A state environmental council voted to significantly alter a proposed — and controversial —solar, battery and turbine energy project along the Horse Heaven Hills.

Citing environmental, cultural and land protections, in addition to measures to protect endangered species and wildlife corridors, the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) decided to eliminate an estimated 100 or more turbines from the proposed project at its Jan. 31 meeting, potentially gutting the $1.7 billion project by more than half.

The decision could place Scout Clean Energy’s project in jeopardy, as reducing the number of turbines also reduces its ability to produce energy or be economically viable.

“The cutbacks that are currently established in these mitigation measures as a result of these recent meetings are a severe blow to the viability,” Dave Kobus, senior project manager for Scout Clean Energy, told the Tri-Cities Area Journal of Business. “I’m not going to say it’s not viable, but I will say it would be really challenging to be competitive.”

EFSEC must balance the state’s clean energy goals with protecting current wildlife and land resources, a task that is painstaking and tedious, with mitigation measures being discussed and finalized in the last few months.

While the council eliminated turbines that had high cultural or environmental impacts, it stopped short of stalling the whole project, despite objections from some local groups.

“We do know from information received from the Yakama Nation that the entire site impacts traditional cultural properties,” said Kathleen Drew, EFSEC chair, at the Jan. 31 meeting.

One mitigation measure is responsible for eliminating many of the turbines.

Taking guidance from the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, EFSEC opted to be especially protective of the endangered ferruginous hawks, which use portions of the site area to nest when they fly north.

EFSEC approved a two-mile buffer around any documented hawk nest site, which prevents Scout from siting any turbine in this radius, effectively eliminating entire portions of the project. 

Scout officials say the mitigation measure is wildly without precedent nationwide and might endanger other wind farm projects in Eastern Washington if they must comply with such stringent requirements.

For comparison, Scout pointed to Oregon’s policy, where there is a quarter-mile buffer zone for active ferruginous hawk nests.

Kobus called EFSEC’s proposal for a two-mile buffer “totally unreasonable” as Scout’s surveys show that the ferruginous hawk population has declined significantly in Benton County, and a nest has not been seen on the proposed site since 2019.

Fish & Wildlife considers the ferruginous hawk an endangered species. And while nesting territories have been in decline for decades, portions of Adams, Benton, Franklin and Walla Walla counties were included in the State Acres for Wildlife Enhancement (SAFE) program to enhance the foraging habitat for the species.

EFSEC also eliminated some turbines that affect high linkage wildlife corridors on the ridge to maintain habitats and enable wildlife in the region to continue to move through the area.

Scout Clean Energy disagreed with this mitigation measure as well, noting that it’s based on a transportation planning map that is over a decade old.

The wind farm has been touted as helping the state meet its clean energy goals, but the proposal has been met with resistance from various community groups, including the Tri-City Regional Chamber of Commerce.

EFSEC could vote on a new site permitting proposal for the wind farm project at its next meeting on Feb. 21, but there is no set date for when EFSEC will vote on the recommendation as it is waiting for the staff to prepare documents.

In January, EFSEC did vote to extend the permitting process before submitting the project to the governor’s office. The council must send its recommendation (which can approve, approve with conditions, or deny the project) to the governor’s office by April 30.

The public will have a chance to comment on the draft recommendation and potential draft site certification agreement before they are sent to the governor, EFSEC staff said. This is the only way Scout Clean Energy, as well as groups like Tri-City CARES, which opposes the project, will be allowed to weigh in on the latest iteration of the plan.

Even with the reduced number of turbines, Tri-City CARES continues to oppose the project in its entirety and is asking EFSEC to deny Scout Energy a permit for the project altogether.

The group said the project likely won’t benefit the local community when it comes to additional power resources.

“No one has signed an agreement with Scout,” said Paul Krupin, president of the group.

Chief among the group’s concerns is the fire-risk posed by the project. The turbines would likely be too close together and too tall for planes to drop water or retardant, eliminating the option of aerial firefighting should it be necessary.

Even EFSEC members acknowledged this risk as one taken with all wind projects in the state.

“There isn’t an expectation that there will be aerial firefighting over any wind farm in the state, so my concern has always been about the periphery,” Drew said at the January meeting.

Separately, a proposal in the Washington Legislature would require EFSEC and any local entity building an energy site to submit plans to the Department of Natural Resources, so the agency can address aerial firefighting aspects of the project.

Scout Clean Energy can petition EFSEC if the council sends the governor a plan and ask it to reconsider, Kobus said. This would put a hold on the process before the governor’s office even receives the plan.

Later, Scout Clean Energy or Tri-City CARES could appeal any decision made by the governor’s office to the Washington Supreme Court.