains a chronological history of all of our communications. We also now have links to relevant video clips supporting our cause. Add our website to your favorites list www.westerncatskillpreservationalliance.org.

At the Stamford Village meeting conducted this past Tuesday (June 16), Eric Miller from Invenergy spoke to the Village Board and “decided” that the Invenergy Wind project was good for the village. He also told Mayor Jacobs that many residents support the project.

As you know, the Village owns the park at the top of Mt. Utsayantha. Invenergy desperately needs to use the road leading to the top of Mt. Utsayantha to build the access roads to Turbine # 1 and beyond. Invenergy came to the meeting and offered the Village payment for granting Invenergy permission to build a road through the park, to grant a waiver to the setbacks requirements and to use the road leading to the top of the mountain.

For some of you who may not know, recently the Fire Tower and Building have been designated an educational facility. According to the Stamford Town law, a wind tower cannot be built within 2500 ft of an educational facility. This means that without a waiver from the Village, Invenergy cannot build the first three turbines. Also, without access to the top of the mountain, Invenergy will have to find another way to the ridge line which will be quite problematic for them. This one of the key tactical challenges in our overall strategy.

They have offered the village $5000 per year for the waiver, and $2500 per year for use of Tower Road.

We are asking all of our supporters to write letters to the Village Board asking them to reject Invenergy’s offer. Please have a look at the attached letter I sent to Mayor Jacobs today explaining the WCPA’s position on this matter. The more letters we send the better.

We are entering crunch time folks, the Village’s decision is absolutely critical to our fight. We need to send as many letters to the Stamford Village Mayor and Village Board stating our opposition. Mr. Jacobs and the board are seem to be very reasonable people so I do think they will seriously consider our position on the matter.

Please address your letter to:
Mayor Mike Jacob
Stamford Village Hall
Main Street
Stamford, NY 12167
As always, thanks for your support and I hope to see you during the summer.

Thanks!
Ron Karam
President, WCPA

Please see the letter to Mayor Jacobs below:

Western Catskill
Preservation Alliance

P.O. Box 136

Stamford, NY
12167

June 21, 2009

Mr. Mike Jacobs

Mayor, Village of Stamford

Village Town Hall

Stamford, NY 12167

Subject: Invenergy
Industrial Wind Project

Dear Mike,

Congratulations on your election as Mayor of the Village of Stamford. I wish you the best of luck.

We haven’t had the pleasure of meeting. My name is Ron Karam and I am representing the Western Catskill Preservation Alliance (WCPA). I currently manage the WCPA along with directors Kenny Haas and Carol Mangan. As you may know our alliance was formed to build a coalition of support to challenge and hopefully stop Invenergy from industrializing our prestigious mountain range.

As a bit of background and status, the project is currently in the SEQRA process. Last year, Invenergy submitted a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), a key milestone in the process. Invenergy is now required to address
the many public comments it received during the public review commenting period. These comments should be addressed when Invenergy submits the Final EIS expected this year. It will then be up to the Roxbury Planning Board (lead agency) to approve or reject the FEIS. The WCPA is tracking this process to ensure that the SEQRA process is being followed and that the public comments are adequately addressed.

While there are many environmental, safety and quality of life reasons why the WCPA is against the project, one of the key reasons is to protect the Village’s unique park and education center at the summit of Mt. Utsayantha. We
view this park as a national treasure and one that must be protected. We hope the Village board agrees.

I understand that Invenergy is now offering to purchase rights from the Village to use Tower Road, to build a road through the Village property and to waive the setback requirements for the 410’ towers. While the decision to accept or reject Invenergy’s offer is entirely with the Village, we hope that you will reject this offer in favor of protecting the park. The park should not be for sale, no matter what the price, just as our National Parks are not for sale and never will be.

In considering this decision the WCPA and its supporters (many from the Village) can only ask that you consider the environmental and safety issues associated with granting Invenergy permission. The setback requirements were developed by the Town of Stamford after much research, discussion and debate. The WCPA urged for one mile setbacks which many jurisdictions with wind turbine experience are now starting to adopt. In any event, the Stamford ordinance was enacted with the current setbacks
which were established to protect the public from the environmental hazards associated with these one hundred-ton turbines.

The ordinance does allow for a landowner to waive the setback requirement. However, we ask you to consider that it is one thing for an individual landowner to grant a waiver as the impact will be limited to one person or one
family. In the case of the Village, a waiver would have a negative impact on the general public and the hundreds of people that frequent the park.

On another matter, Invenergy is seeking to use Tower Road which to the best of my knowledge is a “right-of-way” owned by many landowners along the road. According to one landowner, opposed to the project, his deed states that the “right-of-way” may only be used by landowners to access their land including the Village. The “right-of-way” may not be used for commercial use. Given this, when Invenergy asks the
Village for permission to use the road, we ask the board to consider whether it has the legal authority to grant permission to Invenergy to use the road.

Finally, Invenergy has established a Limited Liability Corporation for this project. The LLC should be a red flag for anyone doing business with them as you will have no recourse in the event the LLC fails to meet its obligation
or goes bankrupt. Invenergy, as the parent company, has done a good job in legally protecting itself from any liability of the LLC and the Stamford wind project. The LLC conveniently will never
have any material assets from which to address a liability claim.

We appreciate the decisions that lie ahead of you and the board on this matter but we believe the decision is really an easy one given the environmental and safety issues. We also believe there are many other ways to obtain funding/grants to maintain the road and the park.

I would be happy to discuss this with you and the board.

Thanks for listening!

Ron Karam

President WCPA

CC: Stamford Village
Board Members