Petition of Randolph Gifford Farm Solar LLC, 012021 VTPSBD, 20-3409-NMP

Docket Nº20-3409-NMP
Opinion JudgeELIZABETH SCHILLING, ESQ. HEARING OFFICER
Party NamePetition of Randolph Gifford Farm Solar LLC for a certificate of public good, pursuant to 30 V.S.A.§§ 248 and 8010, authorizing installation and operation of a 500 kW (AC) group net-metering solar electric generation system in Randolph, Vermont
AttorneyErin C. Brennan, Esq. Vermont Department of Public Service (for Vermont Department of Public Service) *Matt Chapman, General Counsel Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (for Vermont Agency of Natural Resources) Kimberly K. Hayden, Esq. Paul Frank + Collins PC (for Randolph Gifford Farm Solar LLC)...
Case DateJanuary 20, 2021

Petition of Randolph Gifford Farm Solar LLC for a certificate of public good, pursuant to 30 V.S.A.§§ 248 and 8010, authorizing installation and operation of a 500 kW (AC) group net-metering solar electric generation system in Randolph, Vermont

No. 20-3409-NMP

State of Vermont, Public Service Board

January 20, 2021

Erin C. Brennan, Esq. Vermont Department of Public Service (for Vermont Department of Public Service)

*Matt Chapman, General Counsel Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (for Vermont Agency of Natural Resources)

Kimberly K. Hayden, Esq. Paul Frank + Collins PC (for Randolph Gifford Farm Solar LLC)

Maxwell I Krieger, Esq. Vermont Division for Historic Preservation (for Division for Historic Preservation)

ORDER LIFTING STAY

ELIZABETH SCHILLING, ESQ. HEARING OFFICER

This case involves an application filed with the Vermont Public Utility Commission ("Commission") by Randolph Gifford Farm Solar LLC ("Applicant") for a certificate of public good, pursuant to 30 V.S.A. §§ 248 and 8010, for a 500 kW (AC) group net-metering solar electric generation system (the "Project") in Randolph, Vermont.

In this Order, I lift the stay previously imposed in this proceeding in an order issued on December 8, 2020.

I.

Procedural History

On November 18, 2020, a memorandum was issued finding that the application filed for the Project was administratively incomplete because it failed to include testimony addressing the Project's effect on archaeological resources, amongst other things.1

On December 2, 2020, the Applicant filed an email regarding conditions agreed upon between the Applicant and the Vermont Department of Historic Preservation ("DHP") to ensure that the Project, which is proposed on an archaeologically sensitive site, will not result in an undue adverse effect on archaeological resources ("DHP Conditions"). The DHP Conditions would require the Applicant to complete an archeological investigation of the Project site and to complete any mitigation found necessary by the investigation before construction of the Project. Any required mitigation would be subject to DHP approval. The DHP Conditions state that "[m]itigation may include but is not limited to further site evaluation, data recovery, redesign of one or more proposed Project components, or modification of the buffer zone boundaries or the specific conditions that refer to the same."[2]

On December 8, 2020, I stayed...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP