Remarks of Dr. Terrence Doran,

Folmont Property Owners' Association,

To the Allegheny Township Board of Supervisors

07-16-08

As a resident of Allegheny Township and a member of the Folmont Property Owners Association, I wish to formally state my beliefs and opinions concerning the proposed wind energy facility. I, along with other Allegheny Township residents, served on the Wind Turbine Advisory Committee established previous to the enactment of an ordinance that regulates the construction and operation of wind turbines in the township. The ordinance enacted did not, in my opinion, provide adequate protections for the homeowners and residents of the township. I and others continue to be concerned about several provisions found in the ordinance. I believe that the township supervisors are duty bound to protect the “health, safety and welfare” of the citizens of the township” and that the ordinance as enacted does not adequately address the health, safety and welfare issues of residents of the community.

Specifically, the setback limit of 5 times the height of the hub from an occupied residence does not protect the property values (i.e. welfare) of the existing property owners. The Folmont Property Owners Association has been told by a local realtor that we can expect a decrease in real property values of 10% to 15% when the wind energy facility is completed under current setback rules. The Folmont community is an established housing development with over 88 permanent dwellings and therefore represents a significant number of vested interests. In addition, the construction of wind energy facilities near Folmont will and already has impacted the ability of landowners to sell or construct on the affected land. The wind industry recommends a minimum setback of 2500 feet from an established housing development and we believe that Folmont should have been considered a housing development for the purpose of setbacks. The current setback limit does little to protect the property values of Folmont land owners. We have asked as recently as June of this year that the township either increase the setback limitations for all non-participating property owners in Allegheny Township or consider amending the proposed ordinances to allow for setbacks of 2500 feet as recommended by the wind industry for the Folmont development.

The proposed setbacks do not take into consideration safety concerns of property owners. A recent study completed in the State of New York has documented ice throws of 1600 feet from wind turbines constructed in the area. The proposed ordinance does not adequately address this issue and allows for the construction of a potential safety hazard within 5 times the hub height of a non-participating residence. We ask that you refer to an article written by Justin Eger of Mainline Newspapers documented a specific instance of broken and damaged blades found on a non-participating property owners land. Setbacks to address safety concerns are both reasonable and prudent given this information.

In addition, the sound limitations proposed in the ordinance (55dbA) allow for noise limits in excess of those found in the European Union and do not address low frequency sound levels measured on the “C-Scale”. A reasonable sound limitation must be measured on the “C-Scale” and should not exceed 45dbC. The fact that the proposed ordinance allows for a higher sound level (55DBA) is interpreted to mean that the township will allow the construction of “old technology” to the detriment of the citizens and property owners of Allegheny Township. The representatives of E.ON, the wind factory developer, made reference to sound packages available to diminish the impact of the sound levels at the June meeting. We ask that you consider mandating more rigorous sound requirements for the proposed wind turbines.

In a related matter, we ask you to consider the recent law suit in Cambria County concerning excessive noise levels created by the wind factory constructed in Portage Township.

In addition, medical doctors are in the process of documenting the existence of “Wind Turbine Syndrome” and the ordinance does little to address the concerns of those doctors and their related research.

The construction of large numbers of wind turbines can negatively impact the watershed of the Juniata River and Chesapeake Bay. Mr. Costello, Township Supervisor, stated recently that water quality concerns were a priority and we ask that studies be conducted previous to construction to insure the continuation of the flow of high quality waters to Breastworks Run as well as to the headwaters of the Raystown Branch of the Juniata River.

Mr. T. Boone Pickens, a wealthy energy developer, recently proposed large scale wind factories in the mid-western section of the United States. It is significant that Mr. Pickens did not consider the Appalachian Mountain chain as an area of development despite its close proximity to major urban areas and available electrical transmission lines. In fact, when questioned about the eastern United States and wind power, Mr. Pickens stated that there was not a sufficient amount of wind resources to justify development in this area. Wind energy development in Pennsylvania will not decrease dependence of foreign oil nor cause the decommissioning of one nuclear or coal fired plant. Wind development, subsidized by a federal government mired in budget deficits combined with statewide electricity deregulation and a lack of state-wide siting requirements will provide ever more costly electricity to the very consumers who, as federal taxpayers, are paying the subsidies in the first place.

Finally, many states such as West Virginia, Maryland and North Carolina have passed regulations that protect the mountain ridges. Pennsylvania has miles upon miles of reclaimed strip mine land that could support wind turbines without damaging the mountain tops. The entire wind factory in this area could be relocated away from the ridge tops and to the large strip mine that encompasses Allegheny, Stonycreek and Shade Tow b nships. The removal of the four wind turbines nearest the residential community of Folmont would not only protect our property values, but also preserve the mountain ridge tops. This step, despite my overall opposition to wind projects in Pennsylvania, along with the other remedies presented in my proposal would create a “win – win” situation for the residents of Folmont.

There are many residents of the Folmont area that believe the construction of large number of wind turbines near Folmont will negatively impact the quality of life for existing and future citizens of the township. You were elected to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of this township, not to protect the rights of a local sportsman’s club to gain a profit at others’ expense. We ask that you deny the application for the construction of the wind farm until a more suitable siting arrangement is proposed by E.ON, the wind factory developer.