Entries in wind farm wildlife (50)

6/24/10 DOUBLE FEATURE: Brown County wants PSC to look more closely into health and safety issues AND Gag me with a contract: Will you accept $15,000 from a wind developer in exchange for your legal right to complain about the ability to use or enjoy your property, nuisance, injury or harm to persons, anxiety, suffering, mental anguish and loss of ability to enjoy life"? 

BROWN COUNTY TOWNS URGE MORE STUDY OF WIND FARM SITES

SOURCE: Greenbay Press Gazette

June 24, 2010

By Tony Walter

 The elected officials of three southern Brown County towns will ask the Public Service Commission to take more time to study possible health and safety issues before approving wind turbine siting rules.

Comments from town supervisors and residents in the towns of Morrison, Glenmore and Wrightstown will be delivered to the PSC's Wind Siting Council next week. A joint meeting of the three town boards was held Wednesday.

Meanwhile, the county's Human Services Committee unanimously approved a resolution supporting the Board of Health's recommendations that turbines not be built in areas where the fractured bedrock and thin soil could lead to groundwater contamination. The resolution will be considered by the County Board at its July 21 meeting.

Invenergy LLC, a Chicago-based company, has proposed to build a 100-turbine wind farm in Morrison, Glenmore and Wrightstown. It is waiting to resubmit its application until the guidelines are approved by the PSC.

Supporting Invenergy's plans are those who say sustainable energy must be encouraged.

The Wind Siting Council released a draft of rules in May and is holding meetings statewide to hear public comments.

Glen Schwalbach, a supervisor for Rockland, has been hired by the three towns to present the comments to the PSC. He isn't addressing the Invenergy proposal specifically but wind turbines in general.

Comments from town supervisors and residents in the towns of Morrison, Glenmore and Wrightstown will be delivered to the PSC's Wind Siting Council next week. A joint meeting of the three town boards was held Wednesday.

In his presentation to about 35 area residents Wednesday, Schwalbach cited three major points: 

  • Potential health dangers to humans and animals should be studied further before rules are approved. 
  • The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources should take a close look at the risk to groundwater.
  • A third party, paid by wind developers, should be employed to inspect the turbine construction process.
  • The Human Services Committee spent little time discussing the Board of Health's recommendations before approving it on a voice vote.

    Bill Hafs, the county's Land and Water Conservation director, told the committee that the proposed 81 miles of trenching to construct the Ledge Wind farm could impact groundwater in an area where dozens of wells were contaminated in 2006.

    The resolution calls for a maximum 30-decibel level outside any occupied structure at night, and construction of turbines at a minimum of 2,640 feet from structures.

    "The Board of Supervisors recommends that no wind turbines be constructed in unincorporated areas of Brown County until … wind siting rules are enacted and in force," the resolution concludes.

    Invenergy has contracts with several property owners to construct wind turbines on their land, paying about $8,000 per year to the landowners.

    Find out more about what's happening in Brown County by visiting the Brown County Citizens for Responsible Renewable Energy website at BCCRWE.COM

  •  SECOND FEATURE

    The letter below was submitted by a resident of the Ashtabula wind project to Jerry Lien a staff analyst for the North Dakota Public Service Commission. It details how NextEra (formerly Florida Power and Light Energy) opted to address the problems of noise and shadow flicker caused by the Ashtabula Wind Energy facility.     

    Wind project residents in Wisconsin have been telling similar stories about what happens when they complain to wind project developer/owners about noise and shadow flicker. Also included here is the contract offered by NextEra to the non participating landowners.


    [TO] Jerry Lien
    North Dakota Public Service Commission

    Greetings Jerry,

    I appreciate your attention to this matter of the effects of living next to wind turbines. As was discussed in our phone conversation, Next Era Energy is not offering to repair the damage or fix the problem of the noise and shadow flicker imposed on our home, business and property.

    They merely want to pay us to accept it. They say we can use the payment to fix the problem ourselves. In order to receive the payment, we must accept this contract as offered, which I have attached to this letter [below]. This contract, as you can see, is a release for the company to negatively affect us.

    Furthermore, this contract has more wording in it about keeping quiet about the whole issue than solving the problem. Also you can see that it will be binding on us and our property in any future issues.

    $15,000 as a payment is not going to fix this problem. We did not ask for money from this company but requested a relief to the problem at hand.

    Scott Scovill from Next Era, suggested for us to buy trees with the money. Trees will not block the effects because they are not tall enough and may take up to twenty years before they would grow even fifty ft. tall.

    One solution we suggested was to turn the offending turbines off only during the time they cause shadows. That suggestion was answered by Scott bluntly saying "we're not shutting them off".

    Since then Scott or any other Next Era representative has not returned our phone calls.

    Mary Ann and I cannot sign on to a contract of this nature. Our attorney advises against it as well. We are not willing to release to the company our property and enjoyment of our home so they can cause noise, shadow flicker, interference, diminishment of property value and the effects acknowledged in their contracts.

    We are now suffering from these problems as a result of the decision to allow this irresponsible siting of wind towers too close to our farm.

    By reviewing the project you can see there are about four or five turbines to the east of our farm that are causing blinking shadows up to and hour and a half per day for at least 12 weeks of the year. The shadow effects across the windows of our offices are severely disruptive to our business.

    How does the Public Service Commission plan to deal with our issue?

     Is this going to be allowed in every wind farm project in the future? Is it going to be allowed that a large out-of-state company negatively impact a local business? Are the residents of this state expected to sell - (quoted from the contract) "the ability to use or enjoy your property, nuisance, injury or harm to persons, anxiety, suffering, mental anguish and loss of ability to enjoy life"?

    I would like a response to these questions.

    It has been brought to my attention that Next Era representatives have been spreading a lie that we knew this wind farm project was planned before we purchased our property here in Griggs County. This is a false statement and can be proven. We were living on our farm when we were invited to the first meeting of this project.

    I request that you make this contract and my letter part of the public record.

    Sincerely,
    Jim Miller


    RELEASE

    THIS RELEASE ("Release") is made as of the _____ day of _____________, 2010 by and between Ashtabula Wind II LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Company") and __________________________________, ("Owner") (hereinafter collectively the "Parties") upon the terms and conditions set forth below:

    RECITALS:

    WHEREAS, Owner is the owner of a certain tract of land located in Griggs County, North Dakota legally described on the attached Exhibit A ("Property") and incorporated herein; and

    WHEREAS, Company owns and operates the Ashtabula Wind Energy Center ("Wind Farm"), a wind farm which is adjacent to the Property; and

    WHEREAS, Owner notified Company that they are experiencing problems with shadow flicker at their residence on the Property.

    NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements set forth herein, the Parties hereby agree, as follows:

    The recitals are true and correct and are incorporated in this Release by reference.

    Company shall pay to Owner the one-time amount of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00), payable on or before March 31, 2010, for any and all shadow flicker related to the Property, caused or alleged to be caused by the Wind Farm stemming from, related to or attendant to the operation of the Wind Farm by Company, its parent companies, affiliates, successors, assigns, related companies including but not limited to interference with glare, shadow flicker, diminishment of the value of the Property, the ability to use or enjoy the Property, nuisance, and any injury or harm to persons, including but not limited to anxiety, suffering, mental anguish, loss of the ability to enjoy life, or any other harm or wrong, tort, intentional or negligent conduct stemming from, related to or consequent to shadow flicker from the Wind Farm whether claimed or not claimed, including all claims that could have been brought, or which hereafter might be brought by Owner or any of their successors and assigns.

    The matters settled and released pursuant to this Release include all matters, claims, causes of action, and disputes of any nature whatsoever within the authority of the Parties (including third-party claims, indemnity claims, contribution claims, direct and derivative claims, and any other claims held in any capacity) whether or not fully accrued, relating to or arising out of the interference on the Property. The foregoing matters described in paragraph 2 are referred to hereinafter in this Release as the "Released Matters."

    The Parties, each for itself and its directors, officers, agents, and/or representatives, hereby expressly and unconditionally release and discharge one another, and their respective directors, officers, agents, representatives, employees, agents, successors and/or assigns, from any and all obligation, liability or responsibility arising from or as a result of the Released Matters.

    The execution of this Release shall not be construed as an admission by any Party as to the validity or invalidity of any other Party's position with reference to the issues resolved in this Release and neither party shall, directly or indirectly, seek to take or advance any position before any court, agency, or administrative tribunal, predicated in whole or in part on any term or condition of this Release except in connection with an action to enforce this Release or the terms or conditions thereof.

    The fact of settlement, the amount, nature of terms of the Release, and this Release are to are to remain strictly, totally and completely confidential and any breach of the terms of this Release shall entitle the non-breaching Party to seek all equitable relief as well as monetary damages from Owner.

    The Parties agree not to make any statements, written or verbal, or cause or encourage others to make any statements, written or verbal, that defame, disparage or in any way criticize the personal or business reputation, practices, or conduct of the other party, its employees, directors, and officers.

    The Parties acknowledge and agree that this prohibition extends to statements, written or verbal, made to anyone, including but not limited to, the news media, investors, potential investors, any board of directors or advisory board or directors, industry analysts, competitors, strategic partners, vendors, employees (past and present), and clients.

    Either Party, if approached, has the right to state "we had an issue and that the issue has been resolved to our satisfaction."

    The Release may not be modified or amended except by a written instrument signed by all the Parties hereto.

    In the event of litigation arising out of or in connection with the enforcement of this Release or any dispute arising out of this Release, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and incidental expenses incurred in connection with such litigation proceeding, including all costs or fees incurred on appeal.

    The provisions of this Release shall be governed by North Dakota law.

    This Release shall be binding upon the predecessors, heirs, successors, and assigns of each Party.

    EXECUTED on the dates appearing below their signatures by the Parties' undersigned officers, duly authorized.

    Company:
    Ashtabula Wind II LLC,
    a Delaware limited liability company

    By: ________________________________________
    Name: Dean R. Gosselin, Vice President
    Date: ________________________________________

    Owner: ________________________________________
    Name: ________________________________________
    Date: ___________________________________
     

    

    HAVE YOU REACHED OUT AND TOUCHED YOUR PSC TODAY?

    The PSC is asking for public comment on the recently approved draft siting rules. The deadline for comment is July 7th, 2010.

    The setback recommended in this draft is 1250 feet from non-participating homes, 500 feet from property lines.

