HillTopper road use and decommissioning plans expected to pass Logan County Board tonight

[February 20, 2018] 

LINCOLN

On Thursday, February 15, the Logan County Board held its monthly meeting to hear committee updates and set the voting agenda for Tuesday’s Regular Board meeting. One focus was updates on the HillTopper Wind Farm Project’s proposed Road Use Agreement and Decommissioning Plan.

Guests included Sheryl Churney, an attorney who provided legal counsel on the road use agreement, Matt Minder and Chris Burger of Patrick Engineering, Al Young of Young Engineering, Jay Whitmore of Westwood Engineering, Kyle Barry, attorney for the project, Matt Birchby, William Kelsey, and Daniel Sheehan of Swift Current Energy, the company developing the Hilltopper Wind Project.

Update on the Road Use Agreement

Road and Bridge Committee Chairman Bob Farmer said he would bring forward a motion to approve the Road Use Agreement for the HillTopper Wind Farm at Tuesday’s meeting.

Logan County Highway Engineer Bret Aukamp said this road use agreement is one of the conditions in the conditional use agreement for the wind farm. Aukamp said this agreement is for the use of the county highways. There will be similar agreements for Mount Pulaski Road District, Elkhart Road District, and Broadwell Road District since those roads will also be used for the project.

Aukamp said the agreement “spells out the responsibilities of both parties” in reference to what HillTopper will be responsible for as far as “pre-construction” and “post-construction improvements” and any financial securities that need to be put in place. The Road Use Agreement “makes sure roads are truly protected and repaired afterwards” and ensures the taxpayers of Logan County are “not putting any money out” to make repairs for the project.

Aukamp said State’s Attorney Jonathan Wright will need to review it again, and Aukamp and the legal counsel for the project need to fill in a few “blanks” in the agreement, but it should be completed by Tuesday.

Board member Scott Schaffenacker asked about the section on extraordinary events, especially if the events affect “multiple turbines rather than single turbines.” Schaffenacker said the roads could be affected by the cranes that would need to be brought in for repair.

Board member Dave Blankenship said his “only concern was about day to day operations and maintenance,” which is different than “repairs and upgrades.”

Attorney Sheryl Churney said these issues were talked about during negotiations on the agreement, and they “do not consider repair to a single turbine following a lightning strike or some sort of faulty part to be an extraordinary event.” Churney said in her experience with other wind farm projects, it is not all that uncommon for heavy cranes to come out and repair a turbine about once a year, and she does not see “sustained damage” as result of the crane movement. Those bringing cranes in would be “required to obtain an oversized vehicle permit,” so they could help coordinate when and where the crane is moved to “minimize damage.”

Churney said “multiple aggregate trucks” carrying heavy loads cause more problems than one crane that would be needed to fix a single turbine.

Aukamp said the roads are “built up to a pretty good standard already to live through the construction phase” and “bringing in components to assemble the crane for a single event would not be much traffic.” At the Railsplitter Wind Farm, they have had to bring in a crane in pieces, erected it to do the work, and hauled it out, and there has been “minimal damage” to the roads.

Aukamp said would only be a problem if there were multiple turbines in need of repair and they had to bring in “multiple heavy loads” in multiple trips causing a “high volume of traffic.” In those cases, they may need to revisit the road use agreement.


Board Chairman Chuck Ruben said the big crane is brought in on 13 different semis, so it is not a lot of overweight parts.

Blankenship asked if they have factored in the degradation of the roads over time. He has seen a “singular concrete truck tear up roads before.”

Churney said she believes that is addressed in the agreement. She said the road base will be “enhanced” as part of initial construction. The annual operation fee figures in regular maintenance of the road. In the operational phase, the operators are “responsible for any damage that would occur as result of their use beyond normal wear and tear.”

Update on the proposed Decommissioning Plan

Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Committee Scott Schaffenacker gave board members the Hilltopper Decommissioning Plan Proposal Swift Current Energy provided. Schaffenacker said he would motion for approval of the Hilltopper Decommissioning Plan on Tuesday.

The board voted last month to have Patrick Engineering review the proposal and give the board a recommendation as to “what the Conditional Use should be for the Decommissioning Plan.”

Matt Birchby of Swift Current Energy updated the board on the agreement for the Decommissioning Plan drafted by Westwood Engineering and reviewed by Patrick Engineering.

Birchby said after a preliminary review with Patrick Engineering, they found a “very comprehensive plan” that considers a lot of “costs associated with decommissioning.” Swift Current Energy made a few minor revisions.

Birchby said he can “provide assurances to the county that they will not be at a risk related to the decommissioning of the project.” Swift Current Energy will review the Agricultural Impact Mitigation Agreement in year 10 of the project, and examine revenue and fair market value associated with the project 14 or 15 years into the project life. He said these reviews are needed for “financial assurances to the county to ensure “the residents and communities are not at risk in terms of actions from the owners of the HillTopper Wind Project.”

Jay Whitmore of Westwood Engineering said his company looks at factors such as the 30-year life of turbines and decommissioning costs and assurances are “revisited about every five years.” In the early part of the projects, the turbines have substantial resale value if they no longer produce electricity. Other considerations are removal of access roads, restoration of farm fields or vegetation, and disposal of concrete foundations and concreted pads. Many operations are involved in decommissioning.

Al Young of Young Engineering said he reviewed the decommissioning plans and conditional use ordinance to see whether Westwood complied. Young said Westwood did “a thorough job” planning for remediation of the site to bring the property back to the pre-existing condition” to make the land usable again. He said restoration, removal, cost considerations, and the right to recover expenses incurred were also covered in agreement.

Young said he feels the decommissioning plan satisfies the conditions of the Logan County ordinance.

Matt Minder of Patrick Engineering said they looked at associated documents along with the decommissioning plan, which included the project map and Agricultural Impact Mitigation Agreement. They reviewed the plan to check for compliance and Minder said the review “indicated the plan was very detailed in terms of describing decommissioning steps involved.” Patrick Engineering found decommissioning expenses were in line with costs on a “per turbine basis” seen in other Illinois Wind Farm decommissioning estimates.

Minder said they made a few suggestions on administrative and transportation cost considerations, total area for restoration, and compensations to landowners for crop damage, and any costs to rehabilitate or repair roads.

Minder said the review of the plan also has a recommendation for financial assurance mechanism covering the first 10 years to “protect the county’s interest,” and then reviewing and adjusting salvage values and decommissioning costs at the 10-year mark.

Board Chairman Chuck Ruben asked Swift Current Energy if they were willing to meet the recommendations made by Patrick Engineering.

Birchby said they would.

The board will vote Tuesday on whether to approve Patrick Engineering’s recommendations for the decommissioning proposed plan and make it the criteria for satisfying that portion of the conditional use permit.

[Angela Reiners]