Ohio Supreme Court dismisses Buckeye Wind case


By Nick Walton - nwalton@aimmediamidwest.com



COLUMBUS – The Ohio Supreme Court dismissed a case pertaining to the Buckeye Wind project Monday after a joint motion seeking the case’s dismissal was filed last week.

A joint application for dismissal was filed June 21 by Buckeye Wind LLC and citizens group Union Neighbors United (UNU). The application for dismissal came after a 30-day stay of proceedings was granted by the court on May 22.

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.

After oral arguments in the case were held before the state Supreme Court in February, a joint motion between the parties was filed seeking a stay in the case so the parties could continue settlement negotiations.

Within the recent application for dismissal, the parties state they sought a dismissal because the issues in dispute had been resolved by a private settlement between the parties.

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 affirmed the power siting board’s decision in three cases related to the project.

EverPower project manager Jason Dagger told the Daily Citizen that Monday’s decision allows the project to continue moving forward.

“We have several pieces of development that still have to continue to work their course and they were somewhat held up by some of these challenges so now at this point we can take those and step forward,” Dagger said. He added the path forward in the project’s development is still being discussed internally within the company.

Attorney Jack Van Kley, who represented UNU, said Monday a case pertaining to the incidental take permit in the case is still pending in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

By Nick Walton

nwalton@aimmediamidwest.com

Nick Walton can be reached at (937) 652-1331 Ext. 1777 or on Twitter @UDCWalton.

Nick Walton can be reached at (937) 652-1331 Ext. 1777 or on Twitter @UDCWalton.