Docstoc

Appendix Public Correspondence and wpd Canada

Document Sample
Appendix Public Correspondence and wpd Canada Powered By Docstoc
					SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
RENEWABLE ENERGY APPROVAL REPORTS
January 2012




                            Appendix E

 Public Correspondence and Consideration
              by Project Team
            E1 - Generic Letters Accompanying Mail Outs
            E2 - Written, Phone and Email - Comment/Response Summary
            E3 - Public Meeting #1 – Comment/Response Summary
            E4 - Public Meeting #2 - Comment/Response Summary




160960606
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
RENEWABLE ENERGY APPROVAL REPORTS
January 2012




                        Appendix E1

   Generic Letters Accompanying Mail-outs




160960606
August  12,  2010  
  
[Recipient  Address]  
  
  
Dear  [Recipient]:  
  
Please find attached the Notice of Proposal to Engage in a Project for the above-mentioned project. As described
in the notice, wpd Canada Corporation (wpd) is proposing to develop the Springwood Wind Farm in The
Township of Centre Wellington, Wellington County, Ontario. Turbine coordinates are as follows:

                                                     Springwood Turbine Coordinates
                                               Turbine #      Latitude        Longitude
                                                  r1         43.783557°      -80.411160°
                                                  r2         43.790195°      -80.404557°
                                                  r3         43.787143°      -80.401207°
                                                  r4         43.783276°      -80.398586°

You have been included on the project’s consultation distribution list as you live on your own property within the
general radius of the project location. If our contact information should be updated, we would very much
appreciate if you could contact the undersigned at your earliest convenience.

We look forward to working with you, and listening to your valuable input as this project progresses through the
regulatory approvals process. To contact the project team, or for further information, please email us at
SpringwoodProject@wpd-canada.ca or call us at 1-888-712-2401 or (905) 712-2400. Written comments can
also be mailed or faxed to the undersigned.

For more information about the project, please visit the Project Section on our website: www.wpd-canada.ca, or
use the direct link: http://canada.wpd.de/ca/projects/in-canada/springwood.html.


Sincerely,

wpd Canada Corporation




Mark Klein
Manager, Communications and Stakeholder Relations
wpd Canada Corporation

Enclosures: Notice of Proposal to Engage in a Renewable Energy Project
CC: Shawna Peddle, Stantec Consulting Ltd




     wpd  Canada  Corporation                405  Britannia  Road  East,  Unit  214,  Mississauga,  ON      L4Z  3E6      (p)  905-­‐712-­‐2400      (f)  905-­‐712-­‐9565     
  
wpd  Canada  Corporation                405  Britannia  Road  East,  Unit  214,  Mississauga,  ON      L4Z  3E6      (p)  905-­‐712-­‐2400      (f)  905-­‐712-­‐9565     
         
September 22, 2010

Name
Address
City, Province
Postal Code

Attention:       Title. FName LName

Reference:       Springwood Wind Project
                 Notice of Public Meeting


Please find attached the Notice of Public Meeting for the Springwood Wind Project. As described in the notice,
wpd Canada Corporation (wpd) is proposing to develop the Springwood Wind Project (Project) in the Township of
Centre Wellington, Wellington County, Ontario. Wind turbine coordinates are as follows:

                                          Springwood Turbine Coordinates
                                  Turbine #         Latitude       Longitude
                                       1           43.783557°     -80.411160°
                                       2           43.790195°     -80.404557°
                                       3           43.787143°     -80.401207°
                                       4           43.783276°     -80.398586°
                                 (all coordinates in UTM NAD83 format, Zone 17)

You have been included on the Project’s consultation distribution list as you live on or own property within 120m
of the Project location, or have expressed interest in the Project. If our contact information should be updated,
please contact the undersigned at your earliest convenience.

We hope that you can attend the Public Meeting described on the attached notice. Alternatively, to provide the
Project team with your comments or for further information please email us at SpringwoodProject@wpd-
canada.ca, or call our toll free line at 1-888-712-2401. Written comments can also be mailed or faxed to the
undersigned.

For more information, please visit the Project website: http://canada.wpd.de/ca/projects/in-
canada/springwood.html

Sincerely,

wpd Canada Corporation

Communications Team
Tel: (905) 712-2400 - 1-888-712-2401
Fax: (905) 712-9565

Enclosure:       Notice of Public Meeting

CC. Shawna Peddle, Stantec Consulting Ltd




   wpd Canada Corporation      405 Britannia Road East, Unit 214, Mississauga, ON L4Z 3E6 (p) 905 712 2400 (f) 905 712 9565
                 nd
September 2 , 2011
  
  
Reference:            Springwood Wind Project - Notice of Public Meeting
Dear Recipient,

Please find attached the Notice of Final Public Meeting for the Springwood Wind Project. As described in the notice, wpd
Canada Corporation (wpd Canada) is proposing to develop the Springwood Wind Project (Project) in the Township of
Centre Wellington, Wellington County, Ontario. Wind turbine coordinates are as follows:

                                                          Springwood Turbine Coordinates
                                                    Turbine #      Latitude        Longitude
                                                        1         43.783557°      -80.411160°
                                                        2         43.790195°      -80.404557°
                                                        3         43.787143°      -80.401207°
                                                        4         43.783276°      -80.398586°

You have been included on the Project’s consultation distribution list as you live on or own property in the general vicinity
of the Project location, or live or own property along the previously proposed connection line for the Project, or have
expressed interest in the Project. You will note that the project map has changed to reflect the fact that the proposed
connection line is no longer part of the project infrastructure. If our contact information should be updated, please contact
the undersigned at your earliest convenience.

Under Ontario Regulation 359/09, drafts of all reports required as part of the Renewable Energy Approval application for
the Project are to be made available for public review and comment for a period of at least 60-days prior to the Final
                                                                                       th
Public Meeting. The Final Public Meeting for the Project is to be held on November 4 , 2011. The documents will be
available for your review at the Centre Wellington Municipal Offices, 1 MacDonald Square, Elora. The reports are also
going to be available at the Project website – go to www.wpd-canada.ca, under PROJECTS, then in Canada, you will find
the Springwood link on the left. Or use the direct link: http://canada.wpd.de/ca/projects/in-canada/springwood.html.

We hope that you can attend the Public Meeting. The time and location of the meeting can be found on the attached
notice. Alternatively, to provide the Project team with your comments or for further information please email us at
SpringwoodProject@wpd-canada.ca, or call our toll free line at 1-888-712-2401. Written comments can also be mailed or
faxed to the undersigned.

For more information, please visit the Project website, or contact us at any time.

Sincerely,

Kevin R. Surette,
Communications Manager, wpd Canada
2233 Argentia Rd., Suite 102
Mississauga, ON
L5N 2X7
Tel: (905) 813-8400 | 1-888-712-2401
Fax: (905) 813-7487
Enclosure:            Notice of Final Public Meeting
CC.                   Shawna Peddle, Stantec Consulting Ltd




     wpd  Canada  Corporation                2233  Argentia  Road,  Suite  102,  Mississauga,  ON      L5N  2X7      (p)  905-­‐813-­‐8400      (f)  905-­‐813-­‐7487     
  
  




     wpd  Canada  Corporation                2233  Argentia  Road,  Suite  102,  Mississauga,  ON      L5N  2X7      (p)  905-­‐813-­‐8400      (f)  905-­‐813-­‐7487     
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
RENEWABLE ENERGY APPROVAL REPORTS
January  2012  




                        A ppendix E 2

                    Written, Phone and Email
                  Comment/Response Summary
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date        Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
Received    Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                   • Thanked him for his message, and promised to respond with further information in 2 weeks.
                                                                                                                                                      Sent follow-up information - Explained that "the response may be a bit premature. We are still in the early
                                                                                                                                                      planning stages, and in checking with the staff, it looks like we have some items to work out before we can
23-Jun-10   23-Jun-10     email            • Requested general project information.                                                                   determine and provide that information. Please be assured that once a detailed design is prepared that
                                                                                                                                                      there will be a public open house (most likely in the fall) and other means for yourself and all interested
                                                                                                                                                      parties to make comments and have their concerns addressed. If you have any specific concerns or
                                                                                                                                                      comments at this point I would be happy to address them."
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked Chris for his email
16Aug-                                     • Asked whether his home had been included in the project noise assessment, as he did not see
            17Aug2010     email                                                                                                                   • Explained that under O. Reg. 359/09, wpd is required to account for all receptors within 550m.
2010                                       it indicated on the Project Location map.
                                                                                                                                                  • Asked for Chris' home address so that wpd could verify the Project records.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that his home is located outside of the Project study area, approximately 1,500m North of the
                                                                                                                                                  nearest turbine.
16-Aug-                                    • Thanked Stantec for the quick response
            24-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                   • Provided the date, time and location of the first Open House, also indicating that he would receive an
2010                                       • Provided mailing address information
                                                                                                                                                  invitation by mail.
                                                                                                                                                  • Offered to answer any further questions in advance of the meeting.

                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that wpd had not yet selected a turbine make or model at this point and that turbine placement
5-Apr-                                                                                                                                            would come after turbine selection.
            17-Aug-2010   email            • Inquired about the general plans, equipment types and location.
2010                                                                                                                                              • Explained that wpd was very early in the planning cycle for this project and that once a detailed design is
                                                                                                                                                  prepared that there would be a public open house and other means for yourself and all interested parties to
                                                                                                                                                  make comments and have their concerns addressed.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that wpd was still in the early planning stages, and some items must be worked out before we
23-Jun-                                                                                                                                           could determine and provide the information requested.
            17-Aug-2010   email            • Inquired about general Project information (when/where).
2010                                                                                                                                              • Informed him that there would be a public open house where information would be available, and wpd would
                                                                                                                                                  welcome comments and will work to address any concerns.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked her for her comments.
                                           • Wrote to indicate her opposition to the Project.                                                     • Explained that turbines on rural land is not atypical, but rather that it is often found to be a good fit for
                                           • Felt that the Project should not be called a wind farm, but rather an electricity factory.           agricultural operations.
13-Aug-
            17-Aug-2010   email            • She was concerned regarding the industrialization of rural land, visual pollution, shadow            • Explained the role of municipalities under O. Reg. 359/09 and what consultation went into forming provincial
2010
                                           flicker, and ice throw.                                                                                policy, including public hearings.
                                           • Was appalled by the secrecy surrounding industrial zone planning.                                    • Explained how shadow flicker works, and that modern turbines mitigate risk of ice throw, as turbines are built
                                                                                                                                                  to shut down should the blades because imbalanced by the accumulation of ice.
                                                                                                                                                  • Informed her that turbine sourcing had not yet been confirmed, however tower height generally ranges from
13-Aug-                                    • "Would you please be able to confirm specifics, in terms of capacity and physical size, for each
            18-Aug-2010   email                                                                                                                   80-108m , blades range from 42-50m, capacity ranges from 1.8-2.3MW.
2010                                       of the four wind turbines proposed for the Springwood Wind Farm? "
                                                                                                                                                  • Also mentioned that there will be two public open houses, one in Fall 2010, another in Spring 2011.
                                           • Was concerned that the "Kincardine turbines do not turn", and that he believes that the
                                                                                                                                                  • Informed him that setbacks are based on noise levels, and that wpd will ensure that noise levels from the
16-Aug-                                    minimum setback in Kincardine is 850m.
            19-Aug-2010   email                                                                                                                   turbines are no more than 40db at any receptor as per regulation.
2010                                       • Pointed out that the turbines in Belwood will be 150ft taller, but setbacks are 550m. He asked if
                                                                                                                                                  • Mentioned that there will be two public open houses, one in Fall 2010, another in Spring 2011.
                                           he was missing information.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the setbacks we used were set by the MOE and are based on 40 dBA limit. Explained that the
                                                                                                                                                  Ontario Ministry of the Environment had set the minimum distance for turbines at 550 metres regardless of
5-Nov-
            19-Aug-2010   email                                                                                                                   size or height, provided a sound level of 40 dBA at the nearest receptor is not exceeded. As such, the
2010                                       • Wanted to confirm again why Kincardine setbacks were 850m and why ours were 550m
                                                                                                                                                  distance could be further if multiple turbines are in the area, given the impact of cumulative noise.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked him for his email• Explained that wpd was still in the early planning stages, and some items must
                                                                                                                                                  be worked out before we could determine and provide the information requested. • Explained that although
18-Aug-                                    • "Could you tell me the specifications of the turbines which are planned for this project e.g., hub
            19-Aug-2010   email                                                                                                                   each manufacture has different specifications, tower height generally ranged from 80-108 meter and blades
2010                                       height, rotor diameter, number of blades, and highest RPM of the rotor"
                                                                                                                                                  length were usually between 42-50 meters. In terms of capacity, it was stated that the range was generally
                                                                                                                                                  between 1.8 and 2.3 MW per turbine, depending on manufacturer.
                                                                                                                                                  • Responded to him explaining that wind farms exist all over the world and are almost always located in rural
                                           • "I am strongly opposed to the Springwood Wind Farm. I am not against Green Energy. I resent          areas mostly for reasons of ideal wind capacity, and space requirements. Added that in Germany, where they
17-Aug-
            19-Aug-2010   email            the underhanded tactics of your company and the current provincial government. You definitely          have a 15-year head start on Ontario when it comes to building a wind energy industry, there is an installed
2010
                                           do not have the community based support required."                                                     base of over 22,000 wind turbines almost entirely on rural/agricultural land, and that Germans see wind
                                                                                                                                                  turbines as a normal part of the German rural landscape.
14-Aug-                                    • Inquired regarding the dimensions and capacity of the turbines                                       • Informed them that turbine sourcing had not yet been confirmed; however tower height ranges from 80-
            19-Aug-2010   email
2010                                       • How far will they be from the rear property line and from side road 3,                               108m, blades range from 42-50m, capacity ranges from 1.8-2.3MW. He included that turbines will be no closer

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    1 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           • What the estimated annual MW output per turbine would be,                                            than 100 metres from the rear property line and a minimum of 300 metres away from Side road 3.
                                           • Where the grid connection will be,                                                                   • Explained that the connection still was to be determined, however there would be a switching station (but no
                                           • Whether there will there be a substation,                                                            transformer station).
                                           • Whether the transmission lines will be under or above ground,                                        • Mentioned that details regarding transmission lines and turbine installation costs were still being determined.
                                           • What the cost of installation is per turbine.                                                        • Mentioned that there will be two public open houses, one in Fall 2010, another in Spring 2011.
                                           • "I live at 6848 Wellington #16 which shows my home on Google Earth at 43 47'13.24"N by 80
15-Sep-                                    23'16.54"W. Since the turbines coordinates at 43.783557, how can I match up the 2 so that I            • He sent a kmz file (google earth) which included the turbines and the residence.
           19-Aug-2010
2010                                       know how far away each turbine is from my home? Please show me the coordinates the same                  He explained that the ruler tool could be used to determine the distance between 2 locations.
                                           way as google earth, as I need to know exactly the distance."
                                           • Wrote to express her opposition to establishing wind farms in her area.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained to her that in Germany, where they have a 15-year head start on Ontario when it comes to
                                           • "I am writing to express my opposition to establishing wind farms in this area. This is a prime
16-Aug-                                                                                                                                           building a wind energy industry, there is an installed base of over 22,000 wind turbines almost entirely on
           19-Aug-2010   email             agricultural, residential, and tourist area, with the heritage Grand River, Lake Belwood, and the
2010                                                                                                                                              rural/agricultural land, and that Germans see wind turbines as a normal part of the German rural landscape.
                                           Luther Marsh close by. Industrial wind turbines have no place here. We do not want them here.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked her for contacting wpd Canada, and indicated that any further inquiries would be welcome.
                                           Please abandon your idea of putting them in this area."
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked responder for the correspondence and explained to the sender the results of Ontario's Chief
                                           • "We object to the wind farms being so close to communities. There has to be land that is not         Medical Officer of Health's report.
20-Aug-
           20-Aug-2010   email             used for farming or anything productive. If these towers are so high then why can't they be built      • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2010
                                           in swamp or scrub lands. Places where land and people will not be effected by health issues."          wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that wind turbines have historically been quite a good fit with agricultural lands.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained on the phone and email the Ontario Chief Medical Officer health
                                                                                                                                                  report
20-Aug-                                    • Called regarding the Springwood Project. She was concerned regarding potential health
           20-Aug-2010   Phone                                                                                                                    • Tried to give her an overview of the wind sector
2010                                       impacts from turbines, as well as negative effects on property values
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                                                                                                                                  turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Stated that wind farms exist all over the world, and are almost always located in rural areas mostly for
                                                                                                                                                  reasons of ideal wind capacity, as well as due to space requirements.
                                           • Expressed that the proposed development would impede future development in the area,
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the recent report from Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health concluded that “…the
                                           given the "known decrease of house values" when a Industrial wind farm is in the local vicinity.
11-Aug-                                                                                                                                           scientific evidence available to date does not demonstrate a direct causal link between wind turbine noise and
           20-Aug-2010   email             • Stated that everyone would lose - Health-wise, financially etc., and that the area is not suitable
2010                                                                                                                                              adverse health effects".
                                           for a wind farm to be established.
                                                                                                                                                  • Stated that a comprehensive and scientific U.S. study on the impact of wind turbines on property values has
                                           • Stated that the Community young and old are sticking together because they are concerned.
                                                                                                                                                  found that there is no conclusive evidence of any widespread property value effects (positive or negative)
                                                                                                                                                  resulting from wind farms.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained to the sender the results of Ontario's Chief Medical Officer of Health's report.
17-Aug-                                    • Wrote that she was concerned about Health issues, property values, unsightly towers spoiling
           20-Aug-2010   email                                                                                                                    • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2010                                       our beautiful country side, and that wind power has not proven to be useful in any way.
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
18-Aug-                                    • cc'ed wpd on an email to government representatives.• Expressed their opposition to the
           20-Aug-2010   email                                                                                                                    wind turbines on property values.• Explained how historically, wind turbines have been a good fit with rural
2010                                       project, and expressed concern regarding property values.
                                                                                                                                                  agricultural land.
3-Sep-                                     • Expressed opposition about the project
           20-Aug-2010   email                                                                                                                    • Responded Aug 20, 2010 to same email attachment.
2010                                       • Concern about property values, attachment repeat of email sent August 18
                                           • cc'ed wpd on an email to the Honorable Mr. Brad Duguid. Same email as sent from the Morels
17-Aug-                                                                                                                                           • Shared some general information on common concerns that had been heard from the community, including
           20-Aug-2010   email             • Explained that there was no public support for wind project development in the rural
2010                                                                                                                                              health, property values and rural industrialization.
                                           community.
                                           • cc'ed wpd on an email to the Honourable Mr. Brad Duguid. Same email as sent from the
16-Aug-                                    Morels                                                                                                 • Explained to the sender the results of Ontario's Chief Medical Officer of Health's report.
           20-Aug-2010   email
2010                                       • Stated that there was no community support for the Project, and health studies must be               • Examples were given of other siting of turbines in rural areas, and the reasoning behind it.
                                           completed.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked them for the correspondence and explained to the sender the results of Ontario's Chief Medical
22-Aug-                                    • Concerned about the spending of public monies.
           24-Aug-2010   email                                                                                                                    Officer of Health's report: “…the scientific evidence available to date does not demonstrate a direct causal link
2010                                       • Concerned about health
                                                                                                                                                  between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.”
24-Aug-                                    • Stated that opposition in the vicinity of the Project continues to grow.                             • Explained that wind turbines are often sited in rural areas, and that wpd would like to address any specific
           24-Aug-2010   email
2010                                       • Concerned that the Project would disrupt the peace of the area.                                      concerns regarding the Project.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked them for the correspondence and explained to them the results of Ontario's Chief Medical Officer of
22-Aug-                                    • Concerned about the efficiency of turbines and potential health effects..                            Health's report.
           24-Aug-2010   email
2010                                       • "...We have lived in and supported our local community since 1983 and although we are                • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           located approximately 7 kilometers from the proposed site, we are well aware of the impact on          wind turbines on property values.

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     2 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           the residents located in the immediate area of such developments. We have been associated              • Explained that wind turbine produces electricity 70-85% of the time, but that it generates different outputs
                                           with a youth group in the Shelburne On area since 1984 and have seen and heard first hand              dependent on wind speed. Hence the capacity factor can be somewhat confusing.
                                           what the impact of these developments have on a rural community. ...Until such time as it can
                                           be conclusively proven there are no related health issues, a realistic distance from neighbouring
                                           homes is mandated and a full study is completed to determine the impact on agriculture and the
                                           wild life in our area, we stand strongly opposed to the installation of even one of these turbines."
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked him for the correspondence and explained to the results of Ontario's Chief Medical Officer of
                                           • Concerned that the construction of Springwood may have serious implications for the
                                                                                                                                                  Health's report.
22-Aug-                                    community, including potential health effects, change in the quality of life due to the decline in
           24-Aug-2010   email                                                                                                                    • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2010                                       aesthetic values of properties, and resulting reduction in services due to a reduced tax base.
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Asked to be put on record as being opposed to the Springwood Project.
                                                                                                                                                  • Tried to explain that aesthetics are not always seen as being negatively impacted by such projects
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the Draft PDR is in early stage of development, and that it is not meant to be the in-depth
                                           • Stated that there was opposition in Belwood against the project.
                                                                                                                                                  Natural Heritage Assessment.
                                           • Concerned about negative effects on birds and bats
16-Aug-                                                                                                                                           • Explained the requirement for a Natural Heritage Assessment, and the meetings that had been conducted
           26-Aug-2010   email             • Provided resources regarding wind turbines, birds and bats.
2010                                                                                                                                              between wpd's environmental consultants, the Ministry of the Environment, and the Ministry of Natural
                                           • Concerned that the Draft Project Description Report was nothing but a "looks good on paper"
                                                                                                                                                  Resources. Explained that these documents would also be open for public comment.
                                           environmental screening.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked him for his input and informed him that an Open House was upcoming.
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project. Does "not believe that the potential benefits (if any) to       • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                           society as a whole should supersede the potential (and likely) harm inflicted on the local             • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           community"                                                                                             • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                           • Concerned about property values. Indicated that he would be seeking compensation for                 turbines on property values.
17-Aug-                                    devaluation of his property.                                                                           • Asked him to send material from health professionals he has read so that wpd could take them into account.
           31-Aug-2010   email
2010                                       • As an epidemiologist, he expressed concern about health, and rejected the Ontario Chief              • Explained that setbacks were a minimum of 550m, dependent upon a maximum of 40dBA noise level at
                                           Medical Officer of Health's report.                                                                    receptors, and that that really means that 550 m is generally exceeded. "For example, a wind project with five
                                           Asked to be provided with information on wpd's risk mitigation strategy in the event that the          turbines, each with a sound power level of 107dB, must have its turbines setback at a minimum 950 metres
                                           health and wellbeing of surrounding families are negatively impacted by this project.                  from the nearest receptor."
                                           • Stated that the setbacks were insufficient.                                                          • Referenced the night-time noise guideline of the WHO.
                                           • "There are varying opinions on whether or not IWTs will impact HEALTH and PROPERTY
                                           VALUES. For every document you quote saying there is NO effect....I can find you research
                                           that says there IS an effect. On a daily basis more "evidence" strongly suggesting that the 550
31-Aug-                                                                                                                                           • No further questions were presented, repeat of previous email
           31-Aug-2010   email             m setback is inadequate becomes available.It is NOT my job to do the research for you. I
2010                                                                                                                                              • No further response given
                                           suggest you consult with a 3rd party health professional (e.g. epidemiologist, public health
                                           researcher) to review the health related research for you. It is all out there for anyone to
                                           read....including judges, lawyers, etc."
                                           • Expressed opposition about the project - wished to formally submit her opposition.                   • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
17-Aug-                                    • Concerned about bats and birds                                                                       • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds and referenced the policies set out by the MNR
           31-Aug-2010   email
2010                                       • Concerned about health                                                                               • Attempted to explain that wind farms are not seen as negative by the majority of Ontario. Referenced studies
                                           • Concerned about tourism                                                                              on potential effects on tourism.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that there is no scientific evidence that livestock and local agriculture is negatively affected by
                                           • Explained his concerns in the areas of "Questionable Business Model", "Unfair to Farmers",
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines.
                                           "Permanent and Costly Scars", Adverse Health Effects for Humans", Adverse Health Effects for
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained relative impacts on bats and referenced the policies set out by the MNR
17-Aug-                                    Animals", Lover Quality of Life, and Erosion of Property Values", "Unpredictable and Costly
           18-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                    • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped, and explained that wpd has a
2010                                       Electricity Generation", and "Life Cycle Costs".
                                                                                                                                                  contract under the Ontario Power Authority's Feed-in Tariff Program. Provided a link for further information.
                                           'Concerned about health
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the developer's
                                           • Concerned about the consultation process, indicating that in their experience, companies send
                                                                                                                                                  expense.
                                           'low-level' staff to attend.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained viability of wind farms
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
                                           • cc'ed wpd on an email to the Honourable Mr. Brad Duguid.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health noise
17-Aug-                                    • Expressed opposition to the project
           18-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                    and setbacks, ice throw, shadow etc.
2010                                       • Concerned about health
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • Concerned about property values
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    3 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                          Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                               turbines on property values.
                                           • "they oppose the proposed development based on:                                                   • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
                                            Lack democratic process at the local government level,                                               Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           nuisance of the development proposal (will pursue under Nuisance act if necessary)                    • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds and referenced the policies set out by the MNR
6-Sep-
           19-Sep-2010   email             Impact of development on views from our property,                                                     • Explained how setbacks are regulated.
2010
                                           Impact of net value to our property from this development                                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                           impact of health from this proposal                                                                   • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           environmental impact of i.e. bird migration, terrestrial impacts"                                     wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health noise
                                           • Concerned about decommissioning and use of agricultural land
                                                                                                                                               and setbacks, ice throw, shadow etc.
                                           • Concerned about health effects, indicating that everyone has different tolerances
1-Sep-                                                                                                                                         • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
           19-Sep-2010   email             • Concerned about property values and the permanency of the project, including concerns
2010                                                                                                                                           • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the developer's
                                           regarding decommissioning.
                                                                                                                                               expense.• Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           • Concerned about efficiency
                                                                                                                                               wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Concerned about aviation safety
                                                                                                                                               • Explained role of NAV Canada, Transport Canada and Department of National Defence
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked her for sharing her concerns, and addressed each of the 21 questions.
                                           • Expressed concern and had 21 questions about the project
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health noise
                                           • Concerned about health and 'infrasound'
                                                                                                                                               and setbacks, ice throw, shadow etc.
5-Sep-                                     • Concerned about property values
           19-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                 • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
2010                                       • Questions about the project layout, transmission lines
                                                                                                                                               • Explained the reporting requirements and release of information
                                           • Concerned about ice throw, setbacks, shadow flicker
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                           • Questions about wind turbine information and release of information
                                                                                                                                               turbines on property values.
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project, and to any other.
                                           • "These projects are a blight on the land and on the community. The fields they occupy are
                                           forever ruined and the local communities are divided by ill-feeling. Land surrounding these         • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
                                           towers becomes worthless, and families lose farms they can no longer live on, due to vibration      • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09, outlining the work that has to be done to
                                           and many other effects. The viability of these towers is rapidly becoming suspect, as well as       ensure that the Project would be built properly if approved.
3-Sep-
           19-Sep-2010   email             their longevity. This is a short-sighted solution to a problem that can be solved with energy       • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the developer's
2010
                                           conservation.                                                                                       expense in agreement with the landowners.
                                           Instead of spending vast amounts of tax-payer money buying this expensive power, give               • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                           incentives to the city-dwellers to cut back on their consumption. Remove every other light on       turbines on property values.
                                           the 401 through Toronto. But don't ruin our agricultural heritage and good farms in this doubtful
                                           fashion."
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked her for sharing her concerns                                                                • Explained
                                                                                                                                               environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                                                                                                                               • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds reference the policies set out by the MNR
                                           • cc'ed wpd on an email to the Honourable Mr. Brad Duguid. Same email as sent from the              • Explained that there is no scientific evidence that livestock and local agriculture is negatively effected by
27-Aug-
           19-Sep-2010   email             Morels                                                                                              wind turbines.
2010
                                           • Repeat email sent Aug 20, 2010, similar response on Sept 23, 2010                                 • Explained how setbacks are regulated.
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                               wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked her for sharing her concerns                                                                • Explained
                                                                                                                                               environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • Follow up to previous correspondence                                                              • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds reference the policies set out by the MNR
                                           • Concerned about health                                                                            • Explained that there is no scientific evidence that livestock and local agriculture is negatively effected by
30-Aug-
           19-Sep-2010   email             • Expressed opposition regarding the Project                                                        wind turbines.
2010
                                           • Concerned about property values                                                                   • Explained how setbacks are regulated.
                                           • Concerned about Livestock and animals, bats                                                       • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                               wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Expressed opposition about the project, explaining that he has noticed difficulty in selling      • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
31-Aug-                                    properties in the area. Stated that there were plans to take legal action against the proponents    • Explained the processes that must be undergone before an approval may be granted to allow for
           21-Sep-2010   email
2010                                       of the wind farm.                                                                                   construction of the project.
                                           • Concern about property values                                                                     • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  4 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                               Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                    wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                                    • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                           • Concerned lack of community involvement
19-Aug-                                                                                                                                             • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
           21-Sep-2010   email             • Concerned about health
2010                                                                                                                                                • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the developer's
                                           • Concerned about property values
                                                                                                                                                    expense.
                                           • Concerned about decommissioning and cleanup
                                                                                                                                                    • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project, follow up to previous email
                                           • Questioned the setbacks, specifically citing the 'city' setback of 5km (most likely referring to the   • Directed them to ask the Ministry of Environment on how the 550 metre setback was decided on
20-Oct-
           21-Sep-2010   email             offshore setback).                                                                                       • Asked if them if they could please provide the link to the report they referenced in their email, so that wpd
2010
                                           • Concerns about the effect the turbines will have on farming, quoted a report from the                  could take it into account in their development.
                                           Proceedings of the National Academy of Science
                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project, and had particular concern regarding:                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                           • the climate                                                                                            • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • bird migration                                                                                         • Explained the mitigation measures for birds and bats
                                           • birds indigenous to this area, ( hawks, osprey, eagles)                                                • Provided date and time of the first Public House and spoke about consultation
20-Aug-
           21-Sep-2010   email             • bats, ( research has proven that turbines cause the hearts of bats to explode) with subsequent         • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
2010
                                           impact on disease for humans in the form of West Nile virus                                              turbines on property values.
                                           • property values                                                                                        • Provided background on wpd Canada
                                           • health implications for humans and animals                                                             • On a separate email explained how much land turbines take up
                                           • the misuse of agricultural land                                                                        • Explained on second email that to our knowledge there were no demonstrable effects of wind turbines on
                                                                                                                                                    livestock, and that the MOE took into account livestock when establishing setbacks.
                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project, and had particular concern regarding:                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                           • the climate                                                                                            • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • bird migration                                                                                         • Explained the mitigation measures for birds and bats
                                           • birds indigenous to this area, ( hawks, osprey, eagles)                                                • Provided date and time of the first Public House and spoke about consultation
20-Aug-
           21-Sep-2010   email             • bats, ( research has proven that turbines cause the hearts of bats to explode) with subsequent         • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
2010
                                           impact on disease for humans in the form of West Nile virus                                              turbines on property values.
                                           • property values                                                                                        • Provided background on wpd Canada
                                           • health implications for humans and animals                                                             • On a separate email explained how much land turbines take up
                                           • the misuse of agricultural land                                                                        • Explained on second email that to our knowledge there were no demonstrable effects of wind turbines on
                                                                                                                                                    livestock, and that the MOE took into account livestock when establishing setbacks.
                                           • Thanked us for our previous response but found the response unsatisfactory (above)
                                           • "I appreciate that you have responded to my concerns. Unfortunately your response is not
                                           satisfactory. You identify that research has been completed. I challenge the research in all
11-Nov-                                                                                                                                             Thanked her for her comments and informed her that we will be included in our public consultation submission
           21-Sep-2010   email             aspects of my concerns, environmental, health and property values. There is in fact research
2010                                                                                                                                                for the REA
                                           that indicates that there are detrimental effects on all of these areas. I did not choose to live in
                                           the vicinity of wind turbines; you are planning to invade my space and thereby to threaten my
                                           health and financial well being. That plan is totally unacceptable."
                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                                                                                                                                    • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                                                                                                                                    • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                                    • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
18-Aug-                                    • Concerned about health
           21-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                      turbines on property values.
2010                                       • Concerned about property values - asked about any compensation
                                                                                                                                                    • Provided background on wpd Canada
                                           • Concerned about decommissioning and cleanup
                                                                                                                                                    • Explained the decommissioning process and wpd's responsibility
                                                                                                                                                    • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                    relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                           • Opposed to the visual impact of wind turbines,                                                         • Thanked Jim for sharing his concerns
                                           • Concerned with the unreliability of the technology                                                     • Explained role of OPA, backup power and planning
21-Aug-                                    • Concerned about loss of municipal control                                                              • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
           21-Sep-2010   email
2010                                       • "The increased participation in the installation of the turbines by HYDRO should not negate the        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                           liability of private companies in the event that legal actions and research effectively block the        • Explained the mitigation measures for birds and bats
                                           current programs due to health concerns of a community. "                                                • Explained how municipal consultation is a part of the REA process, and that part of the reason for the


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     5 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                  change in municipal powers was to allows for standardized setbacks across Ontario.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                           • "I am informing you of our objection to the proposed windmill site on the property on the 3rd
19-Aug-                                                                                                                                           • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
           21-Sep-2010   email             Line of West Garafraxa , between Sideroads 15 and 20 . The main concern is that there will be
2010                                                                                                                                              • Explained role of NAV Canada, Transport Canada and Department of National Defence. Committed to
                                           a direct conflict with our airstrip (Metz Field 7159 3rd Line) and several others."
                                                                                                                                                  following all regulations regarding aerodromes.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • Asked to be sent all assumptions being made for assessments of flicker, ice throw, shadow,
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health, ice
                                           setbacks, and airport reports, including information about the make and model of the proposed
17-Aug-                                                                                                                                           throw and flicker.
           21-Sep-2010   email             turbine to be used.
2010                                                                                                                                              • Explained role of NAV Canada, Transport Canada and Department of National Defence. Committed to
                                           • Asked when they would be able to see a site plan for the project
                                                                                                                                                  following all regulations regarding aerodromes set by the responsible agencies.
                                           • Asked whether the connection to the 44kv line would be single phase or 3 phase.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that wpd was in the process of securing a wind turbine supplier, and that wpd would be happy to
                                                                                                                                                  run shadow/flicker analysis upon their request.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked her for her concern
10-Oct-
           21-Sep-2010   Mail              • Follow-up question to a previous email, inquiring as to whether the project will be expanded         • Informed her that expansion of the project site is unlikely because of geography and setbacks from natural
2010
                                                                                                                                                  features, receptors, etc.
                                           • "I am responding to your message. Please note that this does not address my concerns. To
25-Oct-                                    actually state that no member of the public has ever been harmed by a wind turbines does not
           2-Dec-2011    email                                                                                                                    • Thanked her for her reply. We will include your comments in our Renewable Energy Approval application.
2011                                       address the hundreds of families who have been forced to sell their homes because of low
                                           frequency noise and annoyances. To imply that your “consultation” is real, is a sham."
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                           • Wrote to express her strong opposition to the project                                                • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • "The impact of wind farms is not well understood, although much is being written about it and        • Explained that the potential shadow effect of wind turbines would by specific to each home, and that wpd
                                           many initial studies are starting to highlight unfortunate side effects: the impact of low frequency   would be happy to do a shadow study upon request
20-Sep-
           21-Sep-2010   email             noise, the impact of shade, particularly in the winter when the sun is low, impact on livestock        • Explained that there is no scientific evidence that livestock and local agriculture is negatively affected by
2010
                                           and bats, the cost to local taxpayers and the decrease in property values, (and) inappropriate         wind turbines. Gave examples of mitigation measures that could be taken
                                           setbacks from neighbours. Furthermore, there has not been full disclosure of your plans,               • Explained how setbacks were established in Ontario relative impacts on bats and referenced the policies set
                                           including the need to install many more turbines to make this initial investment viable."              out by the MNR.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over time.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that our contract with the Ontario 9.2 MW, and provided background on wpd Canada.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the line at that time was not planned to be along the property line: ". Originally, the line was
                                           • Concerned regarding placement of interconnection line.                                               going to run north on Sideroad 20 and flank Wellington Road, but working with our engineers we have been
                                           • Asked for details surrounding the specifics of what the line would physically be like.               able to change the connection point, and the new feeder run. We anticipate the line with run south and will not
13-Aug-                                    • Asked why she was not contacted as she believe it is to be placed along her property.                be alongside of your property. We still have additional environmental studies to complete before we finalize a
           22-Sep-2010   email
2010                                       • Concerned about health.                                                                              layout for the turbines and infrastructure, but will make that information available to the public as soon as we
                                           • Explained the local opposition in the area.                                                          are able."
                                           • Concerned her rights had been violated by the government.                                            • Explained that wpd uses municipal right-of-ways whenever possible.
                                                                                                                                                  • Invited her to speak with wpd regarding her concerns at the upcoming Open House.
                                                                                                                                                  • Mailed Reply to the petition received July 24, 2010.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked petitioners for their input and informed them their submission will be compiled and submitted to the
                                           • Petition letter signed by 61 families
24-Jul-                                                                                                                                           Ministry of the Environment.
           22-Sep-2010   Mail              • Letter states that there is no support in the area for the project and all signatories oppose the
2010                                                                                                                                              • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                           project
                                                                                                                                                  other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                                                                                                                                  issues
                                                                                                                                                  • Mailed Reply to the petition received July 24, 2010.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked petitioners for their input and informed them their submission will be compiled and submitted to the
                                           •Petition letter signed by 61 families
24-Jul-                                                                                                                                           Ministry of the Environment.
           22-Sep-2010   Mail              • Letter states that there is no support in the area for the project and all signatories oppose the
2010                                                                                                                                              • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                           project
                                                                                                                                                  other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                                                                                                                                  issues
                                                                                                                                                  • Emailed Reply to the petition received July 24, 2010.
                                           • Petition letter signed by 61 families                                                                • Thanked petitioners for their input and informed them their submission will be compiled and submitted to the
24-Jul-
           22-Sep-2010   email             • Letter states that there is no support in the area for the project and all signatories oppose the    Ministry of the Environment.
2010
                                           project                                                                                                • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                                                                                                                                  other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      6 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                issues
                                                                                                                                                • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                                                                                                                                • Explained the concept of capacity factor regarding efficiency
                                           • "We are living within the study area of the proposed wind turbine location. This area has prime
                                                                                                                                                • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's report on potential effects of wind on health.
                                           agricultural land with tile drains running across the land. We are concerned about loss of control
                                                                                                                                                • Explained the involvement of municipalities in consultation
25-Aug-                                    over our lands as well as damage to our roads. We feel local councillors should be made aware
           23-Sep-2010                                                                                                                          • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2010                                       of the consequences and the setbacks are too short."
                                                                                                                                                wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Concerned about stray voltage, health, property values, tourism, efficiency, and reduction of
                                                                                                                                                • Explained how setbacks are regulated.
                                           municipal powers
                                                                                                                                                • Referenced studies that suggest that turbines attract tourists
                                                                                                                                                • Explained the common causes of stray voltage
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project, follow up to previous email replied Oct. 25, 2010
17-Oct-                                                                                                                                         • Explained that wpd is required to submit environmental impact assessments as part of the approval process.
           23-Sep-2010   email             • Claimed that turbines in Europe are being taken down
2010                                                                                                                                            • Explained that in Europe most wind turbines are being re-powered not removed from service
                                           • Concerned about the effect on a nearby river
                                           • He expressed opposition to the project, and was particularly concerned with the fact that he       • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                           had not been consulted earlier regarding the electrical station proposed near his property.          • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
25-Aug-
           23-Sep-2010   email             • Concerned about health                                                                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
2010
                                           • Concerned about property values                                                                    • Explained turbine lighting procedures and role of NAV Canada, Transport Canada
                                           • Concerned about lack of consultation and input from other landowners                               • Explained setback limits
                                                                                                                                                • Reaffirmed that the Ontario Chief Medical Officer health report directly addressed issues with low frequency
                                                                                                                                                sound and vibrations: "the recent report released by the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health concluded that
24-Sep-                                    • Reply to response above, Expressing concern about the health information provided replied          there is no scientific evidence to demonstrate a link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.
           23-Sep-2010   email
2010                                       Oct 6, 2010                                                                                          She also concluded that low frequency sound and infrasound from current generation upwind model turbines
                                                                                                                                                are well below the pressure sound levels at which known health effects occur, and that there is no scientific
                                                                                                                                                evidence that vibration from low frequency wind turbine noise causes adverse health effects."
                                           • "Given that adverse health effects from industrial wind turbines have been shown to range
                                                                                                                                                • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           from tinnitus to vertigo to sleep deprivation and many more suspected ailments, I really do not
                                                                                                                                                • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                           want these turbines anywhere in my community. Given the effect they have on human health, is
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that visibility of the turbines will vary, and that individual response to the appearance of turbines
                                           it any surprise then, that they also damage the environment, wildlife and livestock? Bird and bat
                                                                                                                                                varies.
24-Aug-                                    collisions with turbine blades, stray voltage affecting milk production and concrete foundations
           23-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                  • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds reference the policies set out by the MNR
2010                                       altering drainage patterns are only a few of the many concerns these behemoths present when
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that to our knowledge there were no demonstrable effects of wind turbines on livestock, and that
                                           they enter a community. Also, government regulations for windmill set backs from the nearest
                                                                                                                                                the MOE took into account livestock when establishing setbacks.
                                           residence do not inspire a great deal of confidence in the legislative process to protect our
                                                                                                                                                • Explained how setbacks work
                                           individual interests. "Concerned about health• Expressed interest in the upcoming public
                                                                                                                                                • Explained the common causes of stray voltage
                                           meeting
                                           • "My family DOES NOT want your wind turbines in my neighbourhood!
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
                                           When will you people decide to do the right thing and conduct your studies BEFORE these
                                                                                                                                                • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           monsters are erected. Unbiased, of course...
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that there is no scientific evidence that livestock and local agriculture is negatively affected by
                                           If my property values decrease after the fact, will you compensate me ???
                                                                                                                                                wind turbines.
17-Aug-                                    If my family or any of my neighbours become ill as a direst/indirect cause of these monsters, will
           23-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                  • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
2010                                       you compensate me ?
                                                                                                                                                turbines on property values.
                                           If my livestock suffer ill effects after you erect these towers, will you compensate me??
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                           When I cannot afford to pay my ever-increasing hydro bill, due to subsidies you and your ilk
                                                                                                                                                relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                           receives (out of our pockets nonetheless), will you help me pay so as we do not have to stay in
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the OPA is responsible for planning Ontario's electricity system
                                           the dark???"
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                            • Expressed opposition regarding the Project
                                                                                                                                                • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
17-Aug-                                    • Asked questions about the project history
           23-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
2010                                       • Concerned about property values
                                                                                                                                                • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • Asked about the availability of reports
                                                                                                                                                • Provided background on wpd Canada
                                           1) Is the Belwood Wind Farm to which you refer, the Belwood Wind Farm of Invenergy?                  • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                           (http://belwoodwindfarm.info)?                                                                       • RE: wpd Canada and Invenergy - "There is no relation between the two companies. When it became clear to
                                           2) Have acquired contracts from Invenergy?                                                           us that Invenergy had named their proposed project the same as our proposed project (Belwood Wind Farm)
15-Sep-
           23-Sep-2010   email             3) Have you acquired all the wind turbine contracts from Invenergy in the area surrounding           we decided to change the name of ours to avoid further confusion."
2010
                                           Belwood?                                                                                             • RE: Tornado Activity in the Area - "We are aware of past tornado activity in the area. We have not settled on
                                           4) Did you acquire any substation related contract in the Township of East Garafraxa?                a wind generator supplier as of yet but will ensure that this information is worked into the engineering of the
                                           5) Are you aware that your Springwood Wind Farm proposal, dated 13th August, 2010 is in an           wind farm once we do."


