Is BP is using a map from the 1970's to Characterize Cape Vincent as a backwoods rural area?

Town of Cape Vincent

Honorable Jeffrey C. Cohen

March 14,2013

Acting Secretary, NYS Board of Electric Power

Generation Siting and Environment

Three Empire State Plaza

Albany, New York 12223-1350

Re: Case 12-F-0410 Cape Vincent Wind Power, LLC

Dear Secretary Cohen:

The Town Boards of Cape Vincent and Lyme and the Planning Board of Cape Vincent met with

BP on January 22, 2013. Several letters have been sent to you, by the Town of Cape Vincent, on

the items addressed and more pointedly, not addressed, during that meeting. Many of the critical

items have gone unanswered by BP until last week. One should keep in mind that our requests

were for the most recent information so that we could start to look into those items which will

undoubtedly be necessary to address during the PSS and Application phases of BP's Article 10

efforts.

John Harris, BP's attorney, finally sent a letter (March 7. 2013) to the Towns of Cape Vincent

and Lyme, in which he addressed some of the items discussed at the January 22nd meeting. Two

of Mr. Harris's responses demand immediate comment.

Para 1: A copy of a large scale map of the Cape Vincent - The map that BP is using for

their "official" project map of the Cape Vincent Wind Farm Project is significantly out of

date. Many of the road names are incorrect. Several major complexes within the Town,

such as the Correctional Facility and the Thousand Island High/Middle School Complex,

are not even shown on the map. While it is difficult to determine the exact year this

"Official Map" was created, based on the 1972 opening of the Thousand Island

High/Middle School Complex, the map is at least 40 years out of date.

How can BP know the correct parcel boundaries, determine the interaction with

          neighboring parcels on a map that is at least 40 years out of date? To this point, BP

should provide a tax parcel overlay to its turbine array map. This overlay should indicate

all leaseholders and those residents who have 'good neighbor agreements.' BP is not

conducting an outreach campaign; this is a campaign of maintaining corporate privilege

and exclusivity. Once again, we have another glaring example of BP not being

forthcoming in its dealings with our Town's citizens and governing boards.

Para 2: During the January meeting Mr. Harris scrolled though his phone flipping

through sections of our law BP found objectionable and which they intend to ask the

Siting Board to "supplant". At the time it was impossible for us to make notes of the

sections he was describing and we requested that Harris provide us with a printed listing,

which should have been an easy request to satisfy. However, to date we have received

nothing and the comment in his March 7th letter was "we are still working on to finalize

this list. We expect to be able to provide the list very shortly and in any event will

certainly include the list in our Preliminary Scoping Statement." Failure to provide what

BP stated it would provide on a critical issue only compounds a problem that,

unfortunately for us, began on September 17, 2012, the first day BP submitted their

Public Involvement Plan.

Para 3: Mr. Harris notes they were requested to update their distribution list to " ... reflect

new members oj the Town Board as well as individuals no longer serving and confirm

that we have done so." New Town Council representative Michelle Oswald, however, is

still absent from the list - she did not receive a personal addressed letter, which was

provided to other members of Cape Vincent Boards.

Para 4: BP was made aware on January 22 that a few families were situated within the

Environmental Justice "Impact Study Area" and that it would be best if these families

received some specially addressed notification. Rather than contact this small group,

BP's response was, "After further research into this issue, we do not believe we will be

impacting any environmental justice communities and will provide more detail on this

topic in the Preliminary Scoping Statement." Rather than finding a rationale to ignore

this group of people, we feel that BP should have addressed these families directly

perhaps through simple, inexpensive mailing of educational materials to the few families

residing within the impact area.

Now that we are nearing the end of the Public Participation phase of Article 10 it is obvious to us

that BP not only has little respect for our Town, its plan and its law, but BP also has shown no

cooperation or courtesy in the Article 10 process. This is incompatible with BP's stated

Corporate Code of Conduct in dealing with governments: "Co-operate courteously with officials

conducting a government or regulatory agency inquiry or investigation. " Therefore, once again

we are asking the Siting Board to enforce the intent and letter of the Article 10 process. At every

step to date BP has appeared willing to flaunt the transparency that the authors of Article 10

claimed it would bring to the process.

Respectfully yours,

Urban Hirschey-Town Supervisor  

Brooks Bragdon - Deputy Supervisor  

John Byrne - Town Council  

Clifford Schneider - Town Council  

Michelle Oswald - Town Council

We the undersigned appointed officials from the Town of Cape Vincent endorse and

fully support this Town Board letter to the Public Service Commission regarding the

Article 10 application for the Cape Vincent Wind Power project  proposal

Richard Macsherry - Planning Board Chairman

Robert Brown - Planning Board

Cyril Cullen - Planning Board

Paul Docteur - Planning Board

R. Dennis Faulknham - Zoning Board of Appeals Charman

Ed Hludzenski - Zoning Board of Appeals

Keith Walker - Zoning Board of Appeals

Hester Chase - Zoning Board of Appeals

James Millington - Zoning Enforcement Officer