    CLICK HERE to get a copy of the draft siting rules approved by the commissioners on May 14th, and to find out more about the Wind Siting Council

    CLICK HERE and type in docket number 1-AC-231 to read what's been posted so far.

    CLICK HERE to leave a comment on the Wind Siting Council Docket

    6/22/10 When the majority of the Wind Siting Council Members have a direct or indirect financial interest in as few regulations as possible, money talks, direct experience, health, safety and property values walk AND Have your say: PSC schedules hearings on the new draft rules for siting wind turbines.... which look an awful lot like the old rules that have caused so much trouble.

    Click on the images above to hear nighttime turbine noise and see what shadow flicker looks like. The Wind Siting Council draft rules say 20-25 hours of this each year is permissible on non-participating homes. If there is more than this, the developer or operator will give you window blinds.

    Read the daily diary of the family that lives in this house by clicking here.

     

    Dissent delays wind council’s progress

    SOURCE: The Daily Reporter

     June 22, 2010

    By Paul Snyder

    Deadline pressure and 100 amendments are cracking the unity of the states Wind Siting Council as it strives to agree on turbine placement standards.

    Even the definition of agreement is a point of contention among the 15 members. The state law that formed the council requires only that the panel make recommendations that will go to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin and, ultimately, the state Legislature.

    But some council members insist they will testify against recommendations not based on a consensus vote.

    “I told them they can come in with studies and articles and hearsay,” said Larry Wunsch, a Brownsville resident and council member. “I come in with experience. I live in a wind farm, and I can tell you what it looks like and how it sounds.

    “But if they’re going to go with majority rule, then, yeah, I would argue against it at future hearings.”

    The council is designed to establish turbine placement standards for wind farms that generate less than 100 megawatts of electricity. The PSC already reviews wind farms that generate more than 100 megawatts.

    The PSC intends to finalize rules based on the council’s recommendations by Sept. 1, PSC spokeswoman Teresa Weidemann-Smith said.

    Public hearings on draft rules begin next week, and the public comment period for recommendations ends July 7.

    That puts the council on a tight timeline to finish its work, said Michael Vickerman, a member of the council and executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a nonprofit organization focused on clean energy.

    The council also is working through 100 amendments members proposed for the draft rules. But George Krause Jr., a council member, said the panel is moving through those amendments too fast.

    “If we’re going to put something together, we need the proper time to get something done,” he said. “This is a very challenging process, and I’ve found this to be a very, very challenging council to sit on.”

    But disagreement over amendments such as setbacks from property lines — rather than from buildings — is slowing the council’s progress. Although some members on Monday argued for property lines, the majority sided with setbacks from buildings.

    Wunsch, who wanted setbacks from property lines, said similar divisions are forming around many council discussions. The final product, he said, could be based on the majority’s opinion rather than the full council’s.

    “When it comes to property values, setback, sound and shadow flicker, I don’t think there’s going to be consensus,” Wunsch said. “I think it’s a pro-wind heavy council. I’m not there to say I’m anti-wind. I think we’ve had some good dialogue. But we have to address every issue.”

    Tom Meyer, another commission member, said he too would oppose a final rule based on majority rather than consensus.

    “I don’t think our role is to make turbine business easier in Wisconsin,” he said. “It’s to make rules. This isn’t a matter of compromise; it’s a matter of science.”

    Vickerman said he doubts there will be consensus. But, he said, the council represents a wide array of experience and interest, and the PSC and Legislature must take that into account when approving rules for wind turbine placement.

    “Those who oppose wind have already made their minds up,” Vickerman said. “We can have a dialogue with them, but I don’t think we can have a meeting of the minds.”

    Second Feature:

    HEARINGS SET ON WIND PROJECT SITING RULES

    SOURCE: Journal Sentinel, www.jsonline.com

    June 22, 2010

    By Thomas Content

    Public hearings are planned next week on a proposal aimed at adopting uniform siting rules for wind power projects in the state.

    The public hearings and a rulemaking are part of a process launched by the state Legislature when it passed a uniform siting law last year. The legislation essentially delegated to the Public Service Commission decisions on the thorny and controversial questions raised by supporters and opponents of wind power projects at hearings in the Legislature last year.

    Questions that must be resolved include how far a wind turbine must be placed from a nearby property or home, and what maximum noise standards should be. The PSC has released an initial proposal for public comment, and an advisory council created by the legislation is also studying the issue.

    Public hearings will take place Monday in Fond du Lac, Tuesday, June 29 in Tomah and Wednesday in Madison. Hearings will begin at 1 and 6 p.m. each day. More details about the hearings can be found here.

    The legislation was aimed at replacing a patchwork of different rules and moratoriums that have been imposed by counties and towns around the state for small wind power projects.

    HAVE YOU REACHED OUT AND TOUCHED YOUR PSC TODAY?

    The PSC is asking for public comment on the recently approved draft siting rules. The deadline for comment is July 7th, 2010.

    The setback recommended in this draft is 1250 feet from non-participating homes, 500 feet from property lines.

    CLICK HERE to get a copy of the draft siting rules approved by the commissioners on May 14th, and to find out more about the Wind Siting Council

    CLICK HERE and type in docket number 1-AC-231 to read what's been posted so far.

    CLICK HERE to leave a comment on the Wind Siting Council Docket

    6/20/10 What are they saying about the wind project proposed for Brown County? AND Wind Siting Council Meeting tomorrow at 1:30


    Wind turbine issue sparks resident debate

    Green Bay Press-Gazette, www.greenbaypressgazette.com  June 20 2010

    Wind farm development has been a hotly debated issue in Northeastern Wisconsin, and the Green Bay Press-Gazette has received numerous letters to the editor, for and against.

    Drawing the most response from readers has been a proposal by Invenergy LLC, a Chicago-based company, to build wind turbines in the Brown County towns of Morrison, Wrightstown, Glenmore and Holland. The 100-turbine wind farm would be the first major commercial operation of its kind in Brown County and the largest in the state. It has signed contracts for about $8,000 a year with numerous property owners permitting 400-foot turbines on their properties.

    Many property owners and residents in the southern Brown County communities have spoken out against the project, citing negative health effects and the potential loss in property values.

    Just last week, the Brown County Board of Health recommended that no wind turbines be built in the area of the proposed wind farm in southern Brown County, citing a potential threat to the groundwater. The area has a history of well contamination because of the porous bedrock peculiar to that region.

    Invenergy is awaiting siting rules from the Public Service Commission, which is taking public comments on the wind turbine issue until July 6.

    Uncomfortable with proposed turbines

     DENMARK — In the Press-Gazette article, "Wind company tries to woo Brown County" (May 11), Kevin Parzyck, the project manager for the proposed 100-turbine Ledge Wind project in Brown County, is quoted as saying "(T)here is a high level of comfort … it's a benefit to the community." This is a misleading statement. 

       The people who are comfortable with this project are many of the turbine contract signers or those misinformed about the implications of it. Ninety-three percent of the Morrison residents attending a special town meeting voted to put higher restrictions on wind turbine development, as well as a moratorium on turbine construction.
    The town of Holland is not comfortable with this project either, as the town has rewritten its wind energy ordinance to include stricter guidelines.
    The town of Morrison's wind ordinance, which existed at the time the proposed turbines were located, was not adequate given the significant health and safety ramifications now coming to light regarding setbacks and noise levels of large industrial wind turbines. Presently, no utility in the state is interested in buying the energy produced by this wind development, due to the high cost of the wind energy and reduced energy consumption.
    Jon and Lori Morehouse

    Get facts straight

     REEDSVILLE — Kevin Parzyck, the project manager for the Ledge Wind Project, stated in a Press-Gazette article (May 11) that the Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy "is extremely well funded and well connected statewide." 
     
    The BCCRWE is funded by donations of individual members only. BCCRWE is not connected statewide and does not have external funding sources. BCCRWE is for renewable energy that is sustainable and cost-effective. The Ledge Wind Project is neither. It is heavily subsidized by our tax dollars and higher utility rates.

    What else is being said that is less than credible? It certainly makes a person wonder.

    Kerri Schmidt

    Turbines in southern Brown County a 'social injustice'

       REEDSVILLE — In southern Brown County, the gently rolling hills may soon be covered with 100 industrial turbines, 40 stories tall, and the community is fractured. 
     
    The controversy stems from the negative impacts of wind farms, which have only begun to be studied. Even some wind energy proponents admit wind farms can cause adverse psychological and physiological effects in people. Turbines create flicker, noise, infrasound, low-frequency sound, vibration and electrical pollution. Scientific literature tells of numerous adverse effects from chronic exposure to these.

    The area has fractured bedrock that can allow contaminants to leak into ground water. Building this wind farm may result in more fractures and poorer well water quality.

    A frustrating aspect for the people of southern Brown County is lack of local control. By law, wind turbines are considered "farming" and go on agricultural land, even though they are no more agricultural than a hydroelectric dam or a nuclear power plant.

    The decision to put one up is made solely between the developer and the farmer, who both profit, while the surrounding community suffers negative effects, loss of health and wealth (due to declining property values). To me, this is an incredible social injustice.

    Lynne Knuth

    WIND SITING COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE

    Monday, June 21, 2010, beginning at 1:30 p.m.

    Docket 1-AC-231

    Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
    Flambeau River Conference Room (3rd Floor)
    Public Service Commission Building
    610 North Whitney Way, Madison, Wisconsin

     [Click here for map]

    Audio or video of the meeting will be broadcast from the PSC Website beginning at 1:30.

    CLICK HERE to visit the PSC website, click on the button on the left that says "Live Broadcast". Sometimes the meetings don't begin right on time. The broadcasts begin when the meetings do so keep checking back if you don't hear anything at the appointed start time.

     

    Agenda

    1) Welcome/Review of today’s agenda

    2) Review and adoption of meeting minutes of June 15, 2010

    3) Background information on questions raised by Council regarding the draft rules

    a. Statutory interpretation
    b. Enforcement
    c. Commission rulemaking authority
    d. Notice requirements
    e. Emergency services
    f. Vestas manual reference
    g. Decommissioning
    h. Stray voltage
    i. Complaint resolution
    j. Commission noise measurement protocol

    4) Discuss proposed amendments to straw proposal for Council’s recommendations to
    Commission regarding draft rules

    5) Next steps/Discussion of next meeting’s time, place and agenda

    6) Adjourn

    This meeting is open to the public.

    If you have any questions or need special accommodations, please contact Deborah
    Erwin at the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin by telephone at (608) 266-3905 or
    via e-mail at deborah.erwin@wisconsin.gov.

