May 24, 2012 Honorable Jaclyn A.

Brilling, Secretary New York State Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment Empire State Plaza Albany, NY 12212-1350 Dear Secretary Brilling,

RE: In the Matter of the Rules and Regulations of the Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment

HISTORY: WIND POWER ETHICS GROUP LLC was formed in 2006 due to the fact that two industrial wind turbine developers proposed over 250 wind turbines in our small town of Cape Vincent which is five miles along Lake Ontario and fifteen miles along the St Lawrence River. At the time our Town and Planning Boards consisted of officials with wind turbine leases. They appeared to make decisions based on their self interest, rather than what might be best for the entire community. Our organization financially invested in studies, educational presentations and awareness for the concerned public regarding all aspects of wind turbine development. To do this we investigated and researched the information that was provided by the wind turbine companies. As a result of these efforts an increased number of citizens have voted into office non-conflicted board members who are making decisions for the best interest of the whole community. We believe in home rule and feel that our town and planning boards should not be left out of the future planning for any energy development in Cape Vincent. COMMENTS REGARDING THE DRAFT REGULATIONS: Local laws: First, we ask that the applying local substantial laws continue to be the default position. The wind developers are asking that locally laws be preempted entirely. We remind you that the actual language passed by the legislature and governor was clear that the local laws would be applied unless "unduly burdensome". The applicants should bear the burden of proving local laws are burdensome. New York State is historically a home rule state and each municipality has carefully developed its own laws for its unique area.
1000.15 Acceptance of a Certificate

(a) Upon issuance of a final decision by a Board granting a Certificate, an applicant shall, within 30 days after the issuance of such decision, file either a written unqualified acceptance of the Certificate or a petition for rehearing, but not both. We ask that this paragraph be amended to include the municipality has the right to ask for a rehearing also. We find it an unfair advantage that an applicant has more rights than the local municipality.

Public Involvement: The NY Power Act clearly states the Chair shall make decisions in consultation with the Board exclusive of the ad hoc members. Considering all the rhetoric about public involvement it seems important that the decisions be made by a vote including the ad hoc members. The fact that the ad hoc members are not required for a quorum is additional injury to real public involvement and should be necessary for a quorum. Siting Board meetings should take place within the municipality where a project is proposed. This comment period has only been 60 days and some of the time the PSC web page carrying the draft regulations has been offline. Town Boards meet only once a month and this time period is inadequate to carefully consider issues that will have a lasting impact on their communities. A 30 day extension to this comment period is requested. Socioeconomic Effects: One issue we experienced firsthand was weighing the possible benefits of a development against the losses. Currently the draft regulations only consider the benefits such as jobs, PILOTS, secondary industries, and so forth. It is obvious that virtually every development has some negative impact on the involved local community. We ask that an economic analysis include the entire effects; not just the benefits. Noise Issues: Sound studies have been a huge issue in our community. The developers sound studies have shown a large discrepancy with two independent sound studies. Developer studies have completely ignored the issue of low level sound vibration and it is clear communities need to be protected from damaging sounds and vibrations. We would like a cap on sound: 5 dba above ambient as recommended by the DEC or not more than 35dba at non participating property lines. Measuring low level vibration should also be a requirement especially as more and more data is available demonstrating harmful effects of low level vibration(C weighting) and sound in general. Wildlife Protection: Ornithologists take the position that bird and bat studies should continue for three years to account for seasonal variation. Applicants should be expected to present verifiable wildlife studies to protect the local wildlife. The 86 wind turbine complex on Wolfe Island, Canada, just two miles away from Cape Vincent in the St. Lawrence River has some of the recorded highest bird kills in the world. Documented reports show the short eared owls moved away from the turbines, the osprey immigrated into Cape Vincent and 15 red tailed hawks were killed within the wind turbine development area. Valid studies take time, the regulations should make sure studies are at least a year in length at the very minimum.

Naivet: As a community that has seen the most well publicized and unscrupulous behavior from wind developers we must point out the naivet of this point made in the regulations: "Opponents of noise and proponents of new facilities should be able to agree that they share an interest in a robust review of noise issues to ensure adequate protection against and mitigation of adverse impacts and to maintain the viability of future projects." The wind developers in this community presented fraudulent sound studies which are flawed in methodology and conclusions. Our organization has invested many hours of research concerning wind turbine development issues and hope our experience will be of benefit to the final regulations of Article X. Respectfully submitted, Sarah F. Boss, Chairman Wind Power Ethics Group, LLC