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   7 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           area that has a history of tornado activity?                                                         • RE: Public Open House - October 26, 2010; 5:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. Centre Wellington Sportsplex, 550
                                           6) Have you notified any insurers, underwriters, or financial providers of your Springwood Wind      Belsyde Avenue E (at Scotland St), Fergus, Ontario
                                           Farm project of the increased probability of tornado damage to your proposed wind turbines and       • RE: Health - Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's report on potential effects of wind on health.
                                           increased probability of harming people and damaging property?                                       • RE: wpd Canada - "wpd is a developer and financier of wind farms, photovoltaic and biogas projects around
                                           7) Have any of the people who have contracts related to the Springwood Wind Farm expressed           the world. The company has been active in Canada for the past 4 years developing a substantial pipeline of
                                           an interest in having the contracts terminated?                                                      project opportunities, initially as the largest shareholder and primary financer of a partner company and now
                                           8) Would Springwood Wind Farms force the continuance of contracts which people signed some           as wpd Canada Corporation. Wpd Canada is registered in the province of Ontario. After launching the
                                           time ago and who now better realize the full impact of the wind turbines.                            company in 1996, wpd became a leading developer in Germany where it contributed to over a decade of
                                           9) Are you aware that though you may have some signed wind turbine contracts enabling you to         sustainable development. wpd is now established in over 21 countries including Canada, Spain, France, Italy,
                                           install some wind turbines in the Belwood area, the vast majority of the people in the area are      Sweden, Portugal, Belgium, Croatia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, Poland, Australia, Taiwan,
                                           strongly opposed to such installation?                                                               Argentina, Chile and Panama."
                                           10) Are you aware that the health of some people is seriously affected by wind turbines?
                                           11) I see from the "Project Schedule" of your "Springwood Wind Farm - Draft Project Description
                                           Report" of August 2010, that you plan to have a "Public Open House #1" meeting in the fall of
                                           2010. Has that changed?
                                           12) How can I find out about the time and location of such a meeting?
                                           13) Is wpd Canada Corporation based in Germany?
                                           14) Who owns wpd Canada Corporation?
                                                                                                                                                • "The cost of generating electricity from wind has fallen dramatically over the past few years. As with any new
                                                                                                                                                process, technology is constantly evolving and efficiencies are improving. Between 1990 and 2002, world
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project, follow up to previous email replied Oct 25
                                                                                                                                                wind energy capacity doubled every three years and prices fell by 15%. Wind energy is competitive with new
                                           • "Your proposal is based on law that is morally wrong. Evidently industrial sized turbines within
                                                                                                                                                coal and new nuclear capacity, even before any environmental costs of fossil fuel and nuclear generation are
                                           ten kilometers of residences have a significant negative impact on property values and the
18-Oct-                                                                                                                                         taken into account. According to a report released by Ontario Clean Air Alliance Research Inc. (Tax Shift:
           23-Sep-2010   email             health of some people. They are also mar our scenic beauty. They are not truly cost effective
2010                                                                                                                                            Eliminating Subsidies and Moving to Full Cost Electricity Pricing. March, 2008), if hidden subsidies for nuclear
                                           and will only remain viable while the Ontario government pays unrealistic tariffs for the power
                                                                                                                                                and coal energy generation were factored in, the cost to the consumer would increase dramatically. The
                                           they provide---when the wind blows. They cannot stand on their own merit and will eventually
                                                                                                                                                report tallies the annual subsidies at $7.9 billion, and suggests eliminating these would increase the price by
                                           collapse as we are beginning to see."
                                                                                                                                                60%. Contrast this to FIT pricing for new wind projects, where all costs are borne by the developer and the
                                                                                                                                                price is set at the beginning of the project.http://www.cleanairalliance.org/resource/taxshift.pdf"
                                           • "We are extremely opposed to this Windfarm as well as windfarms in general. We have some
                                           concerns listed below."
                                           1) Regarding health and well being of individuals within close proximity of wind farms, how are
                                           you addressing concerns?
                                           2) Would you agree that there has not been proper research conducted in regards to health
                                           concerns regarding wind farms in the occupied areas?
                                           3) Would this project be considered if the Ontario Government was not offering financial             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's report on potential effects of wind on health.
                                           incentives to do so?                                                                                 • Explained why there is wind development in Ontario (FIT program, etc.)
                                           4) Is anything being done to counteract the impact on wildlife the wind farms have and if so         • Explained how setbacks are regulated.
17-Aug-                                    what?                                                                                                • Explained that The cost of generating electricity from wind has fallen dramatically over the past few years.
           23-Sep-2010   email
2010                                       5) Who is responsible for the reconstruction of roadways destroyed by the heavy equipment            • Referenced studies on property values which conclude that there is no widespread effect of wind turbines on
                                           travelling them?                                                                                     property values.
                                           6) What is being done to limit the interruption of services the construction of the wind turbines    • Explained that Natural Heritage Assessments were being prepared as well as Environmental Impact Studies.
                                           will cause?                                                                                          • Explained that relative impact on birds and bats
                                           7) There has been studies about the devaluation of property values the wind farms cause to
                                           surrounding areas are you addressing this in any way?
                                           8) Are you prepared to compensate individuals who do suffer health issues that were caused by
                                           your wind turbines?
                                           9) We believe the health concerns are not an issue if the set backs are in the 2km range, why
                                           are you considering less than this?
                                           • "My concerns regarding the proposed Industrial wind turbine installation:"                         • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                           1- Undesirable Visual impact in scenic rural residential area                                        • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           2- Injury to wild life. Acceptable kill rates are set by who? and why is that number OK.             • Explained that visibility of the turbines will vary, and that individual response to the appearance of turbines
25-Aug-                                    3- Reduced Property Values. What is your response? What is your Guarantee?                           varies.
           23-Sep-2010
2010                                       4- What is the Amount of generated power and Time required for an installed turbine to pay off       • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds reference the policies set out by the MNR
                                           its own Carbon Footprint?                                                                            • Referenced recent studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           5- What is the required amount of gas/coal back up required to be running for your proposed          wind turbines on property values.
                                           installation?                                                                                        • Explained how setbacks work


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   8 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           6- Set Back distance. With the UK now looking at 2 plus km set back from residential buildings,      • Explained how much the Springwood Project would generate, and provided reference to studies on
                                           what is your response?                                                                               balancing wind power with other sources of electricity.
                                           7-As a concerned resident of Belwood and forced subsidizer of all wind park developments ,
                                           why do you want to develop your Industrial development were you are not wanted?
                                           • Concerned her business and local tourism will be affected by the wind project and that it will
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked her for sharing her concerns                                                           • Referenced
27-Aug-                                    severely impact her business.
           23-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                  studies on tourism and suggested that it had little or even positive impact
2010                                       • Claims studies in Europe show the negative effect wind turbines have on tourism.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • She asks wpd to cancel the wind project.
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked her for sharing her concerns                                                           • Referenced
28-Aug-
           23-Sep-2010   email             • Concerned about health and safety                                                                  the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
2010
                                                                                                                                                • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                                                                                                                                • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • Concerned about cost of wind energy                                                                • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           • Concerned about health                                                                             wind turbines on property values.
29-Aug-
           23-Sep-2010                     • Concerned about livestock                                                                          • Explained how setbacks are regulated.
2010
                                           • Concerned about property values                                                                    • Explained that to our knowledge there were no demonstrable effects of wind turbines on livestock, and that
                                           • Concerned about setbacks                                                                           the MOE took into account livestock when establishing setbacks.
                                                                                                                                                • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
20-Sep-
           23-Sep-2010   email             • Asked when the meeting regarding the Project would be                                              • Provided the date, time and location of the Open House.
2010
23-Sep-
           23-Sep-2010   email             • Asked if the connection line would be buried.                                                      • Stated that wpd's engineers were working on it, and it was not yet known.
2010
                                                                                                                                                • Mentioned minimum set backs offered to measure distance to her house
                                                                                                                                                • "The minimum setback from a residence in Ontario is 550M. If you could forward us your
20-Aug-
           23-Sep-2010   email             • Had concerns about the noise and mitigation                                                        coordinates/address we could do some specific measurements from your specific residence. Below is a link
2010
                                                                                                                                                from Ontario’s Medical Officer of Health which should help address your concerns regarding health and
                                                                                                                                                setback rationale."
                                           • "I responded to your response by attaching a peer reviewed paper by Salt et al. I have not
                                           received any further feedback to date. I did not find your original response to my health             • Restated a quote from the 2010 National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia: "In July, 2010
                                           concerns adequate. Quoting the MOH 's May 10 2010 report isn't sufficient since that was an          the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia concluded 'The review of the available
13-Oct-
           23-Sep-2010   email             "available to date" statement that in itself was not a comprehensive review of all scientific        evidence…supports the statement that: There are no direct pathological effects from wind farms and that any
2010
                                           published data. Having read further reports of the barotrauma to bats, an essential mammal to        potential impact on humans can be minimized by following existing planning guidelines.' (Wind Turbines and
                                           our natural environment, I have greater concerns for my own "mammal" safety. How are you             Health – A Rapid Review of the Evidence. ANHMRC. July, 2010. Page 8)"
                                           going to address these issues BEFORE they occur in my area. Thank you. Dr. Huber "
                                           • "We write to express our opposition to your proposed "Springwood Wind Farm" (located on 3rd
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
26-Aug-                                    Line). As taxpayers, we don't want to waste money on questionable source of energy
           23-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                  • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
2010                                       generation. As property owners, we don't want to see damage to the peace and landscape to
                                                                                                                                                • Listed all report required for environmental approval.
                                           our rural environment."
                                                                                                                                                • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09 in an effort to help her understand the planning
                                           • "I am writing to express my concern regarding the proposed Springwood Wind Farm. Until
26-Aug-                                                                                                                                         and studies that must be undertaken before an approval for a project may be granted.
           23-Sep-2010   email             detailed scientific studies have been conducted about the effects of wind turbines I am opposed
2010                                                                                                                                            • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                           to any more being established."
                                                                                                                                                • Listed all report required for environmental approval.
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
27-Aug-                                    • Concerned about property values
           23-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                  • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
2010                                       • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                                turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
                                                                                                                                                • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                                                                                                                                • Overviewed compliance with agencies responsible for the safe use of airspace, including the fact that all
                                           • "As residents and immediate neighbours we have several concerns which should be
                                                                                                                                                lighting and marking requirements would be met.
                                           addressed prior to further approvals of this project."
                                                                                                                                                • Explained the concept of capacity factor and availability factor with regards to wind turbine "efficiency"
26-Aug-                                    • Their concerns included growing opposition in Germany, efficiency of the technology, potential
           23-Sep-2010   email                                                                                                                  • Explained that the cost of electricity generation for wind turbines has fallen dramatically worldwide, and why
2010                                       declines in property values, safety for airstrips, incompatibility with local zoning, the need for
                                                                                                                                                it is preferable to some other sources of generation.
                                           independent studies, and the fact that local issues should be considered locally and in
                                                                                                                                                • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                           consideration of resulting tax payer's burden.
                                                                                                                                                • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                                                                                                                                turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained zoning regulations as relates to wind turbines.

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  9 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date             Correspondence
                                             Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                          Response Summary
Received   Responded        Type
27-Sep-                                      • Email Response to a previous email or letter on Oct 6, 2010, concerning aviation safety, stated   • Thanked him for his response and reinforced that wpd is concerned about aviation safety and following the
           23-Sep-2010      email
2010                                         that wpd's fact were incorrect                                                                      proper safety requirements
                                                                                                                                                 • Asked if he would like to send us the location of his residence so that we could provide him with a shadow
                                                                                                                                                 assessment
                                             • Concerned about health                                                                            • Explained the clearance wpd is securing with the Department of National Defence, Transport Canada, and
                                             • Concerned about livestock                                                                         Navigation Canada, and that wpd will follow and meet all requirements presented by regulatory bodies with
26-Aug-
           23-Sep-2010      email            • Concerned about property values                                                                   regards to aerodromes.
2010
                                             • Concerned about aviation safety                                                                   • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds reference the policies set out by the MNR
                                             • Concerned about flicker                                                                           • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                                                                                                                                 turbines on property values.
                                             • Expressed concerns about the project, reply to previous email which we replied to on Oct 25,
                                                                                                                                                 • Reiterated that recent reports suggest that there is no scientific evidence linking noise from turbines with
20-Oct-                                      2010
           23-Sep-2010      email                                                                                                                adverse health effects
2010                                         • Concerned about health and setbacks, wanted more info
                                                                                                                                                 • Reiterated that all wind projects are subject to the same application process
                                             • Had more questions about the approval process
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that Springwood Wind Project was projected to produce 23,000, 000kWh or electricity per year,
                                             • Concerned about land preservation
                                                                                                                                                 and that overall it was the Ontario Power Authority's role to contract for new generation and that wpd Canada
                                             • Concerned about the conflicts between rural and urban mentality. That urban environments
                                                                                                                                                 was not responsible for managing the grid
                                             wasted energy, but that that is where a lot of the "Green Energy" support is coming from.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds
                                             • Concerned about municipal powers having been reduced
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                             • Concerned about the cost of wind energy
                                                                                                                                                 relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                             • Concerned about provincial ministries being overburdened as a result of the Green Energy
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the developer's
                                             Act.
                                                                                                                                                 expense.
                                             • Concerned that turbines and rural areas are incompatible
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
22-Aug-                                      • Asked if turbines would be removed if in future it was proven that they have negative health
           23-Sep-2010      email                                                                                                                • Explained that there is no evidence of incompatibility between rural areas and turbines, and that rather it was
2010                                         effects on local citizens.
                                                                                                                                                 quite the opposite around the world.
                                             • Asked who would compensate families who moved away from the Project area.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that there is no scientific evidence that livestock and local agriculture is negatively effected by
                                             • Asked if the government would be burdened by turbines should wpd file for bankruptcy
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines.
                                             • Asked if developers would buy more land after they have driven down property values, so that
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                             they could install more turbines.
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines on property values.
                                             • Asked if wpd would allow the community to vote on the Project
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained why there is wind development in Ontario (FIT program, etc.)
                                             • Asked if wpd would recognize that the project is unwanted by the community.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained how setbacks are regulated.
                                             • Concerned about gas generation
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained to them that wpd Canada was responsible for decommissioning the Project, and that the cost was
                                             • Concerned about impacts on agriculture
                                                                                                                                                 covered by wpd, and agreed to under the standard lease agreements with landowners.
                                                                                                                                                 • Provided background on wpd Canada
                                             • Concerned about land preservation
                                             • Concerned about the conflicts between rural and urban mentality. That urban environments
                                             wasted energy, but that that is where a lot of the "Green Energy" support is coming from.
                                             • Concerned about municipal powers having been reduced
                                             • Concerned about the cost of wind energy
                                                                                                                                                 • Thanked her for her email and apologized for the delayed response
           25-Oct-2011                       • Concerned about provincial ministries being overburdened as a result of the Green Energy
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09
           (replied to                       Act.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the OPA is responsible for planning Ontario's electricity system
           original email                    • Concerned that turbines and rural areas are incompatible
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the developer's
           9/23/2010 but                     • Asked if turbines would be removed if in future it was proven that they have negative health
                                                                                                                                                 expense.
13-Oct-    received                          effects on local citizens.
                            email                                                                                                                • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
2010       correspondenc                     • Asked who would compensate families who moved away from the Project area.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that there is no scientific evidence that livestock and local agriculture is negatively effected by
           e indicating                      • Asked if the government would be burdened by turbines should wpd file for bankruptcy
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines.
           that no                           • Asked if developers would buy more land after they have driven down property values, so that
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
           response was                      they could install more turbines.
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines on property values.
           received)                         • Asked if wpd would allow the community to vote on the Project
                                                                                                                                                 • Provided background on wpd Canada
                                             • Asked if wpd would recognize that the project is unwanted by the community.
                                             • Concerned about gas generation
                                             • Concerned about impacts on agriculture
                                             • Repeat of previous email document number 60, they did not receive wpd's first response. wpd
                                             response Oct 25, 2010


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  10 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health.
                                                                                                                                                  Explained any future decisions regarding health will be directed from the appropriate Ontario government
                                           • Wanted clearer and concise answers to her 11 Questions she previously sent which included:
                                                                                                                                                  authorities
                                           • If health concerns were proven would the turbines be moved
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the minimum distance was settled on based off of sound volume. Reinforced that the studies
                                           • Would wpd provide subsidies or compensation if land values declined
25-Oct-                                                                                                                                           that have been conducted show no long term impact on property values
           4-Jan-2011    email             • Who would pay if the project was abandoned
2010                                                                                                                                              • Explained that an escrow account was created for decommissioning, and that the monies were managed by
                                           • What steps would be taken if the wind turbines caused damage to the local ecosystem
                                                                                                                                                  a third party, ensuring that costs of decommissioning would be covered.
                                           • Allow for a vote on the project in the community
                                                                                                                                                  • We are required to submit environmental impact studies on wildlife and fauna in the are and mitigation
                                           • Can participating land owners cancel their contract?
                                                                                                                                                  strategies
                                                                                                                                                  • Acknowledged the existence of opposition to the project in the area, but noted the consultation process
                                                                                                                                                  importance of everyone's opinion including less vocal supporters
14-Oct-                                                                                                                                           • Confirmed that we had received her emails and that the message she was getting was the result of a
           14-Oct-2010   email             • Called to confirm that the email address was working as she had received rejection messages
2010                                                                                                                                              technical issue that should be soon resolved
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
                                           • Expressed concerns about the project
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health
                                           • Concerned about shadow flicker
19-Oct-                                                                                                                                           • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
           21-Oct-2010   email             • Concerned about health and setbacks
2010                                                                                                                                              turbines on property values.
                                           • Concerned about property values
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained shadow flicker and offered to run a test one project site and turbine type is confirmed.
                                           • Concerned about stray voltage
                                                                                                                                                  • Confirmed noise and setback regulations
                                           • Expressed concerns about the project, reply to previous letter that she said went unanswered         • Referred her to two reports: Wind Turbine and Health Effects- An Expert Panel Review, 2009. And the
24-Oct-
           25-Oct-2010   email             • Concerned about health effects, indicating that Dr. Arlene King's report had not scientific merit.   conclusion from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia
2010
                                           Wanted to see third party research concerning the health effects of wind                               • Recommended that Angela also submit her concerns to the office of Dr. Arlene King.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project, indicated that the reply to his previous email was not          • Explained that the Ontario noise limits were set by the provincial government and were in line with the World
18-Oct-
           25-Oct-2010   email             sufficient to address his concerns.                                                                    Health Organization's nighttime noise guidelines, below which effects on health and sleep occur.
2010
                                           • Wanted further clarification about economic cost and the sound associated with wind.                 • Reiterated that the cost of wind was dropping and was competitive with other sources of energy especially
                                                                                                                                                  considering subsidies other industries receive. Provided further reading on the subject should it be of interest.
                                           • Expressed concern about the project
                                           • Concerned about health                                                                               • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
14-Oct-
           25-Oct-2010   email             • Concerned about property values                                                                      • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2010
                                           • Concerned about the effect on wildlife and animals                                                   wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Followed up email sent from her Oct 14, 2010 asking for response
23-Oct-
           25-Oct-2010   email             • Asked for our updated address                                                                        • Provided new address
2010
                                           • He was concerned with the economic viability of wind turbines. . It is a fact that in Europe they
                                           are already shutting several turbine sites down because they produce energy when it is not
                                           required and it has to be sold at less than cost to merely use it . Once the 'Slush' money has
                                           gone, the same thing will happen here , but I bet you will leave the suckered in land owner to
                                           sort out the mess of unpaid taxes and demolishing orders . This potential scenario will affect us
                                           all with lower property values and that is not to mention the potential other problems caused by
                                           these devices being built way ,way too close to peoples dwellings and the radiation being              • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the developer's
13-Oct-
           25-Oct-2010   email             emitted from the inverters and lines . We have located a document that says that a statement           expense.
2010
                                           was made in parliament recently , that the go-ahead for these turbines , will not be given             • Explained that in Europe most wind turbines are being replaced not removed from service
                                           anyway unless the local council (Center Wellington) gives approval . We spoke with Walt Visser
                                           , who said that He (and council) were against them , so you can be very sure that this (plan to
                                           erect industrial turbines) is not over yet and we will be doing everything possible to get that
                                           scoundrel McGuinty thrown from office very soon• Expressed opposition to the project
                                           • Claimed that turbines in Europe are being taken down
                                           • Concerned about the community being left to decommission the turbines.
                                           • "Please advise on how you are dealing with the aircraft traffic in the area since there are a        • "Aviation safety is the jurisdiction of the Federal Government. As such, all of wpd’s project locations have or
                                           number of private airstrips within or adjacent to the designated area. .... I purchased my property    will be submitted to the Department of National Defense (DND), Transport Canada (TC), and NAV CANADA.
13-Oct-
           25-Oct-2010   email             23 years ago with the intention that once I retired I would build an airstrip and start flying my      .... wpd will follow and meet the requirements presented by these regulatory bodies, as well as the
2010
                                           plane from that strip. ... How will you proposal affect the development of my private airstrip. If     requirements for a Renewable Energy Approval (through the Ministry of the Environment) as related to
                                           this prevent me from developing my airstrip how are you going to compensate me."                       aerodromes."
15-Aug-    25-Oct-2010   email             • "I have serious issues regarding the whole concept of wind power as reliable source of               • Thanked them for sharing their concerns and apologized for the delay.