    6/18/10 What's on the docket for the Wind Siting Council? Bad Vibrations: Wisconsin biologist weighs in on wind turbine siting guidelines.

    HAVE YOU REACHED OUT AND TOUCHED YOUR PSC TODAY?

    The PSC is asking for public comment on the recently approved draft siting rules. The deadline for comment is July 7th, 2010.

    The setback recommended in this draft is 1250 feet from non-participating homes, 500 feet from property lines.

    CLICK HERE to get a copy of the draft siting rules approved by the commissioners on May 14th, and to find out more about the Wind Siting Council

    CLICK HERE and type in docket number 1-AC-231 to read what's been posted so far.

    CLICK HERE to leave a comment on the Wind Siting Council Docket

     AN EXCEPT FROM A POST TO THE DOCKET FROM A WISCONSIN BIOLOGIST:

    I posted a previous comment on the PSC website about concerns of Infrasound generated by of the wind turbines. Since posting that comment, I have been contacted by a woman who lives in Byron.

    The wind turbines went up over a year ago there, and she has not had good sleep since. She experiences a constant hum and a vibration in the floors of her house that prevents her from sleeping at night.

    She said that between the lack of sleep, flicker and noise from the generators, she might as well be living in downtown Chicago. She is a breast cancer survivor and is worried that all of this will cause her cancer to recur. She also stated that Invenergy sold the wind farm to a utility, WE Energies, who denies responsibility because they did not build the wind farm. They will not even listen to her complaints unless she can put some numbers on the problem.

    I was also contacted by Healthy Wind Wisconsin, a group that is trying to get resolution of complaints from people living in wind farms.

    They told me of a man near Fond du Lac who raises chickens. Since the turbines went up, his adult chickens are sick, and he has seen deformities in his chicks.

    The deformities seen by the farmer are similar to those reported in a study done by the U.S. Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory (Shannon et al, 1994). In this study, fertilized eggs were exposed to different levels and frequencies of whole-body low frequency vibration. The results revealed increased mortality and birth defects caused by the vibration.

    As a biologist, I am concerned.

    Chick development is used as a model of human embryonic development. Are there implications for people living in the wind farm who want to have children? According to "Excerpts from the Final Report of the Township of Lincoln Wind Turbine Moratorium Committee" people in the Lincoln Township (Kewaunee) wind farm have reported an inability to conceive. There have also been serious birth defects in calves, and cows spontaneously aborting in that wind farm.

    Are people in the wind farms experiencing problems with low frequency vibration?

    According to G.P. van den Berg (2004) "Although infrasound levels from large turbines at frequencies below 20 Hz are too low to be audible, they may cause structural elements of buildings to vibrate." This is borne out in the wind farms as some people complain of hums and vibrations in the floors and windows of their homes and in other structures. If the floor is vibrating, the residents are experiencing whole body vibration.

    Infrasound waves are not readily absorbed by matter, so they pass through us. Some people in wind farms say they can feel the sound waves moving through them. As sound moves through any object, it moves the molecules around it. At appropriate frequencies, the sound waves can set up resonances and cause vibrations.

    If the infrasound or low-frequency sound waves can resonate and vibrate windows in a home as they pass through them, it is easy to visualize how they may vibrate membranes, tissues and organs in the human body as they pass into and through the human body.

    From Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects (2007) Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology (BEST):

    "Low-frequency vibration and its effects on humans are not well understood. Sensitivity to such vibration resulting from wind-turbine noise is highly variable among humans.

    Although there are opposing views on the subject, it has recently been stated (Pierpont 2006) that "some people feel disturbing amounts of vibration or pulsation from wind turbines, and can count in their bodies, especially their chests, the beats of the blades passing the towers, even when they can`t hear or see them."

    More needs to be understood regarding the effects of low-frequency noise on humans." I`ve heard that the vibrations can be felt in one`s body much in the same way as the "deep base" can be felt at a rock concert when standing close to a speaker.

    In addition to the acoustic vibrations, the giant spinning wind turbines also produce low-frequency vibrations which travel through the earth, seismic vibrations, in the form of Rayleigh waves.

    A study done by P. Styles (2005) reported "We have clearly shown that both fixed speed and variable speed wind turbines generate low frequency vibrations which are multiples of blade passing frequencies and which can be detected on seismometers buried in the ground at significant distances away from the wind farms even in the presence of significant levels of background seismic noise (many kilometers)."

    These results were obtained for turbines much smaller than the 400-500 foot giants that will go up in southern Brown County, and for much smaller arrays. The amount of vibration increases by a factor of 10 for every 100 turbines.

    From Frey et al., 2007:

    "In coursework description of "Whole Body Vibration" Prof Alan Hedge of Cornell University writes: "Vibrations in the frequency range of 0.5 Hz to 80 Hz have significant effects on the human body.

    Individual body members and organs have their own resonant frequencies and do not vibrate as a single mass, with its own natural frequency.

    This causes amplification or attenuation of input vibrations by certain parts of the body due to their own resonant frequencies.

    The most effective resonant frequencies of vertical vibration lie between 4 HZ and 8 Hz. Vibrations between 2.5 and 5 Hz generate strong resonance in the vertebrae of the neck and lumbar region with amplification of up to 240%.

    Vibrations between 4 and 6 Hz set up resonances in the trunk with amplification of up to 200%. Vibrations between 20 and 30 Hz set up the strongest resonance between the head and shoulders with amplification of up to 350%. Whole body vibration may create chronic stresses and sometimes even permanent damage to the affected organs or body parts.""

    The vibrations residents experience in the wind farms, whether acoustic or seismic in origin, can amplify in internal structures and organs in their bodies. Since some people complain of disturbing amounts of vibration in their bodies in wind farms, and structures vibrating in their homes, there can be no doubt that wind farms create vibration problems.

    What might the health effects of this vibration be?

    In the study mentioned earlier, increased embryonic mortality was the main outcome of whole-body low frequency vibration of fertilized chicken eggs, but some of the experimental chicks showed deformities.

    In biology, agents that cause birth defects are called teratogens. Each teratogen produces a specific range of effects in a species. You can think of the drug thalidomide which had the specific effect of causing people to be born without limbs. The experimental observations of low-frequency vibration teratogenic effects in animals are:

    · In chickens: crossed beaks, missing eyeballs and missing bony structures in the skull. Some disorientation and muscular weakness and malformed feet were also seen in experimental chicks (Shannon et al, 1994)

    The problems with animal reproduction reported in the wind farms in Wisconsin are lack of egg production, problems calving, spontaneous abortion (embryonic mortality), stillbirth, miscarriage and teratogenic effects:

    · In chickens: Crossed beaks, missing eyeballs, deformities of the skull (sunken eyes), joints of feet/legs bent at odd angles (Jim Vollmer, personal communication)

    · In cattle: missing eyes and tails (updated Excerpts from the Final Report of the Township of Lincoln Wind Turbine Moratorium Committee)

    It is disturbing to me that in chickens and cows in separate wind farms (separated by 50 miles) similar teratogenic effects are being observed, namely missing eyeballs. Based on the correlation of effects seen experimentally and those seen in the wind farm in chickens, these defects may be due to low frequency vibration.

    Jim Vollmer, the farmer who owns these chickens, reports that the tin structures on his farm buildings vibrate. If the infrasound/ low- frequency sound is strong enough to vibrate structures on his farm as it passes through, what is it doing to the delicate connections and circulation inside the developing chicken embryos, and inside people, as it passes through them?

    Some of the other health effects that have been reported in the Kewaunee wind farm (and other wind farms) could also be explained by low frequency vibration. From updated "Excerpts from the Final Report of the Township of Lincoln Wind Turbine Moratorium Committee " (betterplan.squarespace.com):

    Animal health problems in the Srnkas' formerly award-winning herd include cancer deaths, ringworm, mange, lice, parasites, cows not calving properly, dehydration, mutations such as no eyeballs or tails, cows holding pregnancy only 1 to 2 weeks and then aborting, blood from nostrils, black and white hair coats turning brown, mastitis, kidney and liver failure. . . .

    Mr. Srnka and neighbors report serious health effects on not just dairy cows. Health problems in residents include
    · sleep loss
    · diarrhea
    · headaches
    · frequent urination
    · 4 to 5 menstrual periods per month
    · bloody noses: Mr. Srnka had cows bleed to death from uncontrollable bleeding from the nostrils
    · inability to conceive

    According to scientific literature, low frequency vibration could result in the urge to urinate (Frey et al, 2007) , menstrual irregularities, embryonic mortality (Penkov, 2007), which may be interpreted as inability to conceive or spontaneous abortion, birth defects in animals, and kidney problems in animals (Skilianov et al, 2005). All of these effects have been reported in the Kewaunee wind farm.

    Many of the remaining health problems in this wind farm could be explained by infrasound/ low- frequency sound exposure or vibroacoustic disease, which is caused exposure to low frequency sound waves over long periods of time.

    According to Alves-Pereira and colleagues (2007), The clinical symptoms of vibroacoustic disease (in people) are:

    Stage 1- slight mood swings, indigestion and heartburn, mouth or throat infections and bronchitis.

    Stage 2- chest pain, definite mood swings, back pain, fatigue, fungal, viral and parasitic infections, inflammation of the stomach lining, pain and blood in urine, conjunctivitis and allergies.

    Stage 3- psychiatric disturbances, small nose bleeds, varicose veins and hemorrhoids, duodenal ulcers, spastic colitis, decrease in visual acuity, headaches, severe joint pain, intense muscular pain and neurological disturbances.

    In experiments done on rats, low frequency sound has been shown to cause severe trauma to the cells lining the respiratory tract (Oliveira et al., 2001) and the delicate brush cells lining the respiratory tract fuse together.

    Infrasound has been shown to damage numerous systems, including the liver and testes, of laboratory animals under experimental conditions , and some effects on people have been noted at 100 decibels. From Infrasound Toxicology Summary, 2001:

    "When male volunteers were exposed to simulated industrial infrasound of 5 and 10 Hz and levels of 100 and 135 dB for 15 minutes, feeling of fatigue, apathy, and depression, pressure in the ears, loss of concentration, drowsiness, and vibration of internal organs were reported.

    In addition, effects were found in the central nervous system, the cardiovascular system, and the respiratory system. Synchronization phenomena were enhanced in the left hemisphere.

    Visual motor responses to stimuli were prolonged, and the strength of effector response was reduced. Heart rate was increased during the initial minutes of exposure.

