NaturEner Wild Rose 1 Energy Inc.

Transcription

1 Decision Amendment to Wild Rose 1 Wind Power Plant September 13, 2013

2 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision : Amendment to Wild Rose 1 Wind Power Plant Application No Proceeding ID No September 13, 2013 Published by The Alberta Utilities Commission Fifth Avenue Place, Fourth Floor, 425 First Street S.W. Calgary, Alberta T2P 3L8 Telephone: Fax: Website:

3 The Alberta Utilities Commission Calgary, Alberta Decision Application No Amendment to Wild Rose 1 Wind Power Plant Proceeding ID No Introduction 1. NaturEner Energy Canada Inc., pursuant to Approval No. U , 1 has approval from the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC or the Commission) to construct and operate the Wild Rose 1 wind power plant in Cypress County. NaturEner Energy Canada Inc., pursuant to Permit and Licence No. U , 2 has approval from the Commission to construct and operate the Wild Rose 1 substation. 2. NaturEner Energy Canada Inc., by Application No (the application), registered on June 18, 2013, filed a letter of enquiry with the AUC under Section 11 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Regulation to alter the Wild Rose 1 wind power plant. NaturEner Energy Canada Inc. also requested a one-year extension from December 31, 2014, to December 31, 2015, to complete the power plant. 3. On July 8, 2013, the Commission issued information requests to NaturEner Energy Canada Inc. On July 16, 2013, NaturEner Energy Canada Inc. provided responses to the information requests. 4. On July 23, 2013, the Commission issued a notice of application with a deadline for submissions of August 15, 2013, for objections, concerns or support for the application. The notice was sent to all occupants, residents and landowners within 2,000 metres of the power plant project area as well as to industry stakeholders. Four submissions were received by the August 15, 2013 submission deadline. 5. On August 30, 2013, NaturEner Energy Canada Inc. requested an extension from December 31, 2014, to December 31, 2015, for the construction of the substation. NaturEner Energy Canada Inc. further requested that the amended approvals be issued to (NaturEner), which is the Wild Rose 1 project entity. 2 Discussion 6. The Wild Rose 1 wind power plant was approved in AUC Decision and Approval No. U , and will consist of 136 wind turbines; each rated at 1.5 megawatts (MW), with a total generating capacity of 204 MW. The location of the power plant is in Cypress County, approximately 45 kilometres southeast of the city of Medicine Hat, Alberta Approval No. U , Application No , Proceeding ID No. 268, October 19, Permit and Licence No. U , Application No , Proceeding ID No. 268, October 19, Decision : NaturEner Energy Canada Inc. - Wild Rose 1 Wind Power Plant, Application No , Proceeding ID No. 268, October 19, AUC Decision (September 13, 2013) 1