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     11 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                          Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
2010                                       renewable energy due to: the economics of wind power; the intermittency of wind power as a          • Explained that between 1990 and 2002, world wind energy capacity doubled every three years and prices
                                           replacement for coal/gas generation; the, as yet, complete lack of epidemiological studies          fell by 15%, and that wind energy is competitive with new coal and new nuclear capacity, even before any
                                           regarding the safety of wind power compared to the mounting evidence of real health impacts to      environmental costs of fossil fuel and nuclear generation are taken into account.
                                           residents living close to wind farms; and; the lack of community/municipal involvement in the       • Regarding health concerns, referenced was made to the international scientific panel findings from
                                           wind farm approval process. Additionally, I read numerous articles regarding environmental, bird    December, 2009 an international scientific panel of found that there is no scientific evidence to link wind
                                           and bat impacts caused by wind turbines despite assurances from the wind developers in their        turbine noise with reported adverse health effects. The panel included experts in audiology, acoustics,
                                           environmental assessments that environmental impacts will be addressed/mitigated..."                environmental and occupational medicine, and public health. Reference was also made to the May, 2010 the
                                           • "...at present there are three wind development companies attempting to establish projects in     Chief Medical Officer of Health for Ontario's conclusion, and the National Health and Medical Research
                                           my immediate area including WPD. The closest of which would have turbines on my immediate           Council of Australia findings which were similar.
                                           neighbours property to the west and south of me – this is a HUGE concern to me for my families      • Explained that municipal consultation must occur at minimum 90 days before the Second Open House,
                                           health; property value; esthetics; and quality of life. I am very concerned that if WPD gains a     which is earlier than the date on which project documents need to be posted publicly, and that detailed
                                           “foothold” in this community that these other wind developers will follow. "                        consultation forms will be distributed in order to ensure that key potential concerns are addressed.
                                           •"…I challenge WPD to listen and act by walking away from project and it’s risks to this            • In terms of property values, two recent studies were referenced. Both studies concluded that there was no
                                           community…my community."                                                                            evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected cumulative home sales. The US study
                                                                                                                                               looked at 7500 single-family home sales located near 24 existing wind facilities across 9 US states, from 1996
                                                                                                                                               to 2007. The Canadian study looked at home sales in the vicinity of an existing facility in Ontario, and used
                                                                                                                                               the Canadian Uniform Standard of Professional Appraisal Practice.
                                                                                                                                               • "You’re welcome, and thank you for your email. Information on our turbine siting will be available at our
                                           • "Thanks for the update on locations, but most of us do not have equipment to deal with latitude
22-Oct-                                                                                                                                        upcoming open house. There will also be a representative there who will be able to discuss the locations with
           26-Oct-2010   email             and longitude co-ordinates. Can you please define the 4 locations into Lot and Concession
2010                                                                                                                                           you."
                                           Numbers for the respective Townships, or even better the current land owners names."
                                                                                                                                               • Coordinates that could be searched on Google Maps was published on the project website.
24-Sep-                                     • Inquired as to the projects impacts on trees near their property, concerned that setback          • Stantec responded, that they are aware of tress, the turbine's will be 120metres+ from their location.
           26-Oct-2010   email
2010                                       regulations might not be met                                                                        Confirmed that they will be unaffected
                                           • "I am deeply dissatisfied with the fact that my concerns have not been adequately addressed
                                           which is part of the approval process. I have always been strongly opposed to wind turbines
                                           because of many key issues including: Property value decrease, noise impact, health risks on
                                           people, visual impact, risks to wildlife and livestock and risks to the environment as a whole.     • "It is understandable that you would have a concern with shadow flicker. A wind turbine’s moving blades can
                                           • "My beautiful daughter, my only child, has been recently diagnosed with epilepsy. The shadow      cast a moving shadow on a nearby residence, depending on the time of year (which determines how low the
23-Oct-
           26-Oct-2010   email             flicker from these turbines could trigger seizures in my daughter. I want to know what these        sun is in the sky) and time of day. It is possible to calculate very precisely whether a flickering shadow will in
2010
                                           companies, the ministry of environment and the government as a whole is planning to do if my        fact fall on a given location near a wind turbine, and how many hours in a year it will do so. We certainly
                                           daughter can no longer live on our horse farm? What will YOU do if we have to move away but         perform this calculation for your home."
                                           cannot sell our farm because no one will buy it? How can you sleep at night knowing your
                                           greed is destroying lives? I would like concrete answers on how this company is going to
                                           manage the fallout due to this project."
28-Oct-
           26-Oct-2010   email             • Follow up email asking wpd for a shadow flicker report, wpd response Nov 10, 2010                 • Apologized for the delay in response, asked Shannon to provide her civic address to perform a calculation
2010
27-Oct-                                     • Asked about the availability of project reports on website, sent to us and Stantec Consulting     • Stantec confirmed that the Draft Project description report is available and that all other reports will be made
           27-Oct-2010   email
2010                                       Ltd. Stantec responded                                                                              available online 60 days before the last open house.
27-Oct-                                    • Follow up question to the previous document number (wpd response Oct 27, 2010), inquiring
           27-Oct-2010   email                                                                                                                 • Stantec confirmed that they would be.
2010                                       as to whether Stantec would be providing the Arch and heritage reports
                                                                                                                                               • Emailed press release concerning Springwood Open House announcement, to Wellington Advisor, editor of
n/a        27-Oct-2010   email             n/a
                                                                                                                                               Centre Wellington, Guelph Mercury, and News570
                                                                                                                                               • She explained her inbox was full and could not handle large document files.
                                                                                                                                               • "It was nice to meet you at the open house! Thank you for coming and discussing your thoughts with me.
                                                                                                                                               You and I talked about the new Ministry of Natural Resources bat guidelines. If you are interested in reading
28-Oct-
           28-Oct-2010   email             • Had problems sending information to Stantec                                                       them, they can be found here:
2010
                                                                                                                                               http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/stdprodconsume/groups/lr/@mnr/@renewable/documents/document/289694.pdfAs
                                                                                                                                               I also mentioned, new Bird guidelines (an update to the version you currently have) are anticipated this year.
                                                                                                                                               They will likely be posted on the Environmental Registry when available."
n/a        28-Oct-2010   email             n/a                                                                                                 • emailed him at Wellington Advisor confirming wording on the Draft Project Description
                                           • Expressed great concern about the project
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
29-Aug-                                    • Concerned about the potential for fires as a result of gearbox malfunction. Wanted to know
           29-Oct-2010   Mail                                                                                                                  • Explained that modern wind turbines have safety measures against malfunction and they shutdown when a
2010                                       about long term studies on the topic.
                                                                                                                                               malfunction is detected or when wind speeds go above a certain level.
                                           • Concerned about weather patterns and the damage from tornados
5-Oct-                                     • Expressed opposition to the project. These included:                                              • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
           29-Oct-2010   Mail
2010                                       • "1) Windpower is not even green. Carbon dioxide emissions will be so small as to be almost        • Explained that there were no emissions of greenhouse gases from the operation of turbines, and that any

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                12 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                              Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           meaningless. 2) Risk to property values and suitability. 3) Risk of noise. 4) Risk of health effects.   production from the construction phases would be offset early on in the 20 year life of the project.
                                           5) Risk to visual landscape. 6) Risk to environment, wildlife and livestock. 7) Risk to taxpayers /     • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                           ratepayers."                                                                                            other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                           • "We who work, live, in rural Ontario have no democratic say in what is proposed to go up in           issues
                                           our own backyard."                                                                                      • Explained the setbacks and noise level requirements, and that there were no demonstrable negative effects
                                                                                                                                                   on livestock from the operation of win
                                                                                                                                                   • Referenced the declining cost of wind power, real cost of alternatives
                                                                                                                                                   • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                                                                                                                                   turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                   • Thanked them for sharing their concerns, explained we were unable to provide communication in Dutch
                                           • Expressed concern about the project, including shadow flicker, stray voltage, property value,         • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
31-Aug-
           29-Oct-2010   Mail              and impacts on livestock (they operate a dairy farm) and the local environment.                         turbines on property values.
2010
                                           • Requested that communication be in Dutch                                                              • Explained shadow flicker offered to do an assessment on their property.
                                                                                                                                                   • Explained that wildlife assessments are part of the approval process
                                                                                                                                                   • Thanked her for sharing her comments
                                                                                                                                                   • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project, stating that the cost to taxpayers and the efficiency of         relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. Referenced further reading that may be of interest.
14-Oct-
           29-Oct-2010   Mail              turbines was obscene.                                                                                   • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
2010
                                           • Also expressed concerns regarding health effects, and impacts on the natural environment.             other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                                                                                                                                   issues
                                                                                                                                                   • Explained the approval process and details of public consultation
                                           • Wrote to express opposition to the project.
                                           • Felt that the rights of rural communities were being trampled on, and that the process lacked
                                           transparency.
13-Oct-                                    • Indicated that there were demonstrated negative effects from wind turbines, including impacts         • Thanked them for sharing their concerns
           29-Oct-2010   Mail
2010                                       on property values, effects of noise and visual pollution, effects on livestock and wildlife, and the   • Explained that further expansion of the project was highly unlikely because of the location
                                           unreliability of the technology.
                                           • Concerned about the expansion of the project, wanted to know whether wpd was going to
                                           expand after the initial project in a follow up letter
                                                                                                                                                   • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
                                                                                                                                                   • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                                                                                                                                   other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
24-Sep-                                    • Concerned with the lack of regard for the environment, as well as potential effects on property       issues
           29-Oct-2010   Mail
2010                                       values, health, and livestock.                                                                          • Referenced the declining cost of wind power,
                                                                                                                                                   • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                                                                                                                                   turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                   • Explaining wind impact in reducing greenhouse gas
                                                                                                                                                   • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                                                                                                                                   • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                           • He explained that while he recognizes the merits of wind power, he feels that locating them in        other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                           areas where people live is a mistake. • Marty's concerns were with regards to potential health          issues
16-Sep-
           29-Oct-2010   Mail              effects, what the impacts on hydro costs might be, the incompatibility of the visual appearance         • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds and referenced the policies set out by the MNR
2010
                                           of the turbines with the rural landscape, potential effects on wildlife and livestock, and the          • Explained mitigation strategies around stray voltage
                                           possibility of stray voltage                                                                            • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                   relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                                   • Acknowledged the different aesthetic opinions people have of wind turbines
                                                                                                                                                   • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                                                                                                                                   • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                                                                                                                                   other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
24-Sep-                                    • Submitted the same letter as Document #83, expressing concern with the lack of regard for the         issues
           29-Oct-2010   Mail
2010                                       environment, as well as potential effects on property values, health, and livestock.                    • Referenced the declining cost of wind power,
                                                                                                                                                   • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                                                                                                                                   turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                   • Explaining wind impact in reducing greenhouse gas
1-Nov-                                                                                                                                             • Thanked him for his questions, answered his questions concerning, project size, setbacks, contract length,
           1-Nov-2010    email             • Follow up inquiry asking for a quick response to his questions.
2010                                                                                                                                               wpd Canada company history, projected energy output


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   13 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                          Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                                                                                                                               other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                                                                                                                               issues
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                                                                                                                               turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked him for his questions, answered his questions concerning, project size, setbacks, contract length,
                                                                                                                                               wpd Canada company history, projected energy output
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
1-Nov-
           1-Nov-2010    email             • Email of the list of questions sent in comment above                                              other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
2010
                                                                                                                                               issues
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                                                                                                                               turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked him for his questions, answered his questions concerning, project size, setbacks, contract length,
                                                                                                                                               wpd Canada company history, projected energy output
                                            • Sent a list of questions for a news article, including, project size, the number of landowners   • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
1-Nov-
           1-Nov-2010    email             involved, health effects, property values, turbine output, setbacks, company history, contract      other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
2010
                                           length, how we approached landowners, how much do farmers make from the project.                    issues
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                                                                                                                               turbines on property values.
25-Oct-
           1-Nov-2010    email             • Employment inquiry, maintenance/operations for Springwood project                                 Thanked him for his interest would let him know when operation and maintenance needs are determined
2010
                                                                                                                                                • Explained the reason behind of the small group format for the open house and reason behind having small
27-Oct-                                     • Expressed disappointment with the Open House
           3-Nov-2010    email                                                                                                                 topic specific working groups
2010                                       • Felt that their concerns weren't answered and the format was inaccessible
                                                                                                                                               • Explained that wpd provided a number of different ways in which questions could be asked or answered.
                                                                                                                                               • Acknowledged receipt of petition to each signee, noted that they were 20km away from Drayton
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project via signed petition
                                                                                                                                               other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                           • Concerned about health
                                                                                                                                               issues
                                           • Concerned about property values
n/a        3-Nov-2010    email                                                                                                                 • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           • Concerned about efficiency of wind energy, cost to tax payers
                                                                                                                                               wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Concerned about wind not being green
                                                                                                                                               • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                           • Concerned about the lack of public involvement
                                                                                                                                               their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy
                                                                                                                                               • Explained public consultation requirements, and opportunities under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • Letter sent to them in response to a conversation at the open house.
n/a        3-Nov-2010    Mail                                                                                                                  n/a
                                           • Sent copies of property value reports
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked her for sharing their concerns and for late response
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                                                                                                                               other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                           • Concerned about the economic viability of wind                                                    issues
26-Oct-                                    • Concerned about intermittency and power mix in the province.                                      • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
           9-Nov-2010    email
2010                                       • Concerned about health                                                                            turbines on property values.
                                           • Concerned about property values                                                                   • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                               relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                               • Explained that the IESO is responsible for projecting power needs. As time goes by projection methods will
                                                                                                                                               improve so as to best utilize intermittent energy that wind provides
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
                                                                                                                                               • Responded to this inquiry and inquiry below
                                                                                                                                               • Explained the property value reports again along with their conclusions
                                           • Concerned about health                                                                            • Explained the information panels at the open house and sent them as an attachment
27-Oct-
           9-Nov-2010    email             • Concerned about property values• Concerned about setbacks, asked how they were                    • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
2010
                                           determined                                                                                          other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                                                                                                                               issues
                                                                                                                                               • Explained that the setbacks were set based on 40dBA level, and that MOE should be contacted for details
                                                                                                                                               as to how the setback limit was decided upon
27-Oct-                                    • Follow up email, she was unsatisfied with previous answers she received my mail                   • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
           9-Nov-2010    email
2010                                       • Concerned about health                                                                            • Responded to this inquiry and inquiry below

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                               14 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date        Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                Response Summary
Received    Responded     Type
                                           • Concerned about property values                                                                         • Explained the property value reports again along with their conclusions
                                           • Claimed information provided at Open House was false and misleading                                     • Explained the information panels at the open house and sent them as an attachment
                                                                                                                                                     • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                                                                                                                                     other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                                                                                                                                     issues
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained that the setbacks were set based on 40dBA level, and that MOE should be contacted for details
                                                                                                                                                     as to how the setback limit was decided upon
n/a         9-Nov-2010    email            n/a                                                                                                       • Sent Open house information panels. They were not attached to previous email
                                            • Wanted clarification on a couple of issues from the Open House
                                                                                                                                                     • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
27-Oct-                                    • Concerned about health
            9-Nov-2010    email                                                                                                                      turbines on property values.
2010                                       • Concerned about property values
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained that the quote in the newspaper comes from the Ontario Chief Medical Officer Report.
                                           • Felt these topics were not addressed properly at the Open house
                                                                                                                                                     • "In terms of property values, two recent studies were conducted to measure the effect of wind projects on
                                                                                                                                                     property values, one in the United States and one in Canada. Both studies concluded that there was no
                                           • "Last night we went to your information meeting in Fergus. I was told that we should not be
                                                                                                                                                     evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected cumulative home sales. The US study
27-Oct-                                    concerned about our property value and that wind turbines in the area will have no effect on
            9-Nov-2010    email                                                                                                                      looked at nearly 7500 single-family home sales located near one of 24 existing wind facilities across nine US
2010                                       values. Would you please let me know if this is correct and refer me to the research you are
                                                                                                                                                     states. Homes that were considered were between 244 metres and 16 km away from the nearest turbine, and
                                           using."
                                                                                                                                                     home-sales data was collected from 1996 to 2007. The Canadian study looked at home sales in the vicinity of
                                                                                                                                                     an existing facility in Ontario, and used the Canadian Uniform Standard of Professional Appraisal Practice."
                                                                                                                                                     • Thanked him for sharing his concerns
                                            • "Please note that we oppose the development of your wind farm in our community. ... We will            • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                           also take every opportunity to support and participate in any legal actions against WPD as well           other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
26-Oct-                                    as property owners (who have betrayed us) as they affect our health, the quiet enjoyment of our           issues
            9-Nov-2010    email
2010                                       properties, impact on wildlife as well as any negative impact on our property values...as soon as         • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                           our ongoing studies are complete...The current setbacks are totally inadequate and should be              turbines on property values.
                                           increased to 5km's."                                                                                      • Explained that assessing the impact on wildlife is part of the process and mitigation measures will be taken
                                                                                                                                                     as needed
                                            • Expressed opposition to the project, reply to previous email (wpd replied to this email Jan 4,
                                           2011
                                           • "Can you have wpd put something in writing that will guarantee there will be no deterioration in
9-Nov-
            1-Jan-2011    email            the value of my property or my health in the event that our community has to litigate with wpd            • Informed him that we will include his comments in our public consultation submission for the REA
2010
                                           and the landowners that are hosting your project so that I can have l my lawyer review it. The
                                           information that we have is in direct conflict to the findings of the studies that you are referring to
                                           in your form letter response."
                                                                                                                                                     • Thanked her for sharing her concerns
                                            • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
26=Oct-10   9-Nov-2010    email             • Felt that the public meeting should have occurred before speaking with potential landowners.
                                                                                                                                                     relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. When accounting for subsidies other sources of power
                                           • Concerned cost of subsidies, cost of wind
                                                                                                                                                     cost is comparable to wind
                                                                                                                                                     • "The basic criteria used to plan the road layout is to have easy access to the turbines, while allowing the
                                                                                                                                                     landowner to maximize their farming land and provide the least amount of disruption to their farming
                                                                                                                                                     process.Under the new Renewable Energy Approval process in the Environmental Protection Act, municipal
                                                                                                                                                     zoning and planning for the purposes of constructing and maintaining a renewable energy facility has been
26-Oct-                                    • Response to a question posed at the first Open house on Oct 26,2010
            18-Nov-2010   open house                                                                                                                 consolidated into the Approval Process with the Ministry of the Environment. If there is a complaint regarding
2010                                       • She had a question concerning how the access road layout was determined,
                                                                                                                                                     zoning, the municipality can be informed and they are capable of including it in their Municipal consultation
                                                                                                                                                     form (mandated under s.18 of O-reg. 359/09 of the Environmental Protection Act). The decision now rests with
                                                                                                                                                     the Ministry of the Environment; however the municipality is still consulted, through the form, with regards to
                                                                                                                                                     their recommendations for the infrastructure, or roads required for the construction of the project."
                                           • Wanted to advise that they were paid members of Oppose Belwood Windfarm.                                • Thanked him and his wife for sharing his concerns
                                           • Requested answers to the following:                                                                     • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from wind
                                           " 1 -The wind generators, how are we compensated for them. Do you pay for them or??                       turbines on property values.
                                           2-The back up generator same as #1                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
5-Dec-
            4-Jan-2011    email            3-Who pays for transmission lines from your site to end connection                                        other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
2010
                                           4- Will all your underground cables from wind generators to switching & generator building be             issues
                                           permanently marked & at what depth will they be& what if any covering protection.                         • Informed him that the developer is responsible for all construction and production costs.
                                           5- I would like a copy of your required report re the open house meeting of OCT.26,2010,at                • Would inform him at a later date about the underground wiring when the final details of the project were
                                           Fergus, Ont"                                                                                              completed