    Depression of the encephalic hemodynamics with decreased venous flow from the skull cavity and was observed. Heart muscle contraction strength was reduced. Respiration rate was significantly reduced after the first minute of exposure." Reference 29, Karpova et al.,1970.

    Given this, it does not surprise me that people in the wind farm complain of malaise, lack of concentration, vibration, and cardiovascular effects, among others. Infrasound at very low frequencies has measured nearly 100 decibels in a 17 turbine wind farm (van den Berg, 2004).

    What levels of infrasound have been recorded in the middle of a 100 unit wind farm comprised of GE 1.5 MW turbines? At what threshold are effects of infrasound seen with continuous exposure? We need answers.

    Is the level of low- frequency sound in a wind farm sufficient to result in vibroacoustic disease?

    An investigation of a home in a wind farm revealed that the home had levels of Infrasound and low- frequency vibration conducive to the formation of vibroacoustic disease (Alvez-Pereira et al 2007, In-Home Wind Turbine Noise is Conducive to Vibroacoustic Disease posted on www.wind-watch.org). More investigations like this need to be done, as not all homes in a wind farm will be affected equally by these agents.

    In people with occupational exposure to low frequency sound, it can take 10 years to reach stage 3 vibroacoustic disease. Therefore, to know the full health effects of wind turbines, we need to look at older wind farms as well.

    In a complex generating 150 megawatts of electricity, there will be some electrical pollution. Wind turbines create "dirty electricity" which has been implicated in a variety of symptoms (Havas, M. 2006).

    David Colling of Ontario, who has studied the dirty electricity created by wind farms, describes the effects on people as being "like living inside a microwave." The effects are reduced with buried cables, but there are still effects, especially around substations. (See David Colling`s You Tube videos on electrical pollution and wind turbines)

    If not carefully constructed, electricity from the turbines can overload rural power grids, back up into people`s homes and barns, and into the ground, creating ground currents.

    All electricity generated has to complete a circuit and flow back to the site of production through the neutral return wire. There are grounding rods on the neutral return wires, so that some current can constantly flow down the grounding rods and through the earth back to the substation, more when the wire is overloaded or corroded.

    A Minnesota study found that up to 70% of the neutral current returns to the substation via the earth, in some areas, in the form of ground current.

    Dr. Duane Dahlberg has stated "Dairy operators are frequently required by state codes to construct equipotential planes in their barns as a means of avoiding electric shocks for the cows. Unfortunately the equipotential plane is a good conductor which attracts a greater percentage of the ground currents, causes the cows to be exposed to greater continuous currents, and frequently increases stray voltage effects . . . On dairy farms, current in the ground is associated with behavioral, health and production effects in cows."

    These effects have occurred in Mr. Srnkas cattle in the Lincoln Township wind farm.

    100 turbines (with dangerous levels of rotor shaft voltages, up to 1200 volts) and 80 miles of cable carrying up to 150 megawatts of electricity will need to be grounded also, resulting in more current in our ground to get into homes.

    The electricity generated has to find its way back to the wind farm, a portion of which will travel through the ground in currents and become concentrated in the wind farm as it makes its way back. Ground currents enter our homes through plumbing and other conduits creating magnetic fields.

    Wertheimer, Savitz, and Leeper published a paper in 1995 that showed an association between cancer and conductive plumbing in residences, suggesting an increased cancer risk for persons with elevated magnetic fields from ground currents.

    The utility can contribute to electrical pollution in another way when they connect the neutral on the primary side of the transformer serving a farm to the neutral on the secondary of the transformer. The National Electrical Code (NEC), which covers farm wiring, requires that the secondary neutral be hard wired to a building`s water system, structure and electrical ground rod. So, if the transmission line neutral is overloaded, more current from the electrical transmission neutral flows into the plumbing and structures on the farm.

    Here in Wisconsin currents can be measured flowing through the grounds of the transmission lines, as opposed to California where much larger neutral cables are used and current cannot be measured at the ground.

    Electricity from the neutral or from ground currents flowing through plumbing can result in EMF and contact currents. According to a study done by Douglas (1993), the electric current flowing through water pipes and other grounding paths may be the largest magnetic field source in the home other than appliances.

    Exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) has been linked to the formation of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrigs disease) and is considered "possibly carcinogenic" by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

    A study in Turkey demonstrated that men who worked around low frequency EMF had higher levels of genotoxic effects in their lymphocytes. Genotoxic events are mutations which may result in cancers or other adverse outcomes. Children are especially susceptible to the effects of EMF (Kheifets, 2005); exposure above 0.4 µT has been linked to the formation of childhood leukemia (Ahlbom et al, 2001, Angelillo and Villari, 1999).

    Rates of childhood cancer have been found to be increased for children living within 600 meters of electrical transmission lines at time of birth (Draper et al, 2005). Experts have argued that we should do all we can to reduce exposure to EMF in children and fetuses (Carpenter and Sage, 2008). Building 150 megawatt electricity generating complex around families seems unwise to me. It would make more sense to put wind farms in unpopulated areas.

    Exposure to more than one of these agents at a time, as occurs in wind farms, may result in especially detrimental health effects.

    From the research literature it appears that the combination of both whole body vibration and low frequency noise is particularly dangerous. Low frequency sound alone is not genotoxic, but when combined with vibration, chronic occupational exposure has genotoxic effects (Silva et al., 1999, 2002).

    This result has been replicated in laboratory animal experiments, demonstrating the mutations are definitely due to the combination of whole body vibration and low frequency noise. Again, genotoxic effects can result in cancer, and cancers have occurred in cattle in the Lincoln Township wind farm. Yet, to my knowledge, no one has studied genotoxic events in wind farms, or even the mortality rates in herds or people in the wind farms.

    When I first looked at the list of symptoms being reported from the wind farm in Lincoln Township, I doubted such seemingly disparate symptoms could all be caused by wind turbines. A survey of scientific literature revealed plausible explanations for them based on exposures to infrasound/low frequency sound, vibration and electrical pollution.

    We may all be exposed to some of these agents each day, but we know wind farms create these forms of pollution, increasing the dosage (and duration) of exposure for people living inside the wind energy complex.

    The scientific literature tells us of detrimental health effects from prolonged occupational exposure to these agents including vibroacoustic disease, genotoxic effects and embryonic mortality. People and animals in the wind farms seem to be suffering the very effects the science would predict for overexposure to these agents.

    Many research studies demonstrate that the detrimental effects of exposure to these agents increase in severity with increasing time of exposure.

    It concerns me that there are no scientifically-established safe levels for continuous exposure to this combination of agents.

    In occupational exposures people can go home after 8 hours of work and have 16 hours for their bodies to actively recover from the exposures, 64 hours on the weekend.

    People in a wind energy complex don`t get that break from exposure.

    Safe levels are likely to be considerably lower for the elderly, those with underlying health problems, pregnant women, children and fetuses.

    The standards we have also do not take into consideration the compounding of effects which can result from exposure to multiple agents at one time. Based on the chicken embryo studies, any level of exposure to low frequency vibration may pose some risk to developing embryos, as no threshold effect was observed (Shannon et al., 1994).

    We have reports of animals in the wind farms here in Wisconsin with reproductive problems. Scott Srnkas cows suffer spontaneous abortion, problems calving, birth defects such as missing eyeballs and tails - all since the wind turbines.

    Jim Vollmer has seen changes in his chicken`s reproduction - lower hatch rates and birth defects such as missing eyeballs and crossed beaks.

    Ann Wirtz has reported reproductive problems in her alpacas. Since the wind farm became operational, they have not been able to accomplish a live birth - pregnancy always results in miscarriage or stillbirth. There are other reports of chickens no longer laying eggs, and there may be more reports of reproductive effects of which I am not aware.

    People living in the Lincoln Township wind complex have reported an inability to conceive. It appears, from the scientific literature, that vibration is a reproductive hazard which can result in miscarriage, stillbirth and other changes in the reproductive system of women (Balichiyeva, 1993, Marinova, 1976, Penkov, 2007, Seidel, 1993).

    In rats it can reduce the blood flow to the reproductive organs (Nakamura 1996). What happens to little girls growing up in the wind farms, experiencing the continual "deep base" type vibration that people feel in their bodies and the microseismic vibrations? Are their reproductive organs affected? What about their egg cells experiencing the low frequency sound and vibration, a combination which could be genotoxic? Girls are born with all the egg cells they will ever have.

    To my knowledge, no one has even studied the fertility rates or rates of birth defects in people and animals in wind farms, or in people exposed to wind farms. We need concrete scientific proof that the vibration, acoustic and electrical pollution created by wind farms will not cause disease, birth defects or infertility in anyone, before continuing to build them.

    I`ve heard arguments for wind energy stating that it reduces coal emissions and therefore also reduces birth defects caused by those emissions.

    Based on the reports out of the wind farms, there could be far worse reproductive consequences in people or animals (infertility, spontaneous abortion or miscarriage, stillbirth, and birth defects) as a result of wind energy than there ever was from coal emissions or nuclear power in this country.

    This needs to be studied. In Europe vibration exposure is recognized as a potential reproductive hazard (EU Directive 92/85/EEC), and vibration or EMF exposures can result in reproductive problems in people, or animals under experimental conditions (Al-Akhras, 2008, Brown et al., 1992, Hardell and Sage, 2008, Kim et al, 1999, Lahijani et al, 2007, Penkov , 2007, Seidel, 1993, Uysal et al, 2004).

    On many levels wind farming raises concerns, but none more than the health complaints of residents of wind farms.

    One cannot read the updated report from Lincoln Township without being concerned. The problems being reported are not just nuisances. When complaints arise in the wind farms, people, homes and farms should be monitored for low frequency sound/infrasound, vibration and electrical pollution.

    If this were done on a regular basis, we would know what levels and combinations of these agents may cause health effects, but since health complaints have been ignored, and studies have not been done, those levels are not defined.

    People living in the wind farms need rights and protection.

    As it stands, complaints are often ignored. There should be requirements for health care practitioners to report all health problems in wind farms, for investigations into complaints and for resolution of problems -not at the resident`s expense.

    If neighbors suffer ill effects, turbines should be shut down until the problems are resolved.

    It is beyond my comprehension that an individual farmer is allowed to make a decision to put up a power plant with a giant industrial turbine, atop a skyscraping tower, without community approval. The community suffers burdens and hazards because of that decision. It should be a decision of the entire community whom it affects.

