COLUMBUS – A stay of proceedings has been granted in an Ohio State Supreme Court case pertaining to the Buckeye Wind project.
An entry filed Monday in the Ohio State Supreme Court orders that a motion to stay proceedings in the case is granted in part and the case is stayed for 30 days.
On May 2, a joint motion between Buckeye Wind LLC and citizens group Union Neighbors United (UNU) was filed motioning the court to stay the case so the parties could continue settlement negotiations.
In October 2015, UNU filed a notice of appeal, appealing the Ohio Power Siting Board’s decision to approve an extension in the first phase of the project.
Project developer EverPower filed a motion for extension of certificate in July 2014, asking the board to extend the certificate granted in the first phase of the project in March 2010.
The original certificate authorized the company to construct the project with development to commence no later than March 22, 2015. When the board approved the extension in August 2014, the certificate date was moved to May 28, 2018, which is also the deadline for construction to begin on the second phase of the project.
Oral arguments in the case were held before the state Supreme Court in February.
A memorandum within the joint motion stated this case is one of several between Buckeye Wind and UNU since 2009 but the parties had made significant progress in settlement negotiations to resolve disputes that have arisen out of the current and past cases.
Under development since 2006, the Buckeye Wind project proposed to construct more than a combined 100 turbines in Champaign County through two phases of the project.
Previously, the state Supreme Court has affirmed the board’s decision in a case related to the project three times.
After oral arguments in the first phase of the project were held in September 2011, the court affirmed the board’s decision in March 2012.
In April 2016, the court affirmed the decision of the board in granting certificate in the second phase of the project after oral arguments were held in December 2015.
In September 2016, the court affirmed the board’s decision to approve an amendment to the first phase of the project after oral arguments were held last July.