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     15 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                         Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                              • "Thank you for your email raising questions regarding the Springwood Wind Project. My apologies for not
                                                                                                                                              responding sooner. In terms of our reports, we are still in the process of gathering the information from our site
                                                                                                                                              surveys and studies, reviewing it and preparing the reports. Once those are ready for public review and
                                                                                                                                              comment, we will be making them available at least 60 days prior to our final Open House. ... In terms of the
                                                                                                                                              underground cables from the wind turbines to the switching station, in order to place them properly we need
                                                                                                                                              information from the geotechnical, archaeological and natural heritage reports. Once those reports are
                                           • Follow up email from previous contact clarifying our answer to previous questions which
                                                                                                                                              finalized, we will know what features we need to take into account when determining the specific details (e.g.
                                           include:
                                                                                                                                              route, depth, etc.). We are working with Hydro One to determine the final details of the transmission line to
                                           • "1-What size in KWS, amps, voltage, rpm, will your back up generator be? Also what type of
                                                                                                                                              the grid; at this point, we anticipate using existing hydro right-of-ways along roadways. In terms of questions#
2-Apr-                                     fuel will it use & consumption per hr.
           10-Jun-2011   email                                                                                                                1, 2 and 3 our project will not have a backup generator. The electricity produced by our wind turbines will feed
2011                                       2- Will your Geny be @ idle 24/7 in preparation for startup
                                                                                                                                              directly into the electricity grid. Wind is one source of electrical generation the Independent Electricity System
                                           3- What are the decibel ratings @ full speed , inside its building.
                                                                                                                                              Operator (IESO) is able to draw upon to ensure a reliable supply of electricity so that power is there when
                                           4- Is your company LEGALLY responsible for removing all installed wind generators, concrete
                                                                                                                                              consumers flick the switch or turn on an appliance. In terms of question #4, a developer is required to
                                           base’s & all equipment, buildings, roads etc. etc., if so required for any reason"
                                                                                                                                              decommission the wind turbine at their own expense at the end of a typical 20 year Power Purchase
                                                                                                                                              Agreement contract with the Ontario Power Authority. As part of the Renewable Energy Approval (REA)
                                                                                                                                              process, wpd is required to submit a decommissioning plan to the Ministry of Environment detailing how this
                                                                                                                                              will be achieved. The Renewable Energy Approval (REA) application must be approved before wpd can start
                                                                                                                                              construction. wpd Canada, as part of our standard leasing agreement, provides an escrow account covering
                                                                                                                                              the estimated cost of dismantling the facility. Monies are set aside and controlled by a third party."
2-Apr-
           10-Jun-2011   email             • Same as document 98.1 first email was returned "undeliverable"                                   As document 98.1
2011
                                                                                                                                              • "Clearly a request to decommission prior to 20 years would be an unanticipated event, given that a contract
14-Jun-                                    • "Apology accepted. Re question #4,I was thinking more along the lines if the decommission
           21-Jun-2011   email                                                                                                                would be in place for the 20 year period. However, we would comply with an order from the proper authorities,
2011                                       had to be completed, say at any time prior to the 20 years, who would bare the cost?"
                                                                                                                                              and work out the details with that authority."
                                           • "I would like more info on your second info "meeting". (Springwood) I would like to support
                                           your position. The anti-wind people are very vocal. I was sickened to see how their protest.       • Thanked her for her support
28-Jan-                                    (October) was not an info night but a roasting. This is now becoming normal. Where was the         • Explained that the situation was difficult but that we did receive quiet messages of support.
           31-Jan-2011   email
2010                                       protection for your people. Who was responsible for organizing and hosting the event? Why          • Informed her that the next open house will most likely be late summer or early fall
                                           were your people put in the situation to be intimidated? It must have been terrifying to be        • Attached a survey for her reference on Ontario's opinions on wind power.
                                           surrounded by the mob. Why are the anti-wind the only people that are allowed a voice?"
28-Dec-                                    • Disliked our previous response and wanted specific figures, but did not indicate any specifics
           22-Feb-2011   email                                                                                                                • Asked for clarification on what was asked.
2010                                       about what he wanted a clearer answer to.
                                                                                                                                              • Scanned note, with a RE power brochure sent to him.
n/a        22-Feb-2011   Note              n/a
                                                                                                                                              • Apologized for not sending it sooner
                                           • He had spoken with wpd at the previous Open House, and had some questions, which                 • "My apologies for not responding sooner, unfortunately we have been and still are waiting to hear back from
                                           included:                                                                                          Hydro One on a number of issues. Ultimately, the finalized line will depend largely on Hydro One’s decisions,
                                           "1) What kind of power lines are needed to carry the appropriate voltage to the connection         so we are still awaiting additional information to respond to your questions 1 through 5. In response to
                                           point?                                                                                             question 6, for shadow flicker to occur, the angle of the sun must be low on the horizon, turbines must be in
18-Jan-
           22-Feb-2011   email             2) What kind of poles will be required to hold these lines?                                        the right latitude, it must be the right time of day, it must be sunny, etc. Flicker can be experienced from inside
2011
                                           3) How tall and how far apart do they need to be?                                                  a building only if there is a direct line from the sun to a turbine to a window, and if the turbine is close enough
                                           4) Will trees need to be cut down to locate new poles-if necessary?                                to the building. It is possible to calculate very precisely whether a flickering will fall on a given location near a
                                           5) What is the distance from the middle of the road that these poles can be placed?                wind farm, and for how many hours a year. Once the project turbine site is set, wpd would be happy to run a
                                           6) What is being done to minimize/prevent Shadow Flicker at a residence?"                          shadow/flicker analysis for adjacent landowners upon request."
7-Mar-                                                                                                                                        • Indicated that there was no set date as of yet as wpd needed to complete some reporting. Indicated it would
           8-Mar-2011    email             • Inquired as to the date of our second open house
2011                                                                                                                                          be summer at the earliest.
                                                                                                                                              • Acknowledged receipt of petition to each signee, noted that they were 20km away from Drayton
                                                                                                                                              • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                            • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                              other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                           • Concerned about health
                                                                                                                                              issues
6-Dec-                                     • Concerned about property values
           21-Mar-2011   Mail                                                                                                                 • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2011                                       • Concerned efficiency of wind energy, cost to tax payers
                                                                                                                                              wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Concerned about wind not being green
                                                                                                                                              • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                           • Concerned about the lack of public involvement
                                                                                                                                              their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy
                                                                                                                                              • Explained public consultation requirements, and opportunities under O. Reg. 359/09
6-Dec-                                     • Expressed opposition to the project                                                              • Acknowledged receipt of petition to each signee, noted that they were 20km away from Drayton
           21-Mar-2011   Mail
2011                                       • Concerned about health                                                                           • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 16 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                        Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           • Concerned about property values                                 other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                           • Concerned efficiency of wind energy, cost to tax payers         issues
                                           • Concerned about wind not being green                            • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           • Concerned about the lack of public involvement                  wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                             • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                                                                                             their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy
                                                                                                             • Explained public consultation requirements, and opportunities under O. Reg. 359/09
                                                                                                             • Acknowledged receipt of petition to each signee, noted that they were 20km away from Drayton
                                                                                                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                             other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                           • Concerned about health
                                                                                                             issues
6-Dec-                                     • Concerned about property values
           21-Mar-2011   Mail                                                                                • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2011                                       • Concerned efficiency of wind energy, cost to tax payers
                                                                                                             wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Concerned about wind not being green
                                                                                                             • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                           • Concerned about the lack of public involvement
                                                                                                             their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy
                                                                                                             • Explained public consultation requirements, and opportunities under O. Reg. 359/09
                                                                                                             • Acknowledged receipt of petition to each signee, noted that they were 20km away from Drayton
                                                                                                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                             other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                           • Concerned about health
                                                                                                             issues
6-Dec-                                     • Concerned about property values
           21-Mar-2011   Mail                                                                                • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2011                                       • Concerned about efficiency of wind energy, cost to tax payers
                                                                                                             wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Concerned about wind not being green
                                                                                                             • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                           • Concerned about the lack of public involvement
                                                                                                             their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy
                                                                                                             • Explained public consultation requirements, and opportunities under O. Reg. 359/09
                                                                                                             • Acknowledged receipt of petition to each signee, noted that they were 20km away from Drayton
                                                                                                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                             other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                           • Concerned about health
                                                                                                             issues
6-Dec-                                     • Concerned about property values
           21-Mar-2011   Mail                                                                                • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2011                                       • Concerned about efficiency of wind energy, cost to tax payers
                                                                                                             wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Concerned about wind not being green
                                                                                                             • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                           • Concerned about the lack of public involvement
                                                                                                             their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy
                                                                                                             • Explained public consultation requirements, and opportunities under O. Reg. 359/09
                                                                                                             • Acknowledged receipt of petition to each signee, noted that they were 20km away from Drayton
                                                                                                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                             other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                           • Concerned about health
                                                                                                             issues
6-Dec-                                     • Concerned about property values
           21-Mar-2011   Mail                                                                                • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2011                                       • Concerned about efficiency of wind energy, cost to tax payers
                                                                                                             wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Concerned about wind not being green
                                                                                                             • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                           • Concerned about the lack of public involvement
                                                                                                             their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy
                                                                                                             • Explained public consultation requirements, and opportunities under O. Reg. 359/09
                                                                                                             • Mass response document to Mapleton Petition.
                                                                                                             • Acknowledged receipt of petition to each signee
                                                                                                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
                                                                                                             other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                                                                                             issues
n/a        21-Mar-2011   email             n/a
                                                                                                             • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                             wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                             • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                                                                                             their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy
                                                                                                             • Explained public consultation requirements, and opportunities under O. Reg. 359/09
                                           • Expressed opposition to the project                             • Acknowledged receipt of petition to each signee, noted that they were 20km away from Drayton
6-Dec-
           21-Mar-2011   Mail              • Concerned about health                                          • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
2011
                                           • Concerned about property values                                 other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                             17 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date        Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
Received    Responded     Type
                                           • Concerned efficiency of wind energy, cost to tax payers                                            issues
                                           • Concerned about wind not being green                                                               • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           • Concerned about the lack of public involvement                                                     wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                                                                                                                                their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy
                                                                                                                                                • Explained public consultation requirements, and opportunities under O. Reg. 359/09
17-Apr-                                    • Email noting a letter to the editor of the Wellington Advisor from a wind supporter, angry about
            18-Apr-2011   email                                                                                                                 • Thanked her for the letter.
2011                                       accusations that they are damaging anti-wind signs
4-May-
            4-May-2011    Mail             • Returned mail containing the response to her Open house question card                              n/a
2011
4-May-
            4-May-2011    Mail             • Returned mail containing the response to her Open house question card                              n/a
2011
4-May-
            4-May-2011    Mail             • Returned mail containing the response to her Open house question card                              n/a
2011
                                           • Email sent to the Rotary Club asking if they would like a presentation on the Springwood
15-Jun-                                                                                                                                         • Let them know wpd makes presentations to all groups regardless of their views on wind and if they change
            15-Jun-2011   email            Project (sent Jun 7, 2011)
2011                                                                                                                                            their minds let us know
                                           • Replied back they thought our presentation would be too one sided
                                                                                                                                                • Email from wpd asking if she would like to become a community advocate on behalf of CanWEA as she
n/a         17-Jun-2011   email            n/a
                                                                                                                                                asked been proactive in the past in providing support
                                                                                                                                                • wpd email sent to those who either sent in comment cards from the first open house and others who have
n/a         21-Jun-2011   email            n/a                                                                                                  interest in the project updating them on the status of the REA assessment reports and providing new links to
                                                                                                                                                health studies that have been released since the first open house
n/a         21-Jun-2011   email            • Return to sender message, email could not be found                                                 n/a
n/a         21-Jun-2011   email            • Return to sender message, email could not be found                                                 n/a
2-Aug-
            3-Aug-2011    email            • Email from Laura inquiring as to the date of the next open house                                   • Informed her the exact date had not been set but it would be this fall
2011
                                           • Follow up email to a letter he sent in June awaiting answer sent to several staff at wpd and
                                           Stantec
24-Aug-                                                                                                                                         • Apologized for a delay our response and was informed the communications manager would be replying
            25-Aug-2011   email            • He wants to confirm the federal jurisdiction and the need to consult with federal agencies over
2011                                                                                                                                            back when he got back from vacation
                                           the project
                                           • He feels that wpd needs to involve federal agencies or ministries
                                                                                                                                                • Letter answered by Stantec confirmed that the project does not trigger any other four conditions that require
                                                                                                                                                Canadian Environmental Assessment Act approval.
24-Aug-
            25-Aug-2011   email            • Response to his questions above was provided via an attached letter sent Sept 12, 2011             • Explained at length the environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09 and the relations between
2011
                                                                                                                                                Provincial and Federal requirements and Acts
                                                                                                                                                • Explained the federal associations that we consulted with (Transport Canada).
                                                                                                                                                • Email sent to those who sent in comment cards from the first open house and others who have interest in the
n/a         7-Sep-2011    email                                                                                                                 project updating them on the status of the REA assessment.
                                                                                                                                                • Informed them that the date and details of the final open house have been published and sent
                                           • Wrote regarding the upcoming Open House. Felt that the first public meeting did not result in
                                           meaningful consultation due to the format, that it was a one-way communication process.              • "We acknowledge receiving your letter on October 3rd, 2011 concerning the upcoming Springwood Wind
3-Oct-
            6-Oct-2011    letter           • Requested that wpd hold a formal presentation on the project, then have a question and             Project Final Public Meeting and thank you for your correspondence. Our office was away this week attending
2011
                                           answer period.                                                                                       a conference. We will reply to your request next week after the holiday weekend."
                                           • Indicated that they were concerned that the public may not be receiving consistent information
                                           • Explained that the first public meeting had many ways of encouraging 2-way dialogue, and that
                                           there were a number of means through which attendees could have their questions answered,
                                           including all staff onsite, comment cards, information panels, studies and reports on site, the
                                           project website.
see doc
                                           • Explained that efforts are being made to provide consistent information - "To maintain
no. 131     21-Oct-2011   letter
                                           consistency in our responses, all staff members review our project information, our responses to
and 131.1
                                           typical questions, and our printed materials prior to all the Public Meetings. These responses
                                           are the same replies that we provide community members who contact us by email, regular mail
                                           or by phone"
                                           • Offered to meeting with OBWF prior to the Open House
24-Oct-
            24-Oct-2011   call             • He asked where the project was to be located                                                       • wpd provided him with the project boundaries
2011

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                18 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                            Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           • Further expressed concern, indicating that their Board of Directors remained uncertain that out
28-Oct-                                    public meeting format would provide consistent and clear information.
           31-Oct-2011   letter                                                                                                                  • Called him, and arranged meeting with OBWF
2011                                       • Confirmed that 3 OBWF Board members would be available to meet prior to the public
                                           meeting.
                                           • "I am a Realtor in the Fergus/Belwood area and have recently listed a property for sale just to     • "It will be up to the Ministry of the Environment to decide if our project proceeds. We will submit our
                                           the East of your proposed site off of 3rd Line. I have been fielding questions from prospective       Renewable Energy Approval (REA) application to the Ministry of the Environment, who will then review the
3-Sep-                                     buyers asking whether there will be wind mills in the immediate vicinity. Judging by the pictures     various reports contained within it and determine if our project can move forward. We anticipate submitting
           31-Oct-2011   email
2011                                       provided on your website, it would appear that there will be one (at least) just behind their         our application late this Fall.
                                           property. I'm curious to know what the likelihood is of this project commencing? I am not really      If you’d like, you can send along the address of the property in question, and I’ll check with project engineer to
                                           sure at this point what to tell potential buyers. There is a plan, but what is the plausibility? "    see if he can determine the distance between the residence in question and the nearest turbine."
           1-Nov-2011    letter            • Requested REA reports                                                                               • Mailed a copy of the REA reports on CD.
                                           •Included 10 enclosed letters in response to the Draft Springwood REA documents. Letters
                                           included: “Water Assessment”, “Trespassing”, “Raptor and Short-eared Owl Study”, “Avian
                                           Flock Stopovers”, “Bullfrogs”, “Feature 1”, “Safety of Ground Water, “Sub Surface Drainage”,
                                           “Ground Water Flow”, and “Monarch Butterfly”.
                                           •Expressed that the reports were in his opinion, cursory and anecdotal, and that the process
                                           involved in the REA serves to “cover up the true impact of your project while removing the ability
                                           of residents to effectively oppose you.”•Water Assessment: “The conclusions were based on a
                                           single day’s observation in the middle of the driest time of year, in one of the driest years on
                                           record.” … “We request that a comprehensive Water Assessment and Water Body Report be
                                           conducted”
                                           •Trespassing: Felt that “to conduct a thorough assessment of the 120 metre zone of
                                           investigation, the investigators would require access to private property to complete their
                                           observations.” Requested “copies of written permission from all adjoining landowners allowing            Interim Response sent Nov 21, 2011
                                           access to their land.”                                                                                • wpd Consulted with Stantec, engineering and archaeology experts to answer the questions.
                                           •Natural Heritage Assessment and Environmental Impact Study - Raptor and Short-eared Owl              • Details of the response can be found in the Consultation Report Appendix
                                           Study: “From our personal observations the raptor and short-eared owl winter survey as                • The Following Topics were addressed in the response:
                                           presented is incomplete.” Further study was requested.•Natural Heritage Assessment and
                                                                                                                                                 • Water Assessment (RGw2ndPM - 10), Trespassing (RGw2ndPM - 11), Raptor and Short-eared Owl Study
                                           Environmental Impact Study – Waterfowl Stopover and Staging Areas: Asked “what are the
                                           criteria/definition which your investigators used for Waterfowl Stopover and Staging Areas?”,         (RGw2ndPM - 12), Avian Flock Stopover (RGw2ndPM - 13), Bullfrogs (RGw2ndPM - 14), Feature 1
                                           “how many birds does it take to be a significant staging area?”, “if the species is uncommon to       (RGw2ndPM - 15), Monarch Butterfly (RGw2ndPM - 19), Airstrips (RGw2ndPM - 20), Animal Movement
                                           an area, is it more significant?” Expressed that the NHA oversimplified the situation. Requested      (RGw2ndPM - 21),
                                           mitigation procedures, plans to change the spacing between turbines, and plans to reduce the          Flora and Fauna (RGw2ndPM - 22), Osprey (RGw2ndPM - 23), Acoustic Report (RGw2ndPM -24), Receptor
3-Nov-
           21-Dec-2011   letter            height of turbines to be consistent with the height of the natural landscape.•Natural Heritage        Location (RGw2ndPM - 25), Personal IMpact (RGw2ndPM - 26), Community Assessment (RGw2ndPM - 27),
2011
                                           Assessment and Environmental Impact Study – Bullfrogs: Asked about the wetland between R1             Vibration (RGw2ndPM - 28), Horse Industry (RGw2ndPM - 30), Aquifiers (RGw2ndPM - 31), Second Meeting
                                           and R2. “This wetland is situated between towers 1 and 2 and within 162m of turbine 2 and
                                                                                                                                                 (RGw2ndPM -32), Icing 9(RGw2ndPM -33), Shadow Flicker (RGw2ndPM -34)
                                           other project components. However, this wetland was not assessed for significant bullfrog
                                           breeding habitat within the report.” Asked for “a copy of the Legerton et al., study and the          • Innormation was still to come for the following from Stantec : Sub Surface Drainage (RGw2ndPM - 17),
                                           K.Smith, Aeroustics, personal communication” as well as “as review of the literature and copies       Manure storage Tanks (part of RGw2ndPM - 28)
                                           of original Bullfrog impact research where bullfrog habitat was bounded between 2 wind towers         • Geo technical studies have been completed and will be included as part of the full REA application and
                                           equivalent to the size of the towers that you are proposing to erect.” Stated that is such research   public review to answer the following: Safety of Ground Water (RGw2ndPM -16), Ground Water Flow
                                           had not yet been completed, that it should be prior to proceeding with the project.                   (RGw2ndPM - 18), Vibration (RGw2ndPM - 28), Aquifers (RGw2ndPM - 31).
                                           • Natural Heritage Assessment and Environmental Impact Study - Feature 1: “Feature 1 is
                                           wholly contained on the property of our neighbours. Are we admitting to trespass on private
                                           property?” Asked “why are the connector line and access road being placed along the fence line
                                           where it will impact Feature 1?” Stated that “the service road and connector lines are
                                           inappropriately placed.”
                                           • Natural Heritage Assessment and Environmental Impact Study – Groundwater: Stated that “if
                                           the geotechnical investigations have already been done then they should be available to the
                                           public for comment. If they have not been done then they should be completed and made part of
                                           the report for public viewing.” Indicated that “dewatering is potentially a major issue because of
                                           proximity to the Snow Drain and Irvine Creek.” And that “MNR and GRCA staff will need to be
                                           consulted”
                                           • Natural Heritage Assessment and Environmental Impact Study – Groundwater cont’d:
                                           Regarding the distance considered sufficient to attenuate potential negative effects from section
                                           5.3.1 “Please provide the original scientific reference material which will support the statement”.


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     19 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date           Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
Received   Responded      Type
                                           Expressed that mitigation procedures to maintain water quality would include “permanently
                                           plugging of all tile drains, directing all surface runoff from the entire farm to a series of
                                           clearing/treatment settling ponds before being allowed to leave the property and enter the
                                           sensitive habitat downstream from the site.”
                                           • Natural Heritage Assessment and Environmental Impact Study – Groundwater cont’d:
                                           requested “the modeling which places all project components on the landscape using the
                                           geotechnical features found on the proposed site as well as the effect of land slope and
                                           systematic subsurface drainage.”
                                           • Natural Heritage Assessment and Environmental Impact Study – Monarchs: Indicated that the
                                           limited observations of the investigators were applied too broadly. Asked “what mitigation
                                           procedures can be put in place to prevent unnecessary destruction to (the monarchs’) habitat?
                                           What mitigation procedures will prevent clusters of monarchs being damaged by turbulence…”
                                           Indicated that other than annual farming practices, the greatest threat to monarch butterfly on
                                           the construction site would be placing the access road and cable along the back fence line.
                                           •Included 8 enclosed letters in response to the Draft Springwood REA documents. Letters
                                           included: “Airstrip”, “Animal Movement”, “Osprey”, “Flora and Fauna”, “Acoustics Report”,
                                           “Receptor Location”, “Personal Impacts”, and “Community Assessment”.
                                           •Expressed that the reports were in his opinion, cursory and anecdotal, and that the process
                                           involved in commenting for most of his neighbors would be horrendous.
                                           •Receptor Location: Indicated that two lots were not properly considered – one because rather
                                           than having the potential receptor placed near an intersection, it should be in the centre of the
                                           lot, and the second because a lot severance was not considered. Requested that wpd meeting
                                           with Centre Wellington Township, and re-submit all receptors locations to HGC for re-evaluation,
                                           and that this report be made public prior to REA application.
                                           •Airstrip: Indicated that his federally registered aerodrome had not been recognized in the Draft.
                                           He assumed that this was because the report was from September 2011. Suggested a meeting
                                           with himself and the President of Canadian Owners and Pilots Association to discuss
                                           appropriate setbacks.
                                           •Animal Movement: Expressed concern regarding animal movement corridors. Asked the
                                           distance separation would be between the hedgerow and the service road during construction
                                           as well as during maintenance. Recommended that the turbines be moved away from the fence            •
3-Nov-                                     line, recommended buffers for the service road, and that species be planted which could
           21-Dec -2011                                                                                                                         •Response was included In letter sent Dec 21, 2011. Please see table row one above for details in combined
2011                                       obscure the total turbine height, while acknowledging that this would be impossible.                 response.
                                           •Flora and Fauna: Indicated that the authors of the NHA failed to “quantify the flora and fauna in
                                           the study area by neglecting to make observations throughout the year and from year to year.”
                                           Requested that a NHA and EIS be completed by an independent third party.
                                           •Osprey: Indicated that risks to osprey populations in the area were not properly identified.
                                           Suggested the mitigation practice of shutting down turbines from April until late September.
                                           • Acoustics Report: Requested a site specific acoustic test, acoustic measurements made over
                                           a period of at least a year from the base of the a turbine out to 1 km, and that equipment should
                                           be used that meets or exceeds the standard for acoustics testing.
                                           • Personal Impacts: Expressed great concerns that the proposed project would interfere with his
                                           personal use and enjoyment of his farm, property and business. Was concerned with noise
                                           pollution.
                                           • Community Assessment: Stated that wpd failed to complete an environmental, economic and
                                           social scan of the affected area, and that a list of affected businesses had not been compiled
                                           and evaluated. Provided examples of local activities. Stated that the REA application should not
                                           move forward until his suggested comprehensive assessment is completed.

                                           •Included enclosed letters in response to the Draft Springwood REA documents. Letters
                                           included: “Setback”, “Inclusion of 44kv line for connection to the grid”, “Confusion over            • Interim response sent November 21, 2011: "I wanted to send you an email to let you know we have received
                                           connection point to the grid”, “Fire”, “Health”, “Infrasound and Vibration”, “Noise”, “Property      your numerous correspondence. Given the number of documents contained in the packages of information, it
3-Nov-                                                                                                                                          will take some time to review it and provide a response. We will provide a response as soon as possible."
           22-Dec-2011    letter           Value”, “Environment”, “Foundations and Ground Water”.
2011
                                           •Expressed that the conclusions from the reports are “determined from data that is superficial
                                           and incomplete.”                                                                                       Response provided Dec 22, 2011
                                           •Setback: Explained that the installation of wind turbines will have a great impact on their         • wpd Consulted with Stantec, engineering and archaeology experts to answer the questions.