    If wind turbines are coming to the area, organizations such as Healthy Wind Wisconsin recommend documenting everything - property value, the views from one`s property, the wildlife that frequents one`s home, well water quality, noise levels on a clear calm night, health records, electrical pollution, and more. They recommend this because more problems and more lawsuits are anticipated as this virtually unregulated industry continues to grow.

    The residents of a wind farm are not just being "stressed out" by the wind farm, there are physical forces acting on their bodies as a result of the wind farm, physical forces that may do permanent damage. If we were putting up nuclear power plants, and we had reports of animals around them not able to successfully reproduce or being born without eyeballs, and also had some people reporting an inability to conceive, we would halt any new construction until it had been studied. In wind farms, this is exactly what we are seeing.

    I realize there may be technical difficulty in ascertaining the amount of vibration set up inside one`s body, but I am asking you to invoke the precautionary principle and suspend wind farm development until the reproductive effects of wind farms, here in Wisconsin, have been studied. If you move forward before studies have been done, people`s reproductive rights may be violated.

    In March, when Governor Doyle signed a bill banning BPA in baby bottles and cups for children, he stated "It seems to me that if there is a question of (safety), the balance we should strike is on protecting our children."

    I agree with Governor Doyle. I want my children protected. And people in the wind farm want to have children. Elderly people, stay-at-home moms, children, and babies are in these wind farms 24/7 being bathed in low frequency sound/infrasound, vibration and electrical pollution.

    If we are going to err in the siting of wind turbines, it should be on the side of safety for the people.

    Thank you for your consideration,

    Lynne Knuth, Ph.D.

    P.S. I attended the recent meeting with the Brown County Board of Health and Board of Human Services.

    I wish everyone in this state had been able to hear the testimonials of the people who are suffering in industrial wind projects here in Wisconsin.

    We live in the best country in the world, a country that cares about people, founded on the principle that all men are created equal and have equal rights under the law.

    Each life is equally valuable.

    To hear that the wind siting council referred to people suffering in wind farms as "collateral damage" is disturbing.Collateral damage may be unavoidable in military operations, but it is not acceptable in day to day life.

    The life of each person suffering in a wind farm is as valuable as the life of each legislator living in Madison.

    I`d like to see them switch places; then we`d get some wind farm legislation that makes sense.

    If people are going to suffer because of a new technology, we do not move forward with it, but instead we come up with a better solution. There are better solutions to our country`s problems.

    I affirm that these comments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

    Lynne Knuth, PhD

    Reedsville, WI

    References:

    Ahlbom IC, Cardis E, Green A, Linet M, Savitz D and Swerdlow A. ICNIRP (International Commission for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) Standing Committee on Epidemiology. Review of the epidemiologic literature on EMF and Health. Environ Health Perspect. 2001, Dec; 109 Suppl 6:911-33.

    Angelillo IF, Villari P. Residential exposure to electromagnetic fields and childhood leukaemia: a meta-analysis. Bull World Health Organ 1999; 77 (11): 906 - 915

    Al-Akhras MA Influence of 50 Hz magnetic field on sex hormones and body, uterine, and ovarian weights of adult female rats. Electromagn Biol Med. 2008; 27(2):155-63.

    Alves-Pereira M. Castelo Branco NA. Vibroacoustic disease: biological effects of infrasound and low-frequency noise explained by mechanotransduction cellular signalling. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2007 Jan-Apr; 93(1-3):256-79. [Progress in biophysics and molecular biology]

    Balichiyeva DV. Vibration in parental occupation as a risk factor in the health and development of offspring. Reprod Toxicol 1993 Sep-Oct;7(5):492-3

    Briese V, Fanghänel J, Gasow H. Effect of pure sound and vibration on the embryonic development of the mouse. Zentralbl Gynakol. 1984; 106(6):379-88.

    Brown KM, Doynov PG, Barber MK, Litovitz TL, Litovitz TA. Effects of extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields on chicken embryogenesis. Toxicologist 1992 Feb;12(1):100

     

    Carpenter DO, Sage C. Setting prudent public health policy for electromagnetic field exposures. Rev Environ Health. 2008 Apr-Jun;23(2):91-117.

    Celikler S, Aydemir N, Vatan O, Kurtuldu S, Bilaloglu R. A biomonitoring study of genotoxic risk to workers of transformers and distribution line stations. Int J Environ Health Res. 2009 Dec;19(6):421-30.

    Coleman M, Beral V. A review of epidemiological studies of the health effects of living near or working with electricity generation and transmission equipment. : Int J Epidemiol. 1988, Mar; 17(1):1-13

    Dolk H, Busby A, Armstrong BG, Walls PH. Geographical variation in anophthalmia and microphthalmia in England, 1988-94. BMJ. 1998, Oct 3; 317(7163):905-9; discussion 910. [BMJ (Clinical research ed.)]

    Douglas, John. 1993. "Survey of residential magnetic field sources". EPRI Journal, April/May 1993, pp 19-25

    Duane A. Dahlberg, Ph.D. Ground Currents An Important Factor in Electromagnetic Exposure.

    Frey, B.J., and P.J. Haddon. Noise Radiation from Wind Turbines Installed Near Homes: Effects on Health. www.windturbinenoisehealthhumanrights.com. Feb, 2007.

    Hardell L. Sage C. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public exposure standards. Biomed Pharmacother. 2008, Feb; 62(2):104-9.

    Havas M. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: biological effects of dirty electricity with emphasis on diabetes and multiple sclerosis Electromagn Biol Med. 2006;25(4):259-68.Abstract

    Electric Transmission Lines Individual Rights vs Utility Rights of Public Domain
    By Donald Hillman, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Michigan State University.2005.

    Kheifets L, Repacholi M, Saunders R, van Deventer E. The sensitivity of children to electromagnetic fields. Pediatrics. 2005, Aug; 116(2):e303-13.

    Kim YW, Cho JY, Lee JS, Kang SH, Cho MK, Kim YM. Evaluation of fetal abnormalities in mice continuously exposed to 60 Hz electromagnetic fields for 6 months. Teratology 1999 May;59(5):29A-30A

    Lahijani MS, Nojooshi SE, Siadat SF. Light and electron microscope studies of effects of 50 Hz electromagnetic fields on preincubated chick embryo. Electromagn Biol Med. 2007; 26(2):83-98. [Electromagnetic biology and medicine]

    Li P, McLaughlin J, Infante-Rivard C. Maternal occupational exposure to extremely low frequency magnetic fields and the risk of brain cancer in the offspring. Cancer Causes Control. 2009, Aug; 20(6):945-55. [Cancer causes & control : CCC]

    Luo Q, Yang J, Zeng QL, Zhu XM, Qian YL, Huang HF. 50-Hertz electromagnetic fields induce gammaH2AX foci formation in mouse preimplantation embryos in vitro. Biol Reprod. 2006, Nov; 75(5):673-80.

    Marinova G, Svetoslavova E, Mateeva E. Industrial vibrations and their repercussions on the basic functions of the genital system in women Akush Ginekol (Sofiia). 1976; 15(1):74-8. [Akusherstvo i ginekologiia]

    Nakamura H, Ohsu W, Nagase H, Okazawa T, Yoshida M, Okada A. Uterine circulatory dysfunction induced by whole-body vibration and its endocrine pathogenesis in the pregnant rat. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1996;72(4):292-6.

    Oliveira MJ, Pereira AS, Castelo Branco NA, Grande NR, Aguas AP. In utero and postnatal exposure of Wistar rats to low frequency/high intensity noise depletes the tracheal epithelium of ciliated cells. Lung. 2001; 179(4):225-32.

    Pearce MS, Hammal DM, Dorak MT, McNally RJ, Parker L. Paternal occupational exposure to electro-magnetic fields as a risk factor for cancer in children and young adults: a case-control study from the North of England.
    Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2007, Sep; 49(3):280-6.

    Penkov A. Influence of occupational vibration on the female reproductive system and function.

    Akush Ginekol (Sofiia). 2007; 46(3):44-8. [Akusherstvo i ginekologiia]

    Seidel, H. Selected health risks caused by long-term, whole-body vibration. AM J Ind Med. 1993, Apr:23(4):589-604

    Silva MJ; Carothers A; Castelo Branco NA; Dias A; Boavida MG. Sister chromatid exchange analysis in workers exposed to noise and vibration. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1999, Mar; 70(3 Pt 2):A40-5.

    Silva MJ; Dias A; Barreta A; Nogueira PJ; Castelo-Branco NA; Boavida MG. Low frequency noise and whole-body vibration cause increased levels of sister chromatid exchange in splenocytes of exposed mice. Teratog Carcinog Mutagen. 2002; 22(3):195-203

      


    SAVE THE DATE: The PSC will be holding public hearings for the wind sitting rules on

    Monday, June 28 @ 1PM & 6PM in Fond Du Lac at the City Hall on 160 S. Macy Street

    Tuesday, June 29 @ 1PM & 6PM at Holiday Inn in Tomah on 1017 E. McCoy Blvd.

    Wednesday, June 30 at the PSC in Madison on 610 North Whitney Way, 1pm and 6pm

    The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin has scheduled several hearings throughout the state regarding the creation of statewide wind turbine regulations.

    The new regulations apply to wind farms that will generate less than 100 Megawatts of power. Specifics about turbine height, noise and distance setbacks, shadow flicker, signal interference and when residents and government agencies must be notified about proposed projects are included in the 53-page document.

    To view the document, go to www.psc.wi.gov, enter docket number 1-AC-231 into the case search bar and download the document titled “Notice of Hearings” with the Public Service Commission reference number 131882.

    Comments are due on Wednesday, July 7, 2010 at noon and must be mailed to: Sandra J. Paske, Secretary to the Commission, Public Service Commission, P.O. Box 7854, Madison, Wis., 53707-7854.

    Comments can also be faxed to (608) 266-3957 and are due by Tuesday, July 6, 2010 at noon.

    Online comments can be submitted at http://psc.wi.gov using docket number 1-AC-231.

    6/14/10 Got trouble living in the Blue Sky/ Green Field wind project? We'll listen as long as you don't complain about the noise: A closer look at "successful" complaint resolution in the 88 turbine We Energies Blue Sky/ Green Fields wind project

    HAVE YOU REACHED OUT AND TOUCHED YOUR PSC TODAY?

    The PSC is asking for public comment on the recently approved draft siting rules. The deadline for comment is July 7th, 2010.

    The setback recommended in this draft is 1250 feet from non-participating homes, 500 feet from property lines.

