Aug. 20—ELLINGTON — The Connecticut Siting Council's recent denial of a petition to build a solar facility at Ellington Airport is welcome news to a local parachuting company.
The council has taken two tie votes this year on USS Solar's petition to build a photovoltaic power station on a 19.2-acre portion of the privately owned airport at the end of its runway on 360 Somers Road.
The council's Aug. 1 denial in a 4-1 vote stated that the solar facility "would have an adverse effect on air navigation and aviation safety." The council said it finds "that the absence of a glare analysis, grounding study, and written confirmation of the applicability or inapplicability of the Federal Aviation Administration structure marking/lighting scheme for the utility poles from the evidentiary record of the proposed facility proceeding demonstrates uncertainty as to the effects of the proposed facility on air navigation and aviation safety."
The facility has been vehemently opposed by members of Connecticut Parachutists Inc., who have been based at the airport since 1970. Instructors, students, and board members for Connecticut Parachutists asked the council to hold a public hearing on the petition, which was held Dec. 5, and beforehand wrote letters expressing concern for the safety and lives of skydivers should the facility be built. They said installation of the proposed facility in the north field includes an area all skydivers are trained to use as a safety measure if they are unable to safely get to the primary landing zone.
Skydivers who are forced to seek alternate landing areas would find themselves navigating other hazards such as power lines, trees, and buildings for lack of a safe option, they said. They said students and instructors who landed in a solar field would be injured or killed.
"Although Connecticut Parachutists understands and supports the need for renewable green energy, CPI is pleased the Siting Council has recognized the impact this installation would have had on health and safety by voting overwhelmingly to deny petition," said Connecticut Parachutists Board President Brett Mickelson about the recent vote.
However, there are circumstances under which USS Solar could have recourse to challenge the decision, Siting Council Executive Director and staff attorney Melanie A. Bachman said.
USS Solar could revive the appeal that's filed with Connecticut Superior Court and/or submit a motion to reopen the petition based on some council members not being present for the Aug. 1 vote, she said.
USS Solar filed a petition for reconsideration after the first vote in February but it was denied at the council's Feb. 29 meeting. In April, USS Somers Solar filed an administrative appeal in Superior Court challenging the council's failure to issue the declaratory judgement in the company's favor. On May 15, USS Somers Solar and the council filed a joint request to the court to suspend further court proceedings and remand the matter back to the council. In their petition, the parties cited a change in conditions with new members on the council as their reason for the remand.
Another option for USS Solar to move forward with the facility would be to reduce its generating capacity to below the council-jurisdictional threshold, Bachman said. "If the capacity of the solar facility is reduced below 1 megawatt, the proposed project would be under the jurisdiction of the town," she said.
The project is evaluating the Siting Council's decision and the record on which that decision was based, said Lee Hoffman, the lawyer representing USS Solar. Once that review is completed, the project will make a determination of its next course of action, he said.
___
(c)2024 Journal Inquirer, Manchester, Conn.
Visit Journal Inquirer, Manchester, Conn. at www.journalinquirer.com
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