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                            20 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date         Date          Correspondence
                                            Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                            Response Summary
Received     Responded     Type
                                            enjoyment of their property, including the impact on viewscape, noise, and potential behaviour        • Details of the response can be found in the Consultation Report Appendix
                                            of horses. To mitigate the impact, requested that turbine #2 be relocated such that the minimum       • The Following Topics were addressed in the response: Setbacks (AGW - 01), Inclusion of 44kV Line for
                                            550m setback be from the property line of non-participating landowners.                               Connection to the Grid (AGW -02), Confusion over Connection Point to the Grid (AGW -03), Fire (AGW -4),
                                            • Inclusion of 44kv line for connection to the grid: Felt that the exclusion of the line assumed by
                                                                                                                                                  Heath (AGW -05), Infrasound and Vibration (AGW -06), Noise (AGW - 07), Property Value (AGW - 08),
                                            Hydro One from the reports “fails to present the entire impact of this project on the community.”
                                            Requested that the location of the line be included, that the impact of the line be evaluated, and    Environment (AGW - 09), Foundation and Ground Water (AGW - 10), Monitoring Birds and Bats (AGW - 11),
                                            that mitigation strategies be developed and proposed.                                                 Social Concerns (AGW - 12), Electrical Interference/Interference with Business (AGW - 13),
                                            • Confusion over connection point to the grid: Requested clarification regarding the location of      • A copy of the Notice of Proposal to Engage in Project and Notice of Final Public Meeting along with
                                            the 44kv line and connection point. Expressed that wpd should restart the consultation process        respective notice letters were attached with response.
                                            from the beginning so that the public is clear on the intent. •Fire: Expressed concern that a
                                            turbine may catch fire, and asked for “1) a guarantee that should an adverse event occur from
                                            the wind turbines, that we would be fully compensated for all damages to our property, 2) a copy
                                            of the insurance policy that covers these damages and provides remuneration to all affected
                                            persons and their property.”•Health: requested “a guarantee should there be any ill effects from
                                            the Springwood wind project affecting (their) staff, (their) animals, or (themselves) that
                                            appropriate mitigation procedures be put in place.” Asked whether wpd is prepared to
                                            guaranteed that “wpd will bear the cost of relocating (their) home and business.”
                                            •Infrasound and Vibration: Requested “a literature review of the impact of these infrasound
                                            vibrations transmitted through the ground and their impact on building foundations, manure
                                            storage tanks, bullfrog habitat, amphibian breeding and fish breeding,” as well as “a list of
                                            mitigation procedures to prevent their impact on flora, fauna, and buildings.”
                                            •Noise: Requested that “1) the impact of noise from these turbines be properly assessed and, 2)
                                            that the original data from (our) REpower MM92-2.05 MW turbines be shared”, and that
                                            “mitigation procedures be published and agreed upon by all parties prior to proceeding”
                                            • Property value: “If wpd maintains that there will be no negative impact from the Springwood
                                            wind project, then we request a property value guarantee should property values be affected by
                                            the project, and that wpd honour that guarantee.”
                                            • Environment: Expressed that the environmental assessment was narrow and brief. State that a
                                            complete assessment of the area should include all features within a minimum 2 kilometre
                                            distance, with assessment made weekly for a minimum period of one year. Requested that “a
                                            full and comprehensive environmental impact study as outlined above be conducted by an
                                            independent unbiased third party,” before the project is allowed to proceed.
                                            • Foundations and Ground Water: Felt that the information regarding foundation work was
                                            incomplete and misleading. Requested “engineering details and drawings of the turbine towers
                                            based on site specific geotechnical conditions” and “an updated Water Assessment and Water
                                            Body Report” based on the results of the geotechnical assessment.
                                            •Included 2 enclosed letters in response to the Draft Springwood REA documents. Letters
                                            included: “Social Concerns”, and “Electrical Interference”.
                                            •Social Concerns: Stated that the REA does not address social concerns. Requested that wpd
                                            Canada be required to perform an impact study encompassing all aspects of the rural
                                            community, including agriculture, integrity of the rural community, economy, tourism, property
                                            values and infrastructure. Indicated that wpd should report findings to the public in a town hall     • Interim response was sent November 21, 2011: "I wanted to send you an email to let you know we have
                                            format, and that until this is completed, the REA should not move forward.                            received your numerous correspondence.
3-Nov-
                           letter           •Electrical Interference: Expressed concern that the project would interfere with the operation of    Given the number of documents contained in the packages of information, it will take some time to review it
2011
                                            their veterinary hospital due to electrical interference. Requested that a comprehensive              and provide a response. We will provide a response as soon as possible."
                                            assessment be made regarding the local economy, requested a list of steps that the company            • Response was included In letter sent Dec 21, 2011. Please see table row one above for details in combined
                                            will take to ensure no ill effect are experienced by their business, requested a guarantee that       response.
                                            wpd would cover expenses due to any ill effects, including potentially relocating their home and
                                            business. Requested a letter of assurance that liability insurance covers the cost for installing
                                            isolators, replacing equipment, and relocating home and business, and that it encompasses the
                                            20+ year life of the project.
                                                                                                                                                  Thank you for a copy of your letter to Ms. Doris Dumais, Director, Approvals Program, Environmental
                                                                                                                                                  Assessment and Approvals Branch, Ministry of the Environment dated October 27th, 2011 and received by us
cc'27-Oct-
             29-Nov-2011   letter           Letter to the MOE                                                                                     on October 31st.
2011
                                                                                                                                                  The purpose of this letter is to let you know we have received your letter, and will be providing comment within


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                21 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                the next two weeks.

                                                                                                                                                Should you have any further concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us.
                                                                                                                                                •Thanked them again for including wpd on their letter to Ms. Doris Dumais. •Explained that under provincial
                                                                                                                                                regulation, a developer must account for future dwellings on vacant land by assuming that a dwelling exists in
27-Oct-
           29-Nov-2011   Letter            Letter to the MOE                                                                                    a location at which a building would reasonably be expected to be located, having regard to the existing
2011
                                                                                                                                                zoning and building patterns in the area. Explained that adjacent landowners could then chose in future to
                                                                                                                                                build at other location on their property, subject to municipal building requirements.
                                                                                                                                                "I wanted to let you know that I received this letter from as well on October 14th, and replied directly to her
17-Oct-
           4-Nov-2011    email             "Please accept this letter from our neighbour who isn't able to use her computer. Thanks "           email.
2011
                                                                                                                                                Thank you"
                                           • "We are writing to request an answer, which has not yet been given, concerning the issue put
                                                                                                                                                • "My apologies for the delay in responding. I’ve attached a map of the driveway in question. As it clearly
                                           forth in the email sent to you (wpd), on Sept. 17 regarding the wind turbine #1 driveway"
                                                                                                                                                shows, we will not be accessing your land for the Springwood project. We validated the map information with
17-Oct-                                    • "Now it is a full week after Thanksgiving and still no response. We request that you verify with
           4-Nov-2011    email                                                                                                                  Ministry of Natural Resources mapping system, as well as the existing survey stake/standard iron bar,
2011                                       us soon, by providing a close up map of the end of the wind turbine driveway #1, or having a
                                                                                                                                                indicated on the map. We will be working with the Municipality to acquire the proper permits required during
                                           rep. of your company come to show us exactly where the proposed driveway will go, so that we
                                                                                                                                                the various stages of the project. If you have any other questions, please do not hesitate to be in touch."
                                           can be assured that your project does not go onto our property."
                                                                                                                                                •My apologies if the letter we sent you seemed as though it was a form letter. We read each letter that is sent
3-Nov-                                     • Expressed dissatisfaction with previous wpd response based on the fact that the answers read
           4-Nov-2011    email                                                                                                                  to us, and to ensure consistency in the information we provide to the public, we give the same answer to
2011                                       like a form letter.
                                                                                                                                                common questions.
                                                                                                                                                •Apologized that the conversation between her husband and Jane did not end as intended.
                                           •Wrote regarding a phone call her husband received from wpd regarding the project. Explained         •Explained that wpd undertook a calling initiative in the vicinity of the Springwood project to reach out to
                                           that the caller hung up as her husband was being belligerent.                                        residents to ensure they were aware of the project, to answer any questions or concerns, and to make sure
21-Oct-                                    •Asked why wpd called if the caller was not “willing to deal with opposition”.                       they knew how to contact wpd. Explained that this exercise went beyond the requirement of the REA process
           4-Nov-2011    email
2011                                       •Asked is there was a phone number that could be called once the turbines were erected.              in a sincere attempt on our part to ensure people were aware of our project and how to provide feedback.
                                           •Stated that wpd was simply "going through the motions" required under the provincial approvals      • Explained that although Jane had knowledge of the project and issues,that she is to refer certain issues to
                                           process.                                                                                             our subject matter experts. Explained that there came a point in the conversation where it was no longer
                                                                                                                                                productive, and Jane ended it.
31-Oct-                                    • "Here is my opposition letter to the WPD Industrial Wind Farm proposed in my neighbourhood.
           3-Nov-2011    email                                                                                                                  • A response to the attached letter was sent to his email.
2011                                       Please reply to my email or my home address
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that there is certainly a lot of information about health and wind turbines available, and attempted
                                                                                                                                                to provide credible resources.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the MOE noise guidelines were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada,
31-Oct-                                    • Expressed concern regarding health and the use of agricultural land.                               and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
           3-Nov-2011    email
2011                                       • Expressed concern that the project would increase in size over time.                               • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained the restrictions that existed regarding project expansion, and that in order for the project to grow,
                                                                                                                                                wpd would require additional lands.
                                           • "The proposed wind farm does not have the support of the community. I resent that the only         • "Thank you for your recent letter regarding the Springwood Wind Project. Your opposition to our project has
                                           action a rural resident has is to organize and protest. I have never had to protest anything         been noted. Granted, members of your community who are opposed to any renewable energy projects have
                                           before in my life. I also resent the fact that since I am protesting harmful wind turbines, I        come together and organized opposition to our project. We certainly have heard from many of you. We have
                                           somehow support coal. I do not want to bring harm to anyone in either case. I am perplexed. For      also heard from those in the community who support what we are doing, although their efforts are not as vocal
31-Oct-                                    me to build a structure in my municipality, any larger than 10ftX10ft. I must obtain a building      or visible."
           3-Nov-2011    email
2011                                       permit, approval by an engineer and be subject to public scrutiny if necessary. Removing the         • "We must follow a very prescriptive process to submit a Renewable Energy Approval (REA) application for a
                                           municipal process is very undemocratic and instantly indicates to me, a flawed scheme. This is       wind project. The application process was put in place by the Ontario Government, and requires us to submit
                                           not nimbyism but should be a case of not in anyone's backyard. I do not support this proposed        a number of assessments and reports. That information is then evaluated by various Ministries to determine if
                                           project, my community does not support this, my municipality does not support this. Why do           our project should proceed. Once again, thank you for your letter, and feel free to forward any further concerns
                                           you?"                                                                                                you may have."
                                           • "The proposed wind farm does not have the support of the community. I resent that the only         • "Thank you for your recent letter regarding the Springwood Wind Project. Your opposition to our project has
                                           action a rural resident has is to organize and protest. I have never had to protest anything         been noted. Granted, members of your community who are opposed to any renewable energy projects have
                                           before in my life. I also resent the fact that since I am protesting harmful wind turbines, I        come together and organized opposition to our project. We certainly have heard from many of you. We have
28-Oct-                                    somehow support coal. I do not want to bring harm to anyone in either case. I am perplexed. For      also heard from those in the community who support what we are doing, although their efforts are not as vocal
           3-Nov-2011    email
2011                                       me to build a structure in my municipality, any larger than 10ftX10ft. I must obtain a building      or visible." • "We must follow a very prescriptive process to submit a Renewable Energy Approval (REA)
                                           permit, approval by an engineer and be subject to public scrutiny if necessary. Removing the         application for a wind project. The application process was put in place by the Ontario Government, and
                                           municipal process is very undemocratic and instantly indicates to me, a flawed scheme. This is       requires us to submit a number of assessments and reports. That information is then evaluated by various
                                           not nimbyism but should be a case of not in anyone's backyard. I do not support this proposed        Ministries to determine if our project should proceed. Once again, thank you for your letter, and feel free to

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 22 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                            Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           project, my community does not support this, my municipality does not support this. Why do            forward any further concerns you may have."
                                           you?"
                                                                                                                                                 • "We are required to follow a highly prescriptive process to apply for, develop and operate a wind project. I
                                           • Concerned regarding: "Health: As a public health expert who has spent the past 18 months            can guarantee that wpd will meet the requirements of the Renewable Energy Approval process, and the
                                           reviewing literature and participating in epidemiological studies, I understand that based on the     Green Energy Act and Regulations. Our project will follow the guidelines put in place by the Ministry of the
                                           available evidence, the 550m setback to be woefully inadequate to protect the health and quality      Environment regarding sound levels and minimum distances for wind projects in Ontario. The key
28-Oct-                                    of life of families." and "Property Values: As many who choose to live in rural communities, the      consideration is the sound level. The requirements, supported by information from the Ontario Chief Medical
           3-Nov-2011    email
2011                                       majority of my family's net worth is wrapped-up in our property. Having reviewed the available        Officer of Health, Health Canada and The World Health Organization (WHO) Europe and upheld by Ontario
                                           information on this topic, I am very concerned that the value of our property will be significantly   courts, ensure a project must be sited at least 550 metres from non-participating receptors (residences)
                                           impacted by this project."                                                                            provided a cumulative sound level of 40 dBA is not exceeded."
                                           • Requested a Health and Property Value Guarantee                                                     • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated where all available project reports could be found online.
                                           • "I feel that a heavily subsidized project is not for the benefit of Ontarians. If this was such a
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                           viable commodity the government could keep its nose out of your business and OUT of the
                                                                                                                                                 their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy.
                                           taxpayers pockets.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                           The amount of power that would be coming to us wouldn't amount to more than a mouses fart
                                                                                                                                                 relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                           worth of energy, not to mention an unreliable way to bring us power. And for all this what do we
27-Oct-                                                                                                                                          • Compare the cost of the FIT rate to the cost of other sources of generation.
           3-Nov-2011    email             get?
2011                                                                                                                                             • Explained that bird studies and habitat assessments would have to be completed following Ministry of
                                           Well, we get a community that is split, neighbours who are fighting, health issues that to this day
                                                                                                                                                 Natural Resources (MNR) protocols and Environment Canada/Canadian Wildlife Services methodologies.
                                           have not been properly addressed, property values dropping by at least 20% where these
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           monstrosities are already existing, decimation of hundreds of birds and bats and who knows
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines on property values.
                                           what it does to wildlife..... we have lost our voice municipally , plus, due to the size of these
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the MOE noise guidelines were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada,
                                           turbines an ugliness to an otherwise beautiful countryside. "
                                                                                                                                                 and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                            •” Our farm is located within 2 km of the project, and we are aware of problems that have been
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated where all available project reports could be found online.
                                           discussed regarding wind turbine. We would like your guarantee that our property will not see
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           any decrease in value due to proximity to turbines”
27-Oct-                                                                                                                                          wind turbines on property values.
           3-Nov-2011    email              • The responder was also concerned that proper health studies have not been completed.
2011                                                                                                                                             • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                            • They believe that the community should have more say and more authority in the decision
                                                                                                                                                 World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           process.
                                                                                                                                                 • Stated the various ways that they could express their concern, including appealing to the Environmental
                                                                                                                                                 Review Tribunal.
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated where all available project reports could be found online.
                                            • Concerned about long term impacts of the wind turbines if they are found to be inefficient, a
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                           danger to human health, defacing the county side and killing animals.
27-Oct-                                                                                                                                          their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy.
           3-Nov-2011    email             • believes they are inefficient source of power
2011                                                                                                                                             • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                           • Wants a moratorium on development until health studies are completed
                                                                                                                                                 relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                           • Wants to know how much this will increase electricity bills in the future.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario (from development to construction to
                                                                                                                                                 production) are borne by the developer
                                           •Indicated that wpd’s consultation efforts were inadequate
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                           •Stated that a proper health study was missing. Provided excerpt from CBC News in support of
                                                                                                                                                 • Provided information as to where project reports could be located online, and explained wpd’s efforts to
                                           her concerns. Stated that until this concern was addressed, no wind turbines should be put
                                                                                                                                                 provide consistent responses.
27-Oct-                                    anywhere near where people live. •Expressed concern regarding livestock production in terms
           3-Nov-2011    email                                                                                                                   • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
2011                                       of potential impacts of wind turbines.
                                                                                                                                                 World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           •Stated that wpd had not “dealt with the reduction in property values that would result from the
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           turbines.” Asked is wpd would compensate, and whether wpd was willing to guarantee that
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines on property values.
                                           property values would not drop.
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                           •Explained that she lived very close to the proposed project, and that she was greatly concerned      • Provided information as to where project reports could be located online, and explained wpd’s efforts to
                                           regarding health, property values, impacts on vulnerable species, consultation, efficiency of the     provide consistent responses.
26-Oct-                                    technology, foreign investment, and restoration plans.                                                • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
           3-Nov-2011    email
2011                                       •Concerned that profits from projects would not be retained by the province                           wind turbines on property values.
                                           •Concerned that decommissioning plans were not backed up by the money required to execute             • Explained that bird studies and habitat assessments would have to be completed following Ministry of
                                           them                                                                                                  Natural Resources (MNR) protocols and Environment Canada/Canadian Wildlife Services methodologies.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 23 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                            Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                 World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                 relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                                 •Explained that the developer is required to decommission the wind turbines at their own expense, and that
                                                                                                                                                 wpd establishes an escrow account which would cover the estimated cost. Explained that these monies were
                                                                                                                                                 controlled by a third party.
                                           •Wished to highlight concerns regarding the proposed project, in the context of a nearby
                                           retirement community which they owned and operated.                                                   • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                           •Explained that 370 senior citizens were part of said community, many of whom had medical             • Provided information as to where project reports could be located online, and explained wpd’s efforts to
                                           conditions which rendered them “vulnerable to external environmental conditions including noise       provide consistent responses.
                                           and infrasound.”                                                                                      • Explained that CanWEA had recently issued a statement regarding misrepresentation by Wind Concerns
25-Oct-
           3-Nov-2011    email             •Explained that Dr. Robert McMurtry had found that 4 in 10 people near wind farms experienced         Ontario and their position on health and wind energy.
2011
                                           negative health impacts. Referenced the Canadian Wind Energy Association as stating that              • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           wind turbines cause sickness.                                                                         World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           •Asked is wpd would purchase local residents’ homes if they became sick.                              • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           •Requested that wpd guarantee lease rates if devaluation of the property occurs.                      wind turbines on property values.
                                           •Expressed concern regarding the impact of a wind project t on a mixed use community.
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                           •Wished to highlight concerns regarding the proposed project, in the context of a nearby
                                                                                                                                                 •Explained that “There are many events, activities and attractions which draw visitors to your area. Each of
                                           campground which she owned.
                                                                                                                                                 these has a certain appeal for those who chose to take advantage of them. Reasons visitors have been
                                           •Stated that wpd had misrepresented surrounding recreation areas and businesses in the
                                                                                                                                                 drawn to these various events or attractions, for example the Fergus Scottish Games or the Mennonite
                                           project reports in terms of what local businesses or facilities were located within the Project
                                                                                                                                                 farming community, will continue to lure them in the future.” Provided evidence that suggests that the
                                           Location or adjacent to the area.
25-Oct-                                                                                                                                          presence of wind farms is not detrimental to tourism.
           3-Nov-2011    email             •Expressed concern regarding health effects and potential risk to camp guests, and the viability
2011                                                                                                                                             • Explained that CanWEA had recently issued a statement regarding misrepresentation by Wind Concerns
                                           of their business.
                                                                                                                                                 Ontario and their position on health and wind energy.
                                           •Explained that the visual impacts and noise will be a deterrent for their clientele. Stated that
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           wpd had made no commitment to implementing a noise monitoring program.
                                                                                                                                                 World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           • Expressed concern that the project would prevent the camp from expanding.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that as the campground was approximately 4km from the project location, that it falls outside of
                                           •Requested a “revenue and property loss guarantee” from wpd.
                                                                                                                                                 the setback requirement and would not prevent the business from expanding.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained wpd could not comment on the Arthur turbines as they did not belong to wpd.
                                           • Asked why the Arthur turbines were allowed to be installed
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
23-Oct-                                    •Asked why the Springwood project should be approved, assuming that there is already
           3-Nov-2011    email                                                                                                                   their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy.
2011                                       sufficient electricity on the grid.
                                                                                                                                                 • Stated the various ways that they could express their concern, including appealing to the Environmental
                                           • Asked what happened to democracy and listening to the voice of the people.
                                                                                                                                                 Review Tribunal.
                                           • Explained that they had “discovered that around the world the setbacks are being revised to
                                                                                                                                                 •Explained the municipal consultation timeline under the REA.
                                           allow for a greater distance from people’s homes”, that people “suffer illness from industrial wind
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           turbines”
                                                                                                                                                 World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
21-Oct-                                    •Took objection to “huge subsidies” at the expense of Ontarians, and to the lack of power at the
           3-Nov-2011    email                                                                                                                   • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
2011                                       municipal level.
                                                                                                                                                 relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                           • Expressed concern regarding property values, carbon credit trading, provincial politics and
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           other surrounding proposed projects.
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines on property values.
                                           •Asked is wpd would like to purchase her property.
                                                                                                                                                 •Referenced the 2011 O’Neal et al. study which concluded that there should be no adverse public health
                                           • “We are very concerned about the long term impacts of the planned hundreds of wind turbines
                                                                                                                                                 effects at distances greater than 305 metres from the two wind turbine types measured.
                                           in our area. wpd's Springwood Project seems to be spear-heading this development.”
21-Oct-                                                                                                                                          • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
           3-Nov-2011    email             •Expressed concern regarding health - specifically with regards to sound and the minimum
2011                                                                                                                                             their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy.
                                           setbacks, fiscal consequences with examples from other jurisdictions, and environmental
                                                                                                                                                 •Referred the family to the Natural Heritage Assessment for further information on potential impacts to the
                                           impact.
                                                                                                                                                 environment. Informed them of where the reports could be found online.
                                           • Replied back to response on Nov 3, 2011 and indicated that it did not satisfy their concerns in     • Thanked them for their reply
                                           anyway and found the information provided misleading.                                                 • Provided a link to the O'Neal report and affirmed that it was a peer reviewed study.
                                           • They were upset that no link was provided to the O'Neal study and requested that we provide         • Explained that the site investigation completed at the Springwood Wind Project for the NHA report was
15-Nov-                                    more information and inquired if indeed the study was peer reviewed.                                  completed according to Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) guidelines and protocols and the report was
           5-Dec-2011    email
2011                                       • Questioned the depth of the Natural Heritage Assessment and environmental with regards to           accepted by MNR.
                                           bats. They attached a copy of the Site Visit record dated July 21, 2010 from the NHA report and       • Explained that no candidate significant wildlife habitat for bats was identified within the Springwood Study
                                           asked for more extensive information that was used to track the bat population.                       Area
                                           • They found the literature and claims provided by wpd in regards to property values to have          • Explained that post-construction monitoring plan that would be put in place to ensure that bat mortalities do