    CLICK HERE to get a copy of the draft siting rules approved by the commissioners on May 14th, and to find out more about the Wind Siting Council

    CLICK HERE and type in docket number 1-AC-231 to read what's been posted so far.

    CLICK HERE to leave a comment on the Wind Siting Council Docket

    What Wind Siting Council Chairman Dan Ebert says about why there is no specific provision for complaint resolution in the draft rules he presented on June 9th, 2010

     "Andy [Hesselbach] I think, I really in particular have valued your expertise and guidance throughout this process because I think that as a company and I think that other council members recognize that, you guys [We Energies] have done a pretty good job of striking this balance and so I was persuaded on the complaint resolution process that that is valuable but I'm also hesitant to prescribe a particular solution because I think every community is different, every developer is different, and it should really be, you know, an honest effort between the local government and the developers to set up that complaint resolution process.

    So I think to have the rules say you guys should do this without prescribing a particular solution is the best way to proceed.


    During Wind Siting Council Meetings, Chairman Dan Ebert has continually referred to the success of the complaint resolution process used by We Energies in the Blue Sky/ Green Field project.

    While presenting the Siting Council's draft proposal, he uses this 'success' to justify not including provisions for complaint resolution in the draft rules beyond "work with the wind company and the local government".

    Here are the minutes of the Wind Turbine Standing Committee which was formed to address the complaints of increasingly frustrated residents who were getting poor response from We Energies.

    It's hard to see how this can be called a success. Residents of this project who have contacted Better Plan have made it clear nothing has changed.

    The Blue Sky/Green Field project was sited with the almost the same guidelines being proposed by the Wind Siting Council.

    "The Wind Turbines are here to stay. They will not be shut off. Noise and property values will not be addressed."

    -From the minutes of Wind Turbine Standing Committee meeting

     

    TOWN OF MARSHFIELD, FOND DU LAC COUNTY, WISCONSIN

    Minutes of Wind Turbine Standing Committee, August 20, 2009, 7:00 pm

    Presiding officer, John Bord called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm leading the Pledge of Allegiance. Confirmation of publication is noted.

    Those representing the Town of Marshfield were John Bord, Cathy Seibel, Dennis Stenz;

    Concerned Citizens representatives include Larry Lamont, James Mueller, John Gierach, and Dick VanderVelde (tardy).

    Others present: Tanya Holler-Muench, and Mark Noah representing We Energies

    and Sue Schumacher, a biologist, to present information relating to the avian studies.

    Also present was Jim Vollmer [resident] and Joe Bauer (tardy).

    Jim Vollmer filed a ‘Concerned Citizen Form’ and expressed his concerns:

    “Radio Reception, TV Reception, Flicker, Birds dying, Noise and extra cost of electric”.

    He has contacted We Energies about these issues and states that We Energy has not made efforts to resolve these concerns.

    Jim Vollmer stated that his problems are not adequately addressed. He still has issues
    with TV and radio reception. He is not able to receive his usual radio station and even
    though he purchased a new TV, it does not work all the time. The flickering is disrupting
    his sleep. Blinds have been installed by We Energy.

    Jim raises chickens. He states the birds are showing signs of stress. He has asked that
    stray voltage to be tested. No one came.

    Some birds have gotten Coccidiosis and have died. When sick birds were transferred to another environment away from the towers, they recovered.

    The noise from the towers is very annoying especially when trying to sleep. He cannot open windows because of the sound and is forced to use the air conditioner.

    Jim stated the solution to his problems is for We Energies to buy his property, “There is
    no other way out for me.”

    Tanya [From We Energies] stated, “We cannot buy property”. She related that
    issues have been addressed. Dish network has been installed and working until Jim
    purchased a “top of the line Sony TV”.

    We have tried several different radios that are working for other residents. 13 window blinds have been installed.

    We do not know that the birds are dying because of the towers. We can get a stray voltage meter and consult with an agricultural specialist. We Energies can enlist the expertise of technicians.

    Before the September 17th, 2009 meeting, We Energies will:

    1. Test for stray voltage (Jason)
    2. Consult with a Farm Management Representative regarding the chickens
    3. Consult directly with a Dish Network technician regarding the TV issue
    including bring in a different TV set to test
    4. Check further on the radio issues. Larry Lamont will also check his radio to
    see if he has the capability of the station WIXX
    5. Consult with experts regarding insulation for noise as suggested by Dick
    VanderVelde.

    Biologist, Sue Schumacher presented an interesting talk about avian studies.

    The next meeting will be September 17, 2009 at 7:00 pm at the Marshfield Town Hall.
    The meeting adjourned at 9:10 PM.


    TOWN OF MARSHFIELD FOND DU LAC COUNTY, WISCONSIN
    Minutes of Wind Turbine Standing Committee, September 17, 2009, 7:00 pm

    Presiding officer, John Bord called the meeting to order leading the Pledge of Allegiance.
    Confirmation of ‘Publication’ was noted.

    Town officials present: John Bord, Dennis Stenz, Ken Kraus, Cathy Seibel, Connie Pickart;

    Concerned Citizen Committee: Jim Mueller, Larry Lamont, Dick VanderVelde. John Gierach was absent.

    Tanya-Holler- Muench, Mark Noah and Bob Service represented We Energies.

    Also present were Liz and Leander Ebertz, Joe Bauer, Jim Vollmer and Rose Petrie.

    John stated that he and Jim Mueller met and agreed that after the last meeting, some
    complaints were already being addressed. However, they disagreed regarding noise
    issues.

    John stated that ‘noise’ would no longer be addressed since We Energies is
    following the guidelines of the JDA and the PSC.

    Jim replied ‘noise’ issue needs to be addressed. A future noise-study may be initiated to determine if We Energies is complying with the 50dBls.

    John noted that the Town taxes have been reduced 11.4%.

    Property values are debatable. Recovery-wise, in the future, the towers will probably be
    a “non-issue”. TV, radio, flicker are the main three topics.

    Old Concerns-Jim Vollmer-Several solutions have been presented to Jim Vollmer regarding TV, radio and flicker problems. Jim states the problems are not resolved.

    It is noted that after speaking with a DISH tech, it has been acknowledged that some issue are one with the DISH technology, not related to the turbines.

    Regarding radio installation, Jim has indicated that the radio is performing better than the previous model but is still not acceptable. 18 window shades have been applied to Jim’s house.

    Stray voltage tests show there is no unusual voltage activity in Jim’s chicken shed. We Energies Ag Representative has referred Jim to the WI DATCP’s Wisconsin Farm Center regarding coccidiosis in the chickens. Jim has not contacted DATCP thus far.

    New Concerns-Joe Bauer-Joe has problems with radio and TV reception. Window shades have been applied to Joe’s house.

    Shane Baganz- We Energies has contacted Shane and Shane will not pursue concerns at
    this time.

    Liz Ebertz-still has radio and TV problems.

    Darlene Mueller- The Muellers continue to have TV and radio interference. Flickering also is a concern.

    It is noted the above all have concerns with noise and noise interfering with sleep.

    Also noted, most of the concerned citizens questioned why taxes have not been reduced. Cathy again stated the Town does not have jurisdiction over State, County or School Taxes.
    “The Town portion went down by 11.4%.”

    Bernie and Rose Petrie-The Petries are concerned with TV reception or lack thereof. They refuse DISH and want a TV antennae and tripod.

    All parties were involved in the discussion that ensued and all were allowed to offer possible solutions to their own and others problems.

     

    TOWN OF MARSHFIELDFOND DU LAC COUNTY, WISCONSIN
    Minutes of Wind Turbine Standing Committee, September 17, 2009, 7:00 pm

    We Energies has offered Jim Vollmer and Joe Bauer a new radio, one that is presently
    being tested by Jim Mueller. If it solves Jim’s problems, they will receive that radio also.

    Liz has asked for another weather radio for her lower level. We Energies will provide
    one. We Energies offered to move her Direct TV monitor to another location. Liz
    wishes to wait.

    We Energies offered Jim Vollmer a Cirrus radio channel. Jim prefers a radio solution over increasing his TV package.

    Jim Mueller would like a better explanation of decibels, and address all noise problems.
    He wants long term satisfaction regarding TV issues. The present DISH package is
    acceptable, but after the two years are up, We Energies will only provide Green Bay channels.

    Jim stated, “That is not what we were told when coming into this.” “It’s not about getting ahead. “It’s about getting us back to where we were. It’s about replacing with equal kind and quality or close.”

    Jim stated that “you need to take that back to We Energies and discuss it further because it’s not making us whole.”

    Tanya [We Energies] stated they “will take it back.”

    Dennis stated, “It’s only fair to replace what they had.”

    Mark Noah [We Energies] stated, “We said we will reconsider it. We will reconsider it.”

    Jim Mueller stated that Bruce Dalka would like to appear with his concerns, but works
    later in the evening and would the committee be willing to meet on a Saturday morning.

    After Bruce fills out a ‘Concerned Citizens Form’, a date and time will be set.

    John noted the next meeting is Thursday, October 15, 2009 at 7:00 PM. Because the third Thursday in November is hunting season, would there be any objection to holding the meeting November 12, 2009 at 7:00 PM instead. None noted.

    Jim Mueller suggested that a longer time frame be allowed after a ‘Concerned Citizen Form’ is received in order give We energies adequate time to address the concern before the citizen appears before the next meeting.

    Jim Mueller moved to adjourn and Cathy seconded the motion. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:05 P.M.

    Connie Pickart, recording secretary

     

    TOWN OF MARSHFIELD FOND DU LAC COUNTY, WISCONSIN
    Minutes of Wind Turbine Standing Committee, October 15, 7:00 pm

    Presiding officer, John Bord, called the meeting to order leading the Pledge of Allegiance. Confirmation of Publication was noted.

    Town officers present were John Bord, Ken Kraus, Cathy Seibel and Connie Pickart.

    We Energies was represented by Tanya Holler Muench, Mark Noah and Bob Servais.

    Representing the ‘Concerned Citizens’ were Jim Mueller, and Larry Lamont. John Geriach and Dick VanderVelde were absent.

    Jim Vollmer and Joe Bauer were also present.

    Connie noted additions/corrections to the September minutes:

    We Energies would look into providing Jim Vollmer with a satellite radio. They did not offer Mr. Vollmer a Cirrus radio channel.

    Also, Larry Lamont requested that a comment regarding whether the turbines could be turned off when they are not producing be included in the minutes.