4 The turbines will be installed at the coordinates specified in Application No and at the following land locations: sections 17, 18, 19, 30, 31, 32 and 33, Township 9, Range 1, west of the Fourth Meridian sections 13, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 36, Township 9, Range 2, west of the Fourth Meridian sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 21, Township 10, Range 1, west of the Fourth Meridian sections 1, 2, 11, 12 and 13, Township 10, Range 2, west of the Fourth Meridian 7. The power plant also consists of a 34.5-kilovolt gathering system for collecting the electric energy generated by each turbine and transmitting that electric energy to the Wild Rose 1 substation, where the electric energy generated by the power plant will be delivered to the Alberta Interconnected Electric System. 8. The proposed alteration to the approved wind power plant as set out in Application No consists of a change of wind turbine model, from the approved Acciona AW MW model to the Alstom ECO MW model. NaturEner stated that the Acciona turbines, approved under Approval No. U , are no longer available. Accordingly, since constructing the power plant with Acciona turbines is not possible, NaturEner had to acquire different turbines for the Wild Rose 1 power plant. 9. NaturEner stated that approval of the Alstom turbines for the project would result in a reduction in the number of turbines from 136 to 70, a reduction in turbines located on native pasture from 43 to 20, a reduction in the project area from 75 quarter sections to 56 quarter sections and a reduction in the noise levels at previously modelled receptors. 10. NaturEner stated that the proposed change in turbine would increase the projected annual energy production for the power plant and would increase the nameplate rated capacity from 204 MW to 210 MW. 11. The proposed turbine change would increase the rotor diameter from 77 metres to metres and would increase the hub height from 80 metres to 90 metres. 12. NaturEner requested amendments to five of the 136 locations previously approved by the Commission. The five turbine location changes are between 90 and 210 metres from the previous turbine locations approved by the Commission. NaturEner submitted that due to the reduction in the number of turbines, 66 of the 136 approved turbine locations would no longer be required. 13. The proposed amended turbines would be installed at the following land locations: sections 17, 18, 19, 30, 31 and 32, Township 9, Range 1, west of the Fourth Meridian sections 13, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 36, Township 9, Range 2, west of the Fourth Meridian sections 5, 7, 17, 18 and 19, Township 10, Range 1, west of the Fourth Meridian sections 1, 2, 11, 12 and 13, Township 10, Range 2, west of the Fourth Meridian 2 AUC Decision (September 13, 2013)

5 14. NaturEner contracted Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) to evaluate the potential environmental effects due to the proposed turbine changes. Golder concluded that the potential adverse environmental effects predicted for the project are expected to be less due to the lower number of turbines required. 15. On May 30, 2013, NaturEner submitted a request for an updated clearance letter from Alberta Culture which was expected to be received by August NaturEner submitted a noise impact assessment for the proposed amendment which concluded that the predicted sound level produced by the power plant, combined with ambient sound levels, is lower than the permissible sound level of 40 dba at all noise receptors in the area. The noise impact assessment predicted a reduction of the noise level at some of the receptors in the project area. 17. NaturEner conducted a participant involvement program that included all stakeholders who were previously included in the participant involvement program for the project. The participant involvement program included the mailing of the project update notification information package on March 26, The package included a cover letter explaining the change in turbines and included the proposed amended layout. NaturEner also met with all landowners and residents within 800 metres of the power plant boundary. 18. NaturEner stated that three people expressed concerns regarding the proposed change and follow up consultation was conducted with these landowners. 19. NaturEner stated that all relevant government and non-government organizations, and agencies previously consulted with were again consulted regarding the proposed amendment. Correspondence of support or non-objection was received from Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development, the Fish and Wildlife Division (of Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development), the Alberta Electric System Operator, Cypress County, the Economic Development Alliance of Southeast Alberta, Telus, Forty Mile Gas Co-op Ltd., FortisAlberta Inc. and Elkwater Water Co-op Ltd. 20. Four submissions were received in response to the notice of application. Statements of intent to participate were received from Paul and Twyla von Huene, Nature Alberta (Federation of Alberta Naturalists), Henry Binder and Clark Walker. 21. On August 28, 2013, the Commission determined that that none of the four parties who filed a statement of intention to participate have standing in the proceeding. 22. Paul and Twyla von Huene, Henry Binder and Clark Walker all own property at least 2,000 metres from the boundary of the project. The Commission stated the fact that the properties are at some distance from the wind project has a direct bearing on whether there is a direct and adverse impact on them. The Commission found that there would be no direct and adverse impact. AUC Decision (September 13, 2013) 3