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  24 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                            Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           little relevance to Centre Wellington. Specifically he felt that Centre Wellington has different      not exceed government thresholds.
                                           economic background then Chatham-Kent, and should be taken into account separately.                   • Explained that the RE/MAX Market Trends Report -Farm Edition demonstrates that agricultural property has
                                           • Asked why there were no peer reviewed studies which look into the local real estate economy         increased throughout Ontario including areas where wind turbines have been in place for some time.
                                           and environment: 'It would be important to find out and to document if we are the only ones or if
                                           other owners/buyers consider the farmland character and natural environment a worthwhile
                                           feature or not. If these thoughts are completely unfounded, wpd should simply provide a
                                           property value guarantee for home owners in the area"
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           • Expressed concern regarding the health and mental wellbeing of surrounding landowners.              World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           •Expressed concern regarding the visual impact of the turbines                                        • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
15-Oct-                                    •Expressed concern regarding property values•Expressed concern regarding the viability of a           wind turbines on property values.
           3-Nov-2011    email
2011                                       bed and breakfast, and regarding potential effects of shadow flicker on horses.                       •Explained that “There are many events, activities and attractions which draw visitors to your area. Each of
                                           •Expressed concern that it will be difficult to raise sufficient funds to sue wpd Canada should the   these has a certain appeal for those who chose to take advantage of them. Reasons visitors have been
                                           project come to fruition.                                                                             drawn to these various events or attractions, for example the Fergus Scottish Games or the Mennonite
                                                                                                                                                 farming community, will continue to lure them in the future.” Provided evidence that suggests that the
                                                                                                                                                 presence of wind farms is not detrimental to tourism.
                                                                                                                                                 • "Thank you for the invitation to participate. Unfortunately, we are unable to send a representative. We’ve
                                                                                                                                                 found in the past that discussions such as these quickly focus on policy and process issues. The process we
                                                                                                                                                 must follow to apply for, develop and operate a wind farm is highly prescriptive, and was put in place by the
                                                                                                                                                 Ontario Government through the Green Energy Act and regulations. As such, it may be more appropriate for
                                           • "We are producing a segment for the CTV program Province wide this week on the proposed
                                                                                                                                                 a representative of the Ministry of the Environment or other areas of the Provincial Government to participate.
                                           Springwood Wind Farm. Would a spokesperson with your company be available for an
7-Nov-                                                                                                                                           One of the key issue normally raised during our consultation process relates to adverse health effects and
           8-Nov-2011    email             interview Tuesday, November 8th, at 4:15pm, here at our King Street studios in Kitchener?
2011                                                                                                                                             wind turbines, particularly as they relate to sound. We are required to follow the guidelines put in place by the
                                           Your spokesperson would join a representative with the Oppose Belwood Wind Farm
                                                                                                                                                 Ministry of the Environment regarding sound levels and minimum distances. The requirements, supported by
                                           Association."
                                                                                                                                                 information from the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada and The World Health
                                                                                                                                                 Organization (WHO) Europe and upheld by Ontario courts, ensure a project must be sited at least 550 metres
                                                                                                                                                 from non-participating receptors (residences) provided a cumulative sound level of 40 dBA is not exceeded.
                                                                                                                                                 In this instance, it may be beneficial to refer to the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health."
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                 regulations. Provided an overview of the public consultation process to date, and that next steps would be.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Expressed opposition to the proposed project. Asked why they “were never consulted that this        • Provided information as to where project reports could be located online, and explained wpd’s efforts to
14-Oct-                                    project was underway from its beginning.”                                                             provide consistent responses.
           3-Nov-2011    email
2011                                       •Expressed concern regarding health and land values.                                                  • Explained that before excavation commences, a geotechnical study is completed at all potential sites for
                                           •Asked how wpd has avoided damaging the environment.                                                  ground water depth as well as to determine necessary parameters required for foundation design, and that for
                                                                                                                                                 stability reasons, turbine foundations cannot be built in areas where the ground water is too close to the
                                                                                                                                                 surface. Explained that the concrete used during the building process becomes inert once it is cured and
                                                                                                                                                 should cause no damage to the water table. Stated that wpd was still in the process of testing and assessing
                                                                                                                                                 the project site, but that the results would be made available for review online and in hardcopy at local sites 60
                                                                                                                                                 days prior to the final public meeting.
                                                                                                                                                 • We are required to follow a highly prescriptive process to apply for, develop and operate a wind project. The
                                           • "My family and I live very close to one of the proposed turbines. The current setback of 550        requirements were put in place by the Ontario Government through the Green Energy Act, and wpd will meet
                                           metres is unacceptable to the wellness and comfort of the neighbors and residents who have            the requirements of the Renewable Energy Approval process.
                                           lived here for many years. The value of our property is being compromised as well.                    Our project will follow the new guidelines put in place by the Ministry of the Environment regarding sound
13-Oct-
           3-Nov-2011    email                                                                                                                   levels and minimum distances for wind projects in Ontario. The key consideration is the sound level. The
2011
                                           We pay property taxes, income taxes, and follow every other law of this province. Yet due             requirements, supported by information from the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada and
                                           process has not been followed by the Province of Ontario with the Green Energy Act."                  The World Health Organization (WHO) Europe and upheld by Ontario courts, ensure a project must be sited at
                                                                                                                                                 least 550 metres from non-participating receptors (residences) provided a cumulative sound level of 40 dBA
                                                                                                                                                 is not exceeded.
                                           • "We are writing this letter to express our concerns about the WPD project for the 3rd line. As      • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
12-Oct-                                    residents in close proximity to this project, we do not feel that there has been adequate time for    • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
           3-Nov-2011    email
2011                                       our concerns to be addressed. As well as the visual impact and health concerns, we have a Bed         regulations. Provided an overview of the public consultation process to date, and that next steps would be.
                                           & Breakfast in the immediate area. Many of our guests return again and again to experience a          • Explained that “There are many events, activities and attractions which draw visitors to your area. Each of


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 25 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                            Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           quiet peaceful rural setting. These turbines would greatly change that peaceful atmosphere. As        these has a certain appeal for those who chose to take advantage of them. Reasons visitors have been
                                           taxpayers we are opposed to subsidizing this extremely expensive and inefficient means of             drawn to these various events or attractions, for example the Fergus Scottish Games or the Mennonite
                                           energy."                                                                                              farming community, will continue to lure them in the future.” Provided evidence that suggests that the
                                                                                                                                                 presence of wind farms is not detrimental to tourism.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                                                                                                                                 World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                 regulations. Provided an overview of the public consultation process to date, and that next steps would be.
                                           • Wished to express concern and explain that wpd answers have not been satisfactory.
                                                                                                                                                 •Explained how shadow flicker manifested, and indicated that wpd would be happy to run a shadow analysis
                                           • Expressed concern regarding how the obstruction lighting, noise and shadow will affect their
                                                                                                                                                 for adjacent landowners upon request.
                                           quality of life. Concerned about experiencing nausea, vertigo, tinnitus, and sleep disturbances.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
19-Oct-                                    • Concerned about the sale equity of their property
           9-Nov-2011    email                                                                                                                   their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy.
2011                                       • Concerned about the potential impacts on the community and the various age groups of which
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           it is comprised.
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines on property values.
                                           •Asked if wpd would move to a home surrounded by turbines.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                           •Asked wpd to reconsider the location of the turbines.
                                                                                                                                                 relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                                 •Compare the cost of the FIT rate to the cost of other sources of generation.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                 regulations.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                                                                                                                                 World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           "We live in close proximity to this project, under 1,000 feet. We are exactly downwind. The           • Provided an overview of the public consultation process to date, and that next steps would be.
                                           normal wind will mean that we will hear any noise that is generated by the turbines. I am             • Regarding the public meeting, explained that “we chose a format that we felt not only ensured the safety of
                                           personally highly susceptible to noise and do not know what effect it will have on my health          the public, but that of our staff as well. There were many opportunities for the public to receive information
                                           (Parkinsons - Albert).There has been no consultation between us and WPD.                              regarding the project and to have their questions or concerns addressed. We prepared a 20 minute video
                                                                                                                                                 presentation, which played several times during the evening, and contained information regarding our project,
                                           Turbines will have negative impacts on:                                                               as well as a turbine placement exercise illustrating the number of constraints which must be taken into
                                           Farm operations                                                                                       account. In addition, 17 team members were available at various stations throughout the room. Prior to the
220-Oct-                                   Tile drains                                                                                           open house, we provide a review session for all of staff to ensure that our responses can remain consistent –
           9-Nov-2011    email
2011                                       Bird migration                                                                                        especially with commonly-raised concerns. Finally, comment cards and our contact information were made
                                           Traffic                                                                                               available for those who wished to submit a question or comment post-open house. “
                                           Stray voltage                                                                                         • Provided information as to where project reports could be located online, and explained wpd’s efforts to
                                           Questionable economics                                                                                provide consistent responses.
                                           Real estate values                                                                                    • Explained common causes and mitigation strategies regarding stray voltage
                                                                                                                                                 • Referred back to the Natural Heritage Assessment, as the correspondent may be interested in the mitigation
                                           We wish to have an open format meeting with WPD representatives answering questions from              strategies regarding birds.
                                           the audience through speakers so that everyone in the room can hear your replies on Nov 4th."         • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                 relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                                 •Compare the cost of the FIT rate to the cost of other sources of generation.
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                 • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           • "I am a resident of Pine Meadows in Belwood and although I reside over two kilometers from
                                                                                                                                                 regulations.
                                           the proposed site I have concerns that my neighbours have not been given all the facts
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           regarding effects of the turbines on their health due to low frequency noise and light flicker.
                                                                                                                                                 World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           Belwood is a picturesque rural community that would loose its appeal to the tourist industry if the
20-Oct-                                                                                                                                          •Explained how shadow flicker manifested, and indicated that wpd would be happy to run a shadow analysis
           9-Nov-2011    email             countryside was cluttered with wind turbines such as you propose in the Springwood Project.
2011                                                                                                                                             for adjacent landowners upon request.
                                           The area around Shelburne is an excellent example of such spoiling of the landscape.Other
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                           comments:No Wind-------No Power Revert to Coal?Increased cost of Hydro hurts homeowners
                                                                                                                                                 their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy.
                                           as well as small business. In conclusion I am opposed to the Springwood Project for the above
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                           reasons and urge you to reconsider your decision to proceed with the project."
                                                                                                                                                 relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                                 •Compare the cost of the FIT rate to the cost of other sources of generation.
                                           • Expressed concern regarding the health of people and of livestock                                   • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
19-Oct-
           9-Nov-2011    email             • Concerned about property values                                                                     • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
2011
                                           • Concerned about foreign companies owning farmland                                                   regulations.


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 26 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           • Concerned about balancing of electricity in the grid.                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                                                                                                                                  World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                                                                                                                                  their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy.
                                                                                                                                                  • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                  • Regarding the public meeting, explained that “we chose a format that we felt not only ensured the safety of
                                                                                                                                                  the public, but that of our staff as well. There were many opportunities for the public to receive information
                                                                                                                                                  regarding the project and to have their questions or concerns addressed. We prepared a 20 minute video
                                                                                                                                                  presentation, which played several times during the evening, and contained information regarding our project,
                                                                                                                                                  as well as a turbine placement exercise illustrating the number of constraints which must be taken into
                                                                                                                                                  account. In addition, 17 team members were available at various stations throughout the room. Prior to the
                                                                                                                                                  open house, we provide a review session for all of staff to ensure that our responses can remain consistent –
                                           • Stated that the recent public meeting was “nothing more than a sham.”
                                                                                                                                                  especially with commonly-raised concerns. Finally, comment cards and our contact information were made
                                           • Explained that wpd should set up a town hall
17-Oct-                                                                                                                                           available for those who wished to submit a question or comment post-open house. “
           9-Nov-2011    email             • Expressed concern regarding health effects and property values
2011                                                                                                                                              • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           •Stated that the closing of coal plants will make a miniscule different to air quality, and that gas
                                                                                                                                                  regulations.
                                           plants were being proposed merely to backup wind farms.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                                                                                                                                  World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                                                                                                                                  their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                  relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                                  •Explained that wpd undertook a calling initiative in the vicinity of the Springwood project to reach out to
                                                                                                                                                  residents to ensure they were aware of the project, to answer any questions or concerns, and to make sure
                                                                                                                                                  they knew how to contact wpd. Explained that this exercise went beyond the requirement of the REA process
                                                                                                                                                  in a sincere attempt on our part to ensure people were aware of our project and how to provide feedback.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                  regulations.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                                                                                                                                  World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
4-Nov-
           21-Nov-2011   email                                                                                                                    • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
2011
                                                                                                                                                  their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                  relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                                  •Explained that under the Green Energy Act, there is a minimum 50% domestic content requirement.
                                                                                                                                                  •Explained that the project’s expected output would be equivalent to the power use of 1980 homes.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained how municipal consultation is a part of the REA process, and that part of the reason for the
                                                                                                                                                  change in municipal powers was to allows for standardized setbacks across Ontario.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that municipal consultation must occur at minimum 90 days before the Second Open House,
                                                                                                                                                  which is earlier than the date on which project documents need to be posted publicly, and that detailed
                                                                                                                                                  consultation forms will be distributed in order to ensure that key potential concerns are addressed.
                                           • Asked if wpd could guarantee that their property values would not be affected                        • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                           •Expressed concern regarding the visual impact of the obstruction lighting                             • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           •Expressed concern regarding infrasound                                                                regulations.
                                           •Expressed concerns regarding health                                                                   • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
3-Nov-
           21-Nov-2011   email             •Asked if the wind turbines would be shut off at night to lessen human exposure                        World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
2011
                                           •Asked if anyone would be responsible for lost work hours and cost of health care                      • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           •Stated that the last public meeting was useless. Stated that there were hundreds of attendees,        wind turbines on property values.
                                           but only a few company representatives. Stated that the public needed a meeting with chairs            • Regarding the public meeting, explained that “we chose a format that we felt not only ensured the safety of
                                           and a microphone for asking questions, and that the format of the last open house “did not fulfill     the public, but that of our staff as well. There were many opportunities for the public to receive information


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  27 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           the stipulation of public consultation.”                                                             regarding the project and to have their questions or concerns addressed. We prepared a 20 minute video
                                                                                                                                                presentation, which played several times during the evening, and contained information regarding our project,
                                                                                                                                                as well as a turbine placement exercise illustrating the number of constraints which must be taken into
                                                                                                                                                account. In addition, 17 team members were available at various stations throughout the room. Prior to the
                                                                                                                                                open house, we provide a review session for all of staff to ensure that our responses can remain consistent –
                                                                                                                                                especially with commonly-raised concerns. Finally, comment cards and our contact information were made
                                                                                                                                                available for those who wished to submit a question or comment post-open house. “
                                                                                                                                                • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                regulations.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                                                                                                                                World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           •Urged wpd to consider all issues governing a decision to build the proposed project.                • Stated that Repower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
                                           •Expressed concern regarding health, livestock, wildlife, property values, visual landscape, and     •Explained that wpd was unaware of any scientific research that has been conducted on the issue of impacts
                                           environment.                                                                                         on farm animals, but that thousands of turbines existed across Europe, Australia and the United States, and
3-Nov-
           21-Nov-2011   email             •Expressed concern regarding the visual impact, including the impact on the night sky.               the issue did not appear to have surfaced.
2011
                                           •Expressed support for renewable energy.                                                             • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           •Explained that she had heard those who wanted to build the wind turbines in the community,          wind turbines on property values.
                                           and asked where they lived.                                                                          •Explained that as part of the REA process, wpd was required to prepare a Natural Heritage Assessment,
                                                                                                                                                which could be of interest given the concerns raised. Provided information as to where the NHA could be
                                                                                                                                                located.
                                                                                                                                                •Stated that given the maximum sound levels and minimum distances from non-participating dwellings which
                                                                                                                                                wpd must adhere too, along with the various setbacks from natural features, wpd had maximized the number
                                                                                                                                                of turbines it was able to place on the land it had access too.
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked them for their correspondence and indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                regulations.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           • Expressed concern regarding the potential adverse effects of wind turbine noise on their           World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           families, as well as impacts on livestock, such as stray voltage and dirty power, which is created   • Explained that stray voltage is a function of electrical transmission, not of the type of generation.
3-Nov-                                     by the turbines and the transmission lines associated with them                                      • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
           21-Nov-2011   email
2011                                       •Expressed concern regarding health, property values and the future of farm financing.               wind turbines on property values.
                                           •Requested that wpd provide property value guarantees•Expressed concern over lack of                 • Explained that the IESO is responsible for controlling Ontario's electricity system, and continue to improve
                                           democratic process.                                                                                  their modeling projections to best accommodate wind energy.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                                • Stated the various ways that they could express their concern, including appealing to the Environmental
                                                                                                                                                Review Tribunal.
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked him for his email and indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           • Wished to register his opposition to the project                                                   regulations.
                                           • Stated that the provincial government had removed all approval and environmental                   • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
2-Nov-                                     assessment requirements for wind projects.                                                           World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
           21-Nov-2011   email
2011                                       • Asked that wpd not put the turbines up, stating that the community was almost universally          • Explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario (from development to construction to
                                           against the project.                                                                                 production) are borne by the developer. Compared cost of new generation from windpower to other forms, and
                                           • Expressed that the economics of wind farms did not make sense                                      referred to Moody’s Investment Services.
                                                                                                                                                • Stated the various ways that they could express their concern, including appealing to the Environmental
                                                                                                                                                Review Tribunal.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                            28 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           • Sent a previous letter that had been sent to Invernergy regarding their project.
                                           • Stated that Invenergy appeared to have sold their interest in their project to wpd
                                           •Stated that Ontario’s Green Energy Act does not properly and fairly regulate companies.
                                                                                                                                                • Apologized for the delay in response
                                           • Regarding the Invenergy project, expressed concern regarding health, industrialization,
                                                                                                                                                •Explained that the Invenergy and wpd projects were completely separate, and that there may have been
                                           conservation areas, tourism, and environmental impact.
                                                                                                                                                confusion regarding this, as they had both originally been named “Belwood”.
4-Nov-                                     • Expressed concern that wind projects were displacing agricultural practices.
           21-Nov-2011   email                                                                                                                  • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
2011                                       •Stated that is “sensible plans and regulations” were not developed, than wind farms may be
                                                                                                                                                regulations.
                                           viewed in the same manner as oil sands and natural gas developments.
                                                                                                                                                • Indicated that should there be any questions about the Springwood project, that wpd would be happy to
                                           •Expressed concerns regarding potential loss of property values in the community
                                                                                                                                                discuss them
                                           •Expressed concern that the Grand River Conservation Authority’s efforts to maintain a
                                           conservation area would be eroded.
                                           •Expressed concern regarding aviation safety
                                           • Inquired as to whether the project would interfere with the bird migratory route through the       • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds referencing the reports from in production wind projects
                                           area.                                                                                                estimating deaths to be 2 birds/year per turbine. Explained monitoring would continue as needed.
                                           • Inquired as to wpd plans to grow the project and that our project was opening the door for         • Explained that given the setback requirements to sound receptors and natural features, that wpd has
23-Nov-
           12-Dec-2011   email             other project to come in                                                                             maximized the number of turbines we are able to place on the land we have access to. Should additional
2011
                                           • He has concerns about the planning and placement of turbines and their effects on the              lands become available and grid capacity exists we would evaluate the potential for additional turbines.
                                           community, environment and other sensitive areas. He wants wpd to site the turbines in               • Explained the process used to determine wind project placement. Explained that wpd leases the land and
                                           appropriate area (i.e. previous industrial lands).                                                   that the owners are free to continue to use the surrounding land for farming or other uses.


                                           • CC’ed wpd Canada on a letter to Ms. Doris Dumais at the MOE. This letter was regarding the
                                                                                                                                                •Thanked them for cc’ing wpd on their correspondence with Ms. Dumais.
                                           placement of a receptor on a vacant lot. It was indicated that wpd Canada did not place the
25-Oct-                                                                                                                                         •Explained that developers must account for future dwellings based on typical building patterns in the area.
           21-Nov-2011   letter            potential receptor in the ideal location according to the landowner.
2011                                                                                                                                            From there the project is designed based on regulated setbacks, and adjacent landowners may chose in
                                           • Provided a map indicating where the ideal location would be, and indicated that they had met
                                                                                                                                                future to build at other locations on their property subject to municipal building requirements.
                                           with wpd Canada in this regard.
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked her for the correspondence and indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                • Apologized in case the letter seemed formulaic, in explained that wpd was attempting to respond
                                                                                                                                                consistently.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                regulations.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           • Wrote a second time to express deep concern regarding the proposed project                         World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
1-Nov-
           21-Nov-2011   letter            • Expressed concern regarding inadequate setbacks, potential health effects, property values,        Repower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
2011
                                           ineffectiveness of the energy source, environmental impacts, and lack of ‘true’ consultation.        • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                •Explained that as part of the REA process, wpd was required to prepare a Natural Heritage Assessment,
                                                                                                                                                which could be of interest given the concerns raised. Provided information as to where the NHA could be
                                                                                                                                                located.
                                                                                                                                                • Stated the various ways that they could express their concern, including appealing to the Environmental
                                                                                                                                                Review Tribunal.
                                           • In she thanked us for our "form letter" reply to wpd's response on Nov 21, 2011.
23-Nov-                                    • Asked in light of the health and property value information wpd provided, why we were not          • Thanked her for her response and replied "We will follow the highly prescriptive process and meet the
           6-Dec-2011    email
2011                                       willing to provide property value and health guarantees. "If you truly believe the information you   requirements put in place by the Ontario Government to apply for, develop and operate a wind project."
                                           are providing me then this should not be an issue for you."
5-Dec-                                     • While waiting on our response to her previous e-mail she sent us a link to a health study which    • Thanked her for the information. Explained that wpd is in the process of collecting and processing
           12-Dec-2011   email
2011                                       suggested that wind turbines cause ill health effects.                                               information, opinions, data and letters and it would all be included in the REA submission.
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked her for the correspondence and indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           •Wrote a second time to express concerns. Explained that her main concern was regarding
                                                                                                                                                regulations.
                                           property values, as the cost of care facilities for the elderly are high.
31-Oct-                                                                                                                                         • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
           21-Nov-2011   letter            •Stated that it as obvious that the 4 windmills could not stand alone viably and that therefore
2011                                                                                                                                            wind turbines on property values.
                                           there would be a push for further windmill development, which is the cause of great distress.
                                                                                                                                                •Stated that given the maximum sound levels and minimum distances from non-participating dwellings which
                                           •Expressed concern regarding health.
                                                                                                                                                wpd must adhere too, along with the various setbacks from natural features, wpd had maximized the number
                                                                                                                                                of turbines it was able to place on the land it had access too.