    Mark Noah [We Energies] replied, “No they could not be turned off.” “There is always power to them.”

    Tanya [We Energies] provided a summary of follow-up activities from the September meeting:

    1. Jim Vollmer received a new connector. Jim reports this worked. Stray voltage testing
    showed no stray electrical activity. Bob Servias reported that audio-visual, lip sync, was off .1 of a second. “This happens in higher definition TV.” Tanya stated a ‘Receiver Switch Out’ may be an alternative. Bob offered to help Jim adjust his TV.

    Tanya reported that We Energies will give the local channels including the ‘family package’ to all residents within the wind farm who experience problems with TV reception because of the wind turbines, beyond the contracted two year term. Jim Mueller stated, “We realize it is impossible to give us all we had. You are trying to make us whole and we thank you for that.”

    Jim Vollmer stated that regarding radio reception, we’re “at a stand-still”. “Whatever, they have done, it’s been a waste of time.”

    A satellite radio system will be installed at different sites to determine if satellite may be
    a solution. Tanya stated that We Energies is not opposed to fixing the radio problem, but
    We cannot be taken advantage of. There needs to be justification. We need
    documentation.

    2. We Energies has offered to install an antenna at the Rose Petrie residence per Petrie’s
    request. If that does not fix their problem, We Energies has offered to install the Dish system.

    3. Elizabeth Ebertz received the weather radio. She will contact We Energies if she wishes to pursue repositioning the satellite dish.

    4. Joshua Tank received the DISH Network and reported it was working well.

    There were no new Concerned Citizen Forms for the month of October. Bruce Dalka has
    filed a form and will be addressed at the Thursday, November 12th meeting at 7:00 pm.

    Jim Mueller asked if the turbines could be turned off when they are not active. Mark [We Energies] replied, “Our system does not have that capability, to sense and turn off automatically.

    Cathy moved to adjourn and Larry Lamont seconded. The meeting adjourned at 8:35 pm.
    Connie Pickart, recording clerk

    TOWN OF MARSHFIELDFOND DU LAC COUNTY, WISCONSIN
    Minutes of Wind Turbine Standing Committee, November 12, 2009 at 7:00 pm

    Presiding Officer, John Bord, called the meeting to order. He led the Pledge of Allegiance. Confirmation of publication was noted.

    Committee members, John Bord and Cathy Seibel were present from the Town Board. Town Officers Dennis Stenz and Ken Kraus were also present. ‘

    Concerned Citizens’ were represented by Jim Mueller and Richard VanderVelde. Larry Lamont and John Gierach were absent.

    We Energies representatives were Tanya Holler-Muench and Mark Noah and Bob Servias, We Energies technician, was also present.

    Bruce Dalka was present to address his concerns.

    There were approximately 24 members from the public, 8 from the Town of Marshfield.

    Comments by Chairman Bord:

    Comments from the public will be limited to 3 minutes each. The Wind Turbines
    are here to stay. They will not be shut off. Noise and property values will not be
    addressed.

    Bruce Dalka disagreed that “John Bord is limiting what people say and limiting time”.

    Cathy stated some of these things are out of our control. This committee cannot change the JDA.

    John Bord read an e-mail he received from [We Energies BS/GF]Project Manager, Walter (Doc) Musekamp. Doc states, ”We have a significant issue…that based on the testimony of Larry Lamont and Jim Mueller at Wednesday nights PSCW hearing…; it is clear from their comments that these monitoring committee meetings over the last four months have had no value in their opinion. I couldn’t get into the room because of the crowd, but Tanya was”.

    John stated he had no problems with people speaking their opinions.

    According to another source, not We Energies, “You did a pretty good job of ripping on
    We Energies”. Tanya related she did not have problems with people stating their opinions, but “it seems the efforts we have taken up the last four months, seem to not make any difference.”

    "There are so many people that don’t even want to come here any more because they have been beaten around so much that they have given up. They are not going to bother because it falls on deaf ears. There are still a lot more people out there than you know of.”

    Jim replied, “I DID acknowledge that you were working on the satellite. I DID acknowledge that you were going to extend the contract on the family plan. You did not tell us how long.

    There are so many people that don’t even want to come here any more because they have been beaten around so much that they have given up. They are not going to bother because it falls on deaf ears. There are still a lot more people out there than you know of.”

    Discussions regarding wind Turbine ‘Concerned Citizens Form’-Bruce Dalka:

    Bruce is still having TV reception problems. We Energies has contracted Ransom’s Audio Video to address the situation. Bruce notes that Dave Ransom is not reliable and is not allowed on his property. DISH Network has been called.

    Bruce related that DISH stated there is absolutely nothing wrong with his system. Yet, DISH has told Tanya, that the Turbines are not causing Bruce’s TV problems. Tanya asked, “What would like us to do?” “My problem is other people are getting paid for it. I’m not. My
    problem is, you know what, I could probably live with a glitch, now and again, …pay
    something.”

    Cathy related that she was having DISH problems and had a technician out. He did some adjusting. The problem was better but not completely resolved.

    Per agreement of all parties, Bruce will contact Randy Wagner, a technician from St. Cloud,
    who along with Bob Servias will meet at Bruce’s house to assess the situation and resolved the problems.

    Bruce has concerns with radio reception. Jim Mueller reported that the Sirius radio provided to Jim Vollmer and Joe Bauer may be an option for Bruce also. Jim noted that Joe Bauer is satisfied with the satellite radio.

    Jim Vollmer states he still has some interference. It was agreed to wait until the two parties are satisfied with Sirius radio, then set some guidelines for going further before providing other residents with the Sirius system as a solution.

    Regarding noise, Bruce is asking for an independent noise study and asks that the Town contact Fond du Lac Co. Bruce noted that “whistling and screaming” was evident at one of the towers near him and that the problem had not been resolved for several months. Since then, that problem has been resolved.

    Dennis asked Mark Noah to comment on the incident about the ‘whistling’ turbine in question. An abnormal sound was noted by residents and verified by repair technicians. The tower was shut down, a crane brought in and the turbine fixed. The sound level is now at an acceptable level.

    Jim Mueller would like to see such issues addressed on a timelier basis. Mark noted, “It is not in our interest to have the turbines not working.”

    Bruce noted there is health issues associated with the turbines. Bruce requested the Town Board to contact FdL Co Health Nurse, Diane Copazzio, to provide a health study.

    Tanya related that We Energies has just went through a very lengthy, technical hearing in Madison, regarding FdL Co.; the epidemiology research and noise and everything that goes along with that as well. It has gone through the State and it is on the record.

    Regarding safety issues, Bruce stated, “Three days and nights the wind turbines were shut down, the lights were not on.” Mark stated there was an incident at the substation. We Energies has an FAA permit which tells them which turbines need lighting and what type of light. If there is a problem, we need to send a notice to FAA that there is a problem. Then that notification goes out to all airports.

    Bruce stated, “That wasn’t done though.” Mark replied , “Yes it was.” Tanya, “We filed the FAA report.” Bruce received a letter from the FAA stating that the report is on their website. However, the letter did not say FAA did not receive the report as alleged.

    Bruce also has concerns about the diminishing bat population, ice slings, shadow flicker, declining property values. He states ‘Flight For Life, (FFL) will not land in the wind farm area. Cathy replied that she has contacted FFL. They stated they have predetermined landing sites and these sites were determined before the turbines were erected. They will not disclose these sites.

    Bruce wants the Town to contact FFL and demand they reveal the location of these landing sites. It was suggested that Bruce contact the ambulance service so his unique family medical issues are on file if needed.Mt. Calvary Ambulance Service Director was present and she reported that FFL will land as long as the weather is working with them.

    Public Comments:

    Liz Ebertz’s reported that noise in the middle of the night is like a jet that is circling and will not land. Her son has noticed this also. “So it’s not just me.”

    Jim Vollmer continues to have problems with his new wide-screen HDTV. Tanya stated
    they will continue to document and pursue a solution.

    A Town of Empire resident stated that these problems are not problems in Marshfield Township alone.

    The next meeting will be Thursday, January 21, 2010 at 7:00 pm.

    Jim Mueller moved to adjourn and Denis seconded. The meeting adjourned at 9:21 pm.

    Connie Pickart, Recording Secretary

    TOWN OF MARSHFIELD JANUARY 21, 2010 WIND TURBINE STANDING COMMITTEE

    Presiding Town Officer, John Bord called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm leading the ‘Pledge of Allegiance’. Other Town Officers present were Cathy Seibel, Connie Pickart.
    Dennis Stenz was tardy.

    Committee members present were Jim Mueller and Larry Lamont. Dick VanderVelde and John Gierach were absent.

    John Board introduced members representing We Energies: Walter (Doc) Musekamp, Bob Servias and Dale Borusky. Mr. Musekamp and Mr. Borusky replaced Tanya Holler Muench and Mark Noak respectively.

    Members from the public included: Leander and Liz Ebertz, Jim Vollmer, Bruce Dalka and Clarence Kraus(Taycheedah Town Board).

    Review of Tanya Holler-Muench’s Follow Up of Nov. 12, 2009 Meeting

    Tanya Holler Muench provided a 5-page ‘Follow-up” to the November meeting.

    Doc Musekamp offered information regarding Bruce Dalka’s complaint. Bruce related to Bob Servias that when a tower (17A) was out of commission, He had no issues with TV
    reception but when the turbine was restarted, the same issues with TV reception returned.
    Since there may be a correlation between the shut-down of the tower and Bruce’s TV issues, Doc stated that We Energies will investigate this further to establish if there is a
    correlation.

    Bob Servias followed up with Bill Neilson’s complaint regarding declining property values, noise, TV contract for DISH and radio interference. We Energy provided Mr. Nielson with two HD radios. The remaining radios in his home do not provide a consistent signal. Mr. Nielson was provided with an additional HD radio.

    Mr. Nielson complained that he has the most trouble with TV reception when the turbines
    face his home. Bob offered to have his system liked at, but Mr. Nielson declined at this time. Mr. Nielsen was satisfied with the radio and the timely response to his request.

    John Bord contacted FdL County executive, Al Buechel, regarding an independent ‘sound study’. Jim Mueller related that a sound study needs to be honest and impartial.

    Regarding Bruce Dalka’s issues: Bruce claimed that the FAA was not notified when the
    turbine lights were not working during a site outage in June 2009. Tanya’s follow-up confirms that the FAA was properly notified.