6 23. The Commission found that the Nature Alberta (Federation of Alberta Naturalists) did not demonstrate that it has a legal right or interest, one which is known to law, with respect to the project area. 24. Accordingly, the Commission determined that it would not hold a hearing for the proceeding as the Commission determined that there are no parties that filed submissions whose rights may be directly and adversely affected by its decision. 3 Findings 25. The Commission considered the application pursuant to sections 11 and 12 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Regulation, AR 409/83, which provide in part: 11 Unless the Commission directs otherwise, if a person proposes to make minor alterations to a power plant, transmission line or electric distribution system other than minor alterations to which section 18.2 applies, the person may apply for an approval or permit or an amendment to an approval or permit referred to in section 11, 14 or 25 of the Act, as the case may be, by submitting a Letter of Enquiry to the Commission in accordance with AUC Rule 007, Rules Respecting Applications for Power Plants, Substations, Transmission Lines, and Industrial System Designations as published by the Commission and amended from time to time. 12 A letter of enquiry shall contain information respecting the following, where applicable: (a) the need for the proposed work; (b) the nature and extent of the proposed work; (c) the land affected by the proposed work, and its ownership; (d) the timing of the proposed work; (e) any environmental impact that may result from the proposed work. 26. In accordance with the requirements of Section 12 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Regulation, NaturEner has provided information respecting the need, nature, extent, land affected, land ownership and the timing of the work. NaturEner also stated that no adverse additional environmental impacts would be caused by the proposed alterations to the project. 27. Based upon the information provided, NaturEner demonstrated that the proposal is of a minor nature, no other person is directly and adversely affected by the proposal, and no adverse environmental impact will be caused by the proposed alterations, thereby meeting the requirements of Section 11 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Regulation. 28. The Commission finds that NaturEner conducted a satisfactory participant involvement program for the application. 29. The Commission has reviewed the application and has determined that the technical, siting, environmental and noise aspects of the power plant alteration have been met. 4 AUC Decision (September 13, 2013)

7 30. The Commission approves the request for an extension of the construction of the power plant and substation from December 31, 2014, to December 31, In Decision , the Commission directed, as a condition of its approval, that NaturEner conduct a post-construction monitoring program in accordance with the recommendations of Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development, as specifically described in the Wind Energy Referral Report. The Commission included in its direction the commitments made by NaturEner as noted in the Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Wind Energy Referral Report. 32. The Commission expects NaturEner to conduct a post-construction monitoring program as previously directed by the Commission. 33. Should the results of post-construction wildlife monitoring differ significantly from the information upon which Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Wildlife Management provided its Wind Energy Referral Report, the Commission may review the power plant approval pursuant to Section 41 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Act. The purpose of such a review would be to address any unanticipated environmental impacts resulting from the project. 34. The Commission finds that the maximum predicted nighttime sound level at the nearest residence in the study area (receptor ID NR001 in the noise impact assessment) is 38.5 dba L eq, which is below the permissible nighttime sound level of 40 dba L eq set out in AUC Rule 012: Noise Control (AUC Rule 012). The Commission recognizes that the accuracy of the modelling based on the standard ISO 9613 has a tolerance of ±3 db. In light of this accuracy tolerance, it is possible that the predicted sound levels may exceed the nighttime permissible sound level at some dwellings. Accordingly, the Commission directs NaturEner to conduct a post-construction comprehensive noise study at receptor NR001 under the representative conditions in AUC Rule 012 to verify and ensure that the facility complies with the permissible sound level as determined in accordance with AUC Rule For the foregoing reasons and subject to the conditions and directions herein, the Commission considers that the approval of the amendment to the Wild Rose 1 wind power plant is in the public interest. 4 Decision 36. The Commission approves Application No pursuant to sections 11 and 12 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Regulation. 37. The Commission, pursuant to Section 11 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Act, grants Approval No. U to alter the power plant and to extend the completion date of the power plant, as set out in Appendix 1 (Appendix 1 will be distributed separately). AUC Decision (September 13, 2013) 5

8 38. The Commission, pursuant to sections 14, 15, and 19 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Act, grants Permit and Licence No. U to extend the completion date of the substation, as set out in Appendix 2 (Appendix 2 will be distributed separately). Dated on September 13, The Alberta Utilities Commission (original signed by) Neil Jamieson Commission Member 6 AUC Decision (September 13, 2013)