Not required

Solar developer ignores County’s conditions and concerns

Need more evidence green energy developers and the Ministry of Environment operate under a law unto themselves? Take a closer look at the 100 acre solar photovoltaic (PV) plant currently under construction on Black Road near Doxsee in Sophiasburgh. It is the third in likely dozens of such arrays that are set to cover farmland in Prince Edward County and elsewhere in Ontario.

YOUR RULES DON’T APPLY
If it were anyone other than a “green energy” developer, the proponent would be compelled by legislation to submit a stormwater management plan long before now. It would not be able to begin construction until the plan was approved and permitted. The Demorestville project, however, is already in mid-construction with 85 per cent of the materials already on site.

A stormwater management plan typically involves the design and addition of some ditches and swales on the developed property to ensure run-off from a heavy rain event doesn’t impact a neighbouring property owner—at least not greater impact than had the property remained undeveloped. It is meant to protect neighbours from the unintended consequences of industrial, commercial or institutional development.

The County of Prince Edward has been asking for a stormwater management plan from the developer of the Black Road property, a subsidiary of SunEdison, a Californiabased owner-operator of solar PV projects. The County has gotten nowhere.

Even as the project moves closer to completion, the developer is defying the County—responding that it only answers to the MOE on such matters.

SunEdison has written to say that it has prepared a stormwater management plan as part of its Renewable Energy Approval process with the MOE and that County approval isn’t required.

WHO WATCHES OVER THE DEVELOPER?
So who will regulate the plan and ensure compliance? Who should neighbours contact should stormwater flow into their basements? Or wash away crops?

No one is regulating this, according to the County’s chief engineer Robert MacAuley. Not the County. Not the Conservation Authority.

“The developer is required to submit a plan in its REA, based on best practices,” said MacAuley. “But there is no permitting process. It is just a report.”

There is nothing to ensure the developer does what he says he will do.

It is not the only matter over which SunEdison has thumbed its nose at requests made by the County.

SAFEGUARDS IGNORED
It will not enter into a pre-development agreement with the County. It doesn’t have to.

SunEdison won’t submit a driver reflectivity analysis—the REA does not compel it to do so.

It won’t establish a site rehabilitation security fund. The MOE says it doesn’t have to.

It won’t assess the impact on the local tourism economy. It doesn’t have to, so it won’t.

In other requests made by the County, such as that for a stormwater management plan— SunEdison will comply—but only with REA rules. “County approval is not required.”

This includes impacts to groundwater, decommissioning and an emergency response plan.

Earlier this year the municipality of Prince Edward agonized over,and finally adopted, a list of conditions by which it would consider green energy project applications. This is the template by which all new projects are being assessed and evaluated. But SunEdison had already received its approval and accordingly, doesn’t need the support of the County.

The developer is required, however, to negotiate with the County over the use of its roads. The project, when completed, will comprise more than 45,000 solar panels each on steel supports sunk into the ground to bedrock. Add in all the construction equipment and travel back and forth by workers on the project, the surrounding roads will be in poorer condition once the project is completed.

ROCK AND HARD PLACE: COUNCIL
It was this agreement that was up for Council’s approval last week.

Several councillors, including North Marysburgh councillor Robert Quaiff, urged fellow members to reject the agreement.

“They have shown a lack of respect for the concerns of this municipality,” said Quaiff.

Sophiasburgh councillor Terry Shortt shared the frustration, particularly over the lack of a site rehabilitation fund.

“If we dig a pit, we are required to rehabiliate the land afterward,” said Shortt. “These projects have a shelf life—but there is no security.”

Picton councillor Bev Campbell shared the same worries, but suggested the municipality would be in a worse position without the roads agreement.

Mayor Peter Mertens was inclined to agree with Campbell—but it did little to diminish his frustration.

“The province has clearly made their views known,” said Mertens. “They have no interest in working with municipalities.

“If in 20 years this is a pile of scrap, they won’t care,” said Mertens. “It will be up to the municipality to clean up the mess.”

When the vote came, most councillors held their nose and approved the roads agreement.