    A third party technician, Randy Wagner, inspected Bruce Dalka’s DISH Network system.
    Some irregularities were noted. Bob offered to have a DISH Network technician perform
    further testing. Bruce declined questioning why Wagner could not perform the tests. Wagner was not a DISH Network technician and Wagner did not have any testing equipment with him. Bruce has asked for Direct TV.

    Jim Mueller interjected that perhaps We Energies could contact another source other than Ransom’s since Ransom does not seem to have the capabilities to solve the problems.

    Doc stated that we need to focus on this” latest wrinkle”, that the turbine anomaly may be the cause of the problem.

    Jim Mueller and Larry Lamont presented letters responding to a statement made by Doc
    that was read at the November 2009 meeting. Doc and Tanya both were disappointed by
    the speeches Jim and Larry made at the PSC hearing in Friesland, WI.

    Doc related, “It is clear from their comments that “these monitoring committee meetings …have had no value in their opinion”. Jim and Larry maintain they have the right to free speech. The meetings are accomplishing things and they wish the meetings to continue. Larry stated, “We cannot go back to where we were, but we should not give up on our attempts to improve where we are.”

    Citizen Concern Forms

    Liz Ebertz is concerned that her police scanner is not working. Cathy reported that FdL
    Co has changed frequency and that possibly is the cause. Bob Servias will be checking
    Liz’s equipment.

    Bruce Dalka is concerned that the turbines are causing interference with his cell phone
    reception and has asked We Energies to install a personal cell phone tower mounted on
    his home. We Energies also uses cell phones in the area with no problems. Bob Servias
    stated, “From their technical consultants, cell phone signals are not interfered with”.

    Doc related that in certain instances satellite radios do work and the committee will have
    to set standards as to who should get a satellite radio. Jim Vollmer and Joe Bauer have
    received the okay to have the satellite radio installed. At those sites, it has been verified
    that the turbines have created signal interference. Eligibility needs to be verified in each
    location.

    It was stressed that citizens should contact the ‘hotline’ number first, 1-877-380-0522.

    Then, if We Energies does not respond, go to the committee and fill out a ‘Concerned
    Citizen Form’.

    Dale Borusky asked how and why this committee was formed. John Bord related that the
    committee was to address issues that weren’t being addressed by We Energies. There
    was a need to seek legal counsel as to what the committee is able to do; whether the
    Town Board has the authority to order the shut-down of the turbines and whether We
    Energies is in compliance with the Joint Development Agreement (JDA).

    Attorney John St. Peter was consulted and his memorandum was read by Cathy.
    John St. Peter gave a background of the project and the JDA. He noted the formation and
    role of the committee. He addressed the authority of the Town Board and the regulatory
    power over We Energies.

    In summary, Mr. St. Peter stated, “The complaints receive by the Committee would not
    justify the Town in declaring We Energies to be in default of the Agreement. As for the
    Committee itself, I continue to believe that it has a worthwhile role. However, it cannot
    act as a forum to debate the existence of the Wind Farm. Nor can the Committee function as an arbitrator for the purpose of mandating specific remedies, particularly with regard to signal interference complaints.

    The PSC is the one entity that has control of the situations. They have control over We Energies and the Town."

    A verbal altercation occurred between Bruce Dalka and Dale Borusky. Dale stated he was willing to form a working relationship with Bruce but respect is needed from both
    parties.

    Jim Vollmer questioned if any procedure would be put in place before his poultry react to
    the upcoming seasonal flickering and shadowing. He also noted that TV reception is not
    completely resolved. He has filed a complaint with the PSC.

    It was agreed that the Wind Turbine Standing Committee meetings should continue. An
    educational session, entitled, ‘A General Overview’, will be presented by the We Energies team. The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, March 18, 2010 at 7:00 pm at the Marshfield Town Hall. There are no Concerned Citizens Forms filed at this time. We Energies will continue to address the present issues and provide a ‘follow-up’ at the March 18th meeting.
    There being no further business, John Bord moved to adjourn and Larry Lamont seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 9:35 pm.
    Connie Pickart
    Recording Secretary


    TOWN OF MARSHFIELD MARCH 18, 2010 WIND TURBINE STANDING COMMITTEE

    Presiding officer, John Bord called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm leading the Pledge of
    Allegiance.

    Members of the committee present were Jim Mueller, Larry Lamont, Cathy Seibel and John Bord.

    Other Town Officials present were Ken Kraus and Connie Pickart.

    Dennis Stenz was tardy. Absent were alternates Dick VanderVelde and John Gierach.

    Tanya Holler-Muench, Dale Borusky and Bob Servias represented We Energies.

    Members from the public included, Richard and Dolli-Jo Jordan, Liz Ebertz, Jim Vollmer, Diane/Kim Kraus, Bruce Dalka and Chuck Kiefenheim. Also present was FdL County Executive, Allen Buechel, Gloria Smedema of FdL Co. Public Health Department, and Art Ondrejka operations manager from Vestes American Wind.

    Review of January 21, 2010 meeting

    Regarding Bruce Dalka’s situation-Dale Borusky stated that a letter has been sent to Bruce informing him that We Energies will hire COMSEARCH, an engineering consulting firm who has the expertise in areas of signal interference, to perform tests to evaluate wind turbine interference pertaining to his TV reception.

    Bruce has 7-10 days to respond.

    Tanya stated we have dealt with this problem for two years and it is time “to get to the bottom and move on”. “If the problem is related to the turbine, we will fix it.”

    Dennis Stenz, will represent the Town in the evaluation process. Questions pertaining to
    COMSEARCH’s credentials were directed to their website.

    “They will give We Energies the answers they want. I don’t trust them”. Bruce has asked for an independent company. Bruce will respond to We Energies’ offer in a “timely manner”. We Energies replied, “If you don’t want to accept our offer, we are done”.

    We Energies replied, “If you don’t want to accept our offer, we are done”.

    Regarding Sirius satellite radio-Jim Mueller stated he received Sirius radio and “turned out well”. Larry Lamont still has problems with his and Joe Bauer’s works. Bruce stated We Energies promised him a Sirius radio. Bob Servias stated that if he did, he was wrong to do so at that time. Only three has been approved thus far. Protocol and eligibility issues need to be verified.

    Concerned Citizens Form

    Chuck Kiefenheim-Chuck is concerned about “noise, TV reception, environmental concerns and cell phone roaming”. He reported that “Ransom’s (TV) is unresponsive to his calls, do not return calls”. Chuck is concerned that if We Energies fixes his present concerns and he “signs off”, will We Energies be responsive to any future concerns.

    Tanya responded, “We Energies will fix your problems for however long”.

    Kris Meixensperger- has continuing concerns about “shadow flicker on my house/property”. Tanya reported that Kris refuses window treatments and wants the turbine shut down. “The Towers cannot be shut down.”

    Rickard and Dolli-Jo Jordan-The Jordans are concerned about “health issues for humans
    and animals, water contamination, fires because they attract lightening strikes”. They are
    also concerned about shadow flickering, lowered property values, poor radio and TV reception, increased property taxes and increased electric bills. They do not want window treatments; property values can be directed to the assessors; We Energies will consult with them regarding radio;

    Cathy explained property taxes in the Town of Marshfield have gone down, largely due to the shared revenue the Town has received because of the turbines.

    Rickard asked why the towers were put up in any residential area. Tanya [We Energies] replied because of the “low density” and availability of wind. The Public Service Commission (PSC) has set the standards. We Energies is required by Wisconsin law to create green energy.

    John Bord stated, “Probably the best thing in the long run, is to put all your issues together and go to your legislatures. They are the ones who forced power companies to go to ‘green power’.

    Jim Vollmer-We energies has dealt with Jim’s concerns. Tanya stated, “We have addressed your issues and made recommendations. You have notified [The Public Service Commission], “mitigation is in the State’s hand”. Jim asked if the Town can help. The Town does not have the power to do anything, unless the conditions of the Amended Joint Development Agreement are not followed.

    A five minute break followed. Bruce Dalka left and the Jordans left about half way through the presentation by Art Ondrejka.

    Power Point by Dale Borusky and Art Ondrejka

    Art Ondrejka introduced himself as operations manager for Vestes American Wind, manufacturer of the generator for the turbines. There was a concern of grease on the
    outside of the turbines. This is due to a seal problem and it is fixed. The turbines will be
    cleaned. The DNR has been notified and they are satisfied that there is no contamination
    from the grease.

    Art described the general construction and maintenance of the turbines. The turbines are
    completely computer driven. Maintenance is performed on each turbine every six months minimum. “They run well. They run safe.” A “phenomenal” crew of 13, all local residents, is a top-rated team, no accidents and they keep the turbines running 99% of the time.

    John introduced Allen Buechel, FdL Co. executive. Allen commented that a County funded ‘sound study’ was not feasible. There are approximately 200 turbines in FdL County. Health issues might be coordinated with the Public Health Department.

    Gloria Smedema, FdL Co Public health office, nodded in agreement.

    The next meeting will be May 20, 2010 at 7:00 p.m.
    Cathy Seibel moved to adjourn and Jim Mueller seconded. The meeting adjourned at
    9:25 p.m.
    Connie Pickart, Town Clerk

    Town of Marshfield Wind Turbines Standing Committee Citizen Concern Form
    Meetings will be held the 3rd Thursday of each month at 7:00 PM at the Marshfield Town Hall, 999 Fond du Lac St., Mt. Calvary, WI.

    A completed copy of this form should be submitted 10 days prior to the meeting to:
    Town of Marshfield Wind Turbines Standing Committee
    c\o Jim Mueller
    N8710 Pine Rd
    St. Cloud, WI 53079.
    Name: _____________________________________________________________
    Address: ___________________________________________________________
    Phone: __________________________ E-mail _________________________________
    Please describe your concerns: (Use back of this form if more room is needed)
    Have you contacted We Energies about this issue? Yes No
    Has We Energies made efforts to resolve your concerns? Yes No
    Please explain any details regarding efforts undertaken by We Energies to resolve this concern. Are
    the steps being made in a timely manner?
    What solutions are you seeking?
    Have the concerns been resolved? Yes No
    Please sign below. By signing this form you give the Committee permission to discuss this
    information with We Energies regarding contacts and interactions with you and it gives We Energies
    permission to release information regarding contacts with you and any efforts taken to mitigate your
    concerns.
    Signature: _______________________________________ Date: __________________
    PSC REF#:132436
    Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
    RECEIVED: 06/01/10, 10:49:19 AM

    Previous 5 Entries | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10