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                              29 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                                                                                                                                  World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
                                                                                                                                                  REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked her for the correspondence and indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                  •Explained that as part of the REA process, wpd was required to prepare a Natural Heritage Assessment,
                                                                                                                                                  which could be of interest given the concerns raised.
                                           •Expressed concern regarding environmental impacts of wind turbines, particularly with regards
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that under Ministry of Natural Resources guidelines for birds and bird habitat, there are thresholds
                                           to birds and wildlife.
2-Nov-                                                                                                                                            set for bird mortality to ensure that bird populations are maintained, and that these require three year post
           18-Nov-2011   letter            •Explained that she had moved to the area for the peace and serenity, and that the project
2011                                                                                                                                              construction monitoring. Explained that mitigation measures should they be needed could include increasing
                                           would devastate the aesthetic value of the place to her.
                                                                                                                                                  the cut-in speed of the turbines, or shutting them down during certain periods. Provided information as to
                                           •Expressed concern regarding property values, and foreign ownership of Canadian resources.
                                                                                                                                                  where the NHA could be located.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked them for the correspondence and indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                  regulations.
                                           •Wished to express concern regarding the project.                                                      •Explained that wpd was unaware of any scientific research that has been conducted on the issue of impacts
                                           •Expressed concern that the wind turbines would cause their livestock to have reduced milk             on farm animals, but that thousands of turbines existed across Europe, Australia and the United States, and
                                           production, and that people’s health was at risk.                                                      the issue did not appear to have surfaced.
                                           •Expressed concern regarding property value. Asked who was responsible for that.                       •Explained how shadow flicker manifested, and indicated that wpd would be happy to run a shadow analysis
                                           •Expressed concern regarding shadow flicker, noise and vibration – particularly in the context of      for adjacent landowners upon request.
2-Nov-
           18-Nov-2011   letter            their manure storage tank.                                                                             • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
2011
                                           •Expressed concern that vibration would cause adverse effects to be experienced by                     World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
                                           earthworms, insets, bacteria, etc.                                                                     Repower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
                                           •Indicated that their property had been put within the Study Zone without their consent.               • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           •Requested that wpd provide a copy of a $5 million liability insurance policy to cover all their       wind turbines on property values.
                                           concerns.                                                                                              •Explained that while their property was identified as being within the study area, it was not part of wpd’s
                                                                                                                                                  detailed investigations. Explained that regulations require that a developer conduct studies and assessments
                                                                                                                                                  upon which turbines and other associated infrastructure is to be located. Reassured them that wpd would not
                                                                                                                                                  access their lands without their approval.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked them for the correspondence and indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                  regulations.
                                           •Explained that they were owners of a B&B within 1.5km of the proposed project.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           •Expressed concern regarding tourism, as the project would be an industrial installation, and the
1-Nov-                                                                                                                                            wind turbines on property values.
           3-Nov-2011    letter            main draw for their establishment was the rural aspect.
2011                                                                                                                                              • Explained that “There are many events, activities and attractions which draw visitors to your area. Each of
                                           •Expressed concern regarding property values, stating that the value of the rural property would
                                                                                                                                                  these has a certain appeal for those who chose to take advantage of them. Reasons visitors have been
                                           be reduced by 35%
                                                                                                                                                  drawn to these various events or attractions, for example the Fergus Scottish Games or the Mennonite
                                                                                                                                                  farming community, will continue to lure them in the future.” Provided evidence that suggests that the
                                                                                                                                                  presence of wind farms is not detrimental to tourism.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked him for the correspondence and indicated that his opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                  • Apologized in case the letter seemed formulaic, in explained that wpd was attempting to respond
                                                                                                                                                  consistently, and explained that to support wpd’s answers, references are made to external studies and
                                           •Wrote again to express disapproval for the location of the project
                                                                                                                                                  reports.
                                           •Explained that his primary concerns were regarding health and property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
3-Nov-                                     •Proposed that wpd provide a “Health and Property Value Guarantee” to all non-participating
           3-Nov-2011    letter                                                                                                                   regulations.
2011                                       property owners within 5km of the proposed project.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           •Indicated that he had received "form letters" in the past, and requested a specific letter that
                                                                                                                                                  World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
                                           addressed him specific proposal.
                                                                                                                                                  REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Wrote to wpd explaining his deep dissatisfaction to our earlier responses. He was disappointed
                                           that wpd would not address his suggestion in the written response or at the Nov 4, 2011 Open
1-Dec-                                                                                                                                            • Thanked him for his response and replied that wpd "will follow the highly prescriptive process and meet the
           6-Dec-2011    email             House.
2011                                                                                                                                              requirements put in place by the Ontario Government to apply for, develop and operate a wind project."
                                           • He felt that wpd was required to take reasonable steps to gain the support of the community
                                           for this project and that if wpd felt that there are no health or property value effects they should


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    30 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                          Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           provide a guarantee. He felt that the "Reluctance on behalf of WPD to negotiate a Health and
                                           Property Value Guarantee can only be interpreted as an admission that there are indeed risks to
                                           non-participating property owners"
                                           •Wrote a second time to express concerns regarding the proposed project, and impacts on the         • Thanked them for their correspondence, and indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                           economic viability of their tourism business.                                                       •Explained that “There are many events, activities and attractions which draw visitors to your area. Each of
                                           •Stated that wpd’s previous response was unsubstantiated.                                           these has a certain appeal for those who chose to take advantage of them. Reasons visitors have been
                                           •Stated that wpd had misrepresented surrounding recreation areas and businesses in the              drawn to these various events or attractions, for example the Fergus Scottish Games or the Mennonite
                                           project reports in terms of what local businesses or facilities were located within the Project     farming community, will continue to lure them in the future.” Provided evidence from external sources that
1-Nov-                                     Location or adjacent to the area.                                                                   suggest that the presence of wind farms is not detrimental to tourism.
           3-Nov-2011    letter
2011                                       •Expressed concern regarding health effects and potential risk to camp guests, and the viability    • Explained that CanWEA had recently issued a statement regarding misrepresentation by Wind Concerns
                                           of their business.                                                                                  Ontario and their position on health and wind energy.
                                           •Explained that the visual impacts and noise will be a deterrent for their clientele. Stated that   • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           wpd had made no commitment to implementing a noise monitoring program.                              World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           • Expressed concern that the project would prevent the camp from expanding.                         • Explained that as the campground was approximately 4km from the project location, that it falls outside of
                                           •Requested a “revenue and property loss guarantee” from wpd.                                        the setback requirement and would not prevent the business from expanding.
                                           •Wrote a second time to express concerns regarding their nearby retirement residence.
                                           •Wished to highlight concerns regarding the proposed project, in the context of a nearby            • Indicated that their opposition to the project had been noted.
                                           retirement community which they owned and operated. •Explained that 370 senior citizens were        • Provided information as to where project reports could be located online, and explained wpd’s efforts to
                                           part of said community, many of whom had medical conditions which rendered them “vulnerable         provide consistent responses.
                                           to external environmental conditions including noise and infrasound.”                               • Explained that CanWEA had recently issued a statement regarding misrepresentation by Wind Concerns
1-Nov-
           3-Nov-2011    letter            •Explained that Dr. Robert McMurtry had found that 4 in 10 people near wind farms experienced       Ontario and their position on health and wind energy.
2011
                                           negative health impacts. Referenced the Canadian Wind Energy Association as stating that            • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           wind turbines cause sickness.                                                                       World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           •Asked is wpd would purchase local residents’ homes if they became sick.                            • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           •Requested that wpd guarantee lease rates if devaluation of the property occurs.                    wind turbines on property values.
                                           •Expressed concern regarding the impact of a wind project t on a mixed use community.
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked him for the correspondence and indicated that his opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                               • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           •Stated that the building of the wind turbines could not be considered “Green Energy” friendly      regulations.
                                           given the materials used to construct them.                                                         • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           •Asked if his municipality will have to upgrade the roads to meet fire regulations. Asked is wpd    World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
31-Oct-
           18-Nov-2011   letter            would be responsible for any damage to roads due to heavy equipment use.                            REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
2011
                                           •Asked is wpd would reimburse landowners for any drop in property values.                           • Explained that prior to construction, wpd would work with the appropriate municipal officials to further
                                           •Expressed that the minimum setbacks should be greater.                                             develop a traffic management plan, which would minimize traffic disruption. Stated that wpd would be
                                           •Expressed concerns regarding health, light flicker, and vibration.                                 responsible for any required road upgrades.
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                               wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Stated that they were against the project because they were very concerned about sound.
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked them for the correspondence and indicated that his opposition to the project had been noted.
                                           • Stated that the Chief Medical Officer of Health’s report notes that for projects with more than
                                                                                                                                               • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           one turbine, the setback would be greater than 550m. Stated that the setback for the 4 turbine
31-Oct-                                                                                                                                        World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
           18-Nov-2011   letter            project should be a minimum of 870m.
2011                                                                                                                                           REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
                                           • Explained that they were afraid that the “actual level” of sound could be much higher than what
                                                                                                                                               • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           is within the project documentation.
                                                                                                                                               wind turbines on property values.
                                           • Stated that they were very concerned about property value decline.
                                           •Included 13 enclosed letters in response to the Draft Springwood REA documents. Letters            Interim Response sent Nov 21, 2011
                                           included: “Monitoring Birds and Bats”, “Social Concern”, “Interference with Business”, “Acoustics   • wpd Consulted with Stantec, engineering and archaeology experts to answer the questions.
                                           Report”, “Receptor Location”, “Personal Loss”, “Environment Scan”, “Vibration”, “Horse              • Details of the response can be found in the Consultation Report Appendix
                                           Industry”, “Aquifers”, “Second Meeting”, “Icing”, and “Shadow Flicker”.
                                           •Social Concerns: Stated that the REA does not address social concerns. Requested that wpd          •Response was sent to on December 22, 2011 and December 21, 2011. Responses to their concerns in this
21-Nov-                                    Canada be required to perform an impact study encompassing all aspects of the rural                 letter e answered along with their previous letters.
           22-Dec-2011   Letter
2011                                       community, including agriculture, integrity of the rural community, economy, tourism, property
                                                                                                                                               • The Following Topics were addressed in the response:
                                           values and infrastructure. Indicated that wpd should report findings to the public in a town hall
                                           format, and that until this is completed, the REA should not move forward.                          • Water Assessment (RGw2ndPM - 10), Trespassing (RGw2ndPM - 11), Raptor and Short-eared Owl Study
                                           • Monitoring Birds and Bats: Was concerned regarding the search frequency and search area of        (RGw2ndPM - 12), Avian Flock Stopover (RGw2ndPM - 13), Bullfrogs (RGw2ndPM - 14), Feature 1
                                           the bird and bat monitoring. Requested that monitoring over the 20+ year life of the project        (RGw2ndPM - 15), Monarch Butterfly (RGw2ndPM - 19), Airstrips (RGw2ndPM - 20), Animal Movement
                                           accommodate fluctuating populations, and that the weekly monitoring reports and any mitigation      (RGw2ndPM - 21),

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                             31 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           measures be posted publicly.                                                                           Flora and Fauna (RGw2ndPM - 22), Osprey (RGw2ndPM - 23), Acoustic Report (RGw2ndPM -24), Receptor
                                           • Interference with Business: Stated that a proper assessment of business and economy of the           Location (RGw2ndPM - 25), Personal IMpact (RGw2ndPM - 26), Community Assessment (RGw2ndPM - 27),
                                           area was not done. Expressed concern that the project would interfere with the operation of their      Vibration (RGw2ndPM - 28), Horse Industry (RGw2ndPM - 30), Aquifiers (RGw2ndPM - 31), Second Meeting
                                           veterinary hospital due to electrical interference. Requested that a comprehensive assessment
                                                                                                                                                  (RGw2ndPM -32), Icing 9(RGw2ndPM -33), Shadow Flicker (RGw2ndPM -34)
                                           be made regarding the local economy, requested a list of steps that the company will take to
                                           ensure no ill effect are experienced by their business, requested a guarantee that wpd would           • Information was still to come for the following from Stantec : Sub Surface Drainage (RGw2ndPM - 17),
                                           cover expenses due to any ill effects, including potentially relocating their home and business.       Manure storage Tanks (part of RGw2ndPM - 28)
                                           Requested a letter of assurance that liability insurance covers the cost for installing isolators,     • Geo technical studies have been completed and will be included as part of the full REA application and
                                           replacing equipment, and relocating home and business, and that it encompasses the 20+ year            public review to answer the following: Safety of Ground Water (RGw2ndPM -16), Ground Water Flow
                                           life of the project.                                                                                   (RGw2ndPM - 18), Vibration (RGw2ndPM - 28), Aquifers (RGw2ndPM - 31). Setbacks (AGW - 01), Inclusion
                                           • Acoustics Report: Expressed concern that MOE noise guidelines may not be met. Requested              of 44kV Line for Connection to the Grid (AGW -02), Confusion over Connection Point to the Grid (AGW -03),
                                           a site specific acoustic test, acoustic measurements made over a period of at least a year from
                                                                                                                                                  Fire (AGW -4), Heath (AGW -05), Infrasound and Vibration (AGW -06), Noise (AGW - 07), Property Value
                                           the base of the a turbine out to 1 km, and that equipment should be used that meets or exceeds
                                           the standard for acoustics testing.                                                                    (AGW - 08), Environment (AGW - 09), Foundation and Ground Water (AGW - 10), Monitoring Birds and Bats
                                           • Receptor Location: Indicated that 2 lots had not properly been considered. Indicated that one        (AGW - 11), Social Concerns (AGW - 12), Electrical Interference/Interference with Business (AGW - 13),
                                           potential receptor should have been placed at the centre of the vacant lot, and that another lot       • A copy of the Notice of Proposal to Engage in Project and Notice of Final Public Meeting along with
                                           had been severed in the past year and needed to be considered as such. Requested that wpd              respective notice letters were attached with response.
                                           meeting with Centre Wellington Township, and re-submit all receptors locations to HGC for re-
                                           evaluation, and that this report be made public prior to REA application.
                                           • Personal Loss: Expressed great concerns that the proposed project would interfere with his
                                           personal use and enjoyment of his farm, property and business. Was concerned with noise
                                           pollution.
                                           •Environmental Scan: Indicated that wpd had failed to complete an environmental, economic
                                           and social scan of the affected area. Provided examples of local businesses in the area. Stated
                                           that the REA application should not move forward until his suggested comprehensive
                                           assessment is completed.
                                           •Vibration: Explained that the project reports did not address the potential impacts of vibration
                                           on geomorphology and surrounding structures. Provided an overview of what structures should
                                           be considered. Stated that the REA report failed to include a detailed geological study. Indicated
                                           that before the project moved forward, a vibration modal needed to be developed based on the
                                           geology of the area and the potential vibration from the 4 turbines both singularly and as a
                                           group, that the model would have to be used to predict the impact on the local aquifer, 3 manure
                                           storage structures and wells of neighbours within 2km. Stated that mitigation procedures
                                           needed to be accepted by all levels of government and the neighbouring property owners, and
                                           that $100 million bond or proof of liability insurance must be placed with the Township of Centre
                                           Wellington for the lifespan of the project.
                                           •Horse Industry: Provided an overview of the horse industry in Ontario in a North American
                                           context, and specifically within Wellington County. Explained that the project would be ugly and
                                           would drive the horse industry away from all locations for which the project would be visible,
                                           resulting in local job losses.
                                           •Asked how many permanent jobs wpd would create in rural Ontario, and how much money wpd
                                           would spend in rural Ontario.•Aquifers: Stated that the Draft REA reports do not identify the fact
                                           that the project would be sited within the well head protection area for the Town of Fergus, that it
                                           is over a major aquifer, and does not document the geomorphology of the area. Asked where
                                           the study was which covered mitigation and compensation regarding potential impact on
                                           aquifers, public consultation regarding aquifers, bond or liability insurance, and mitigation
                                           measures related to spills from manure storage. •Second Meeting: Stated that when he
                                           requested a hardcopy of the reports, he was handed a CD, which was unacceptable given the
                                           challenges involved in reading electronic copies. Indicated that wpd employees were ill
                                           informed, gave false information, and were unable to answer questions. Stated that boards were
                                           too simplistic. Indicated that wpd failed to inform the public related to a model supplied by the
                                           Danish Wind Industry Association. Stated that before wpd proceeded any further, that hard
                                           copies needed to be provided to all residents “in the impact zone” and to others on request, and
                                           that there be 90 days provided to review the hardcopies and that this time period must be done
                                           in the winter. Stated that a public forum for technical questions would have to be held, and that
                                           scientific reports from Ontario based facilities in the impact of stray voltage, sound, vibration,
                                           strobing and light flicker on veterinary equipment and horse and dairy cattle health and heat

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                             32 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                          Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           cycles must be provided.
                                           •Icing: Expressed concerns about icing as a potential hazard to workers on the westerly third of
                                           his property. Referenced a case study in which freezing rain was a problem. Indicated that wpd
                                           would need to provide ice throwing data and worst case scenarios for sound levels. •Shadow
                                           Flicker: Indicated that wpd made an omission as wpd did not provide modeling for the impact of
                                           shadow flicker and strobing on the health and welfare of humans, livestock and air traffic.
                                           Indicated that wpd should present a methodology for a shadow flicker and strobing study,
                                           present names of tenured university faculty members who could complete the research, provide
                                           scientific evidence as to impact on the reproductive cycles of horses and dairy cattle, and
                                           provide a report on the impact on air traffic.

                                           • Indicated that wpd did not properly address his questions, as they were related to federal        •Indicated that wpd felt the letter from Stantec regarding the issue of federal involvement did address his
4-Nov-
           22-Nov-2011                     regulations, not provincial. Indicated that he would be bringing his documentation to the meeting   issue. Understood that he had spoken with Nicole at the public meeting, and that she had subsequently sent
2011
                                           that evening.                                                                                       him an electronic copy of the Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan.

                                                                                                                                               • According to REpower Systems, for a REpower MM92 2MW model, power requirements do not exceed 25
4-Nov-                                     • At the Nov 4, 2011 Open House, the attendee asked how much energy the turbine consumed            kW, and the annual energy demand is an estimated 16000 kWh. In Ontario, considering a medium wind
           11-Nov-2011
2011                                       during its operation.                                                                               resource, one MM92 generates approximately 5,625,000 kWh per year. The annual demand represents
                         email
                                                                                                                                               0.28% of production.


                                                                                                                                               •Explained that we had looked for their previous correspondence but did not see record of the questions they
                                                                                                                                               referred too, nor were they attached to the email. Asked that they send the questions to wpd directly.
                                                                                                                                               • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           •Stated that their previous38 questions had not been answered, but that they were attached for      regulations.
                                           reference.                                                                                          • Explained that there were many ways under the REA process for the community to received information and
4-Nov-
           22-Nov-2011   email             •Indicated that they have only received wpd PR pieces that they felt were patronizing.              provide feedback. Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to
2011
                                           •Indicated that wpd’s consultation was insufficient                                                 appeal to the Environmental Review Tribunal.
                                           •Expressed concern regarding health and wildlife.                                                   • Explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario (from development to construction to
                                                                                                                                               production) are borne by the developer
                                                                                                                                               • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                               relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                           • A List of 38 Questions sent by an area resident paraphrased below:                                1. We have heard from many people opposed to the project as well as those who support it
                                           • 1. Do we acknowledge the project will have an impact on the community at large?                   2. Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                           2. Would the wind energy project be viable without the Feed-in Tariff program                       relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. Cost is competitive with other newly constructed power
                                           3. Would we allow landowners who have signed contracts with wpd to withdraw                         plants
                                           4. How many staff do we employ, who funds research on the residents behalf?                         3. Contracts with landowners are signed for the duration of the project.
                                           5. How can projects possibly be successful without community support?                               4. wpd Canada currently has a staff of 13,i n addition, we have engaged
                                           6. Has wpd ever bought out a landowner in any of its international projects                         Stantec Consulting to conduct our environmental investigations and prepare our Renewable Energy Approval
                                           7. How do we evaluate criticism that wind power is less green than given credit for?                (REA) application. The public has a chance to review all documents and appeal through the ERT
                                           8. How do you evaluate the fact that the REA deliberately overrides local municipalities            5. We acknowledge support and opposition to project. Explained public and municipal consultation process.
                                           opposition?                                                                                         6. Each subsidiary is responsible for operations and development within their jurisdiction. wpd Canada has
n/a        8-Dec-2011    email             9. How do you account for the dead bats that have been found by the turbines in Shelburne           lease arrangements with landowners, and they are able to use the surrounding
                                           10. How do you evaluate that this area is home to endangered birds?                                 land for farming or other purposes.
                                           11. Do we think that impacts on birds and migration has been fully addressed in Ontario?            7. Ontario has a history of support fledgling industries (auto sector). Wind energy is creating jobs, driving
                                           12. Does wpd give any consideration to the cumulative effect of its own projects in conjunction     millions of dollars in investment to rural communities. Reducing greenhouse gases is essential to address
                                           with other projects?                                                                                climate change.
                                           13. Are there any plans whatsoever to expand the initial project size in the future?                8. Ontario Regulation 359/09 under the Environmental Protection Act recognizes the importance of working
                                           14. What happens to wpd's obligations when/if the company is sold, or goes bankrupt?                with municipalities. It also streamlines and standardizes the process creating an even playing field for
                                           15. Why did you choose a location that is surrounded with residents as opposed to remote            developers. Municipalities are provided reports 90 days before last Open house
                                           areas?                                                                                              9. Explained natural heritage assessment process and bird and bat monitoring before and after construction.
                                           16. How will wpd respond to health effects on people, what procedures are in place?                 Referred her to the MNR bat guidelines
                                           17. Why is the precautionary principle (in absence of studies) not considered in setback reg?       10. The risk of mortality or disturbance to Osprey from the Springwood Project is considered low. Studies at

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 33 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                         Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                           18. Have you asked the residents of Fergus about the large turbines set against their town?        operating facilities in Ontario where Osprey are nesting in close proximity to wind turbines have not indicated
                                           19. Can you give us an idea what the transformer station will look like and sound like?            disturbance effects
                                           20.Where specifically will you run cables above ground?                                            11. As part of the application process for our Springwood project, we are required to submit
                                           21. How does the concrete base affect land drainage and ground water?                              reports outlining the potential impacts on the environment, birds and bats and what steps will be taken to
                                           22. How do you address the issue of falling ice?                                                   mitigate those impacts.
                                           23. How do you evaluate the unpredictability and inconsistency of wind power?                      12. We are required to submit reports on the potential impacts of our project, and what steps will be taken to
                                           24. How do we account for property gain for participating landowners and lose for others?          mitigate those impacts. In terms of sound, the cumulative effect of adjacent wind farms is assessed in the
                                           25. How do we account for property gain for participating landowners and lose of tourism?          Noise Impact Study.
                                           26. In the contracts that wpd has with landowners do we have a silence clauses?                    13. We have maximized the number of turbines we are able to place on the land we have access to given the
                                           27. Who has priority access to the turbine areas, you or the landowner?                            setback regulations. Should more capacity on grid exist or should more land become available wpd would
                                           28. Will cables be installed above or in ground?                                                   evaluate the potential for more turbines.
                                           29. How do you regard health concerns related to turbine and transformer station noise and         14. Those obligations would remain in place.
                                           electrical fields?                                                                                 15. After looking at various wind resources we determined the winds in this area were sufficient to produce
                                           30. What would happen to the operation if a future government of Ontario cancelled the FIT         electricity. We then had to determine if there was capacity to add electricity to the grid. Finally, we approached
                                           program? Will you be able to pay landowners the amounts they are now told are guaranteed?          landowners in the region to see if there was
                                           31. Where are you actually sourcing the turbines? Has wpd purchased them already?                  an interest in participating in the project.
                                           32. Do contracts with landowners contain provisions for compensation in regards to a decrease
                                           in their property values.                                                                          16. Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study and other reports on potential effects of wind
                                           33. Will wpd provide an environmental assessment after decommissioning of the turbines?            turbines on health and the reason behind the setback limits. Reinforced that wpd would follow all guidelines
                                           34. What is your definition of returning the land to original condition after decommissioning of   put in place by MOE. Explained the REPower the turbine manufacturer has guaranteed that 40dBA will not be
                                           the wind turbines?                                                                                 exceeded given the regulated setbacks
                                           35. Will an official from the REA visit the area before making a decision on the approval?         17. The setbacks for wind projects were determined by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment in developing
                                           36. How far from your personal home is the closest industrial-sized wind turbine (150m high)?      the Green Energy Act and Regulations. The overriding factor which must be taken into account when
                                           37. Are you aware that there are opposition groups fighting wind power in Germany too?             determining minimum distances is that a sound level of 40 dBA not be exceeded.
                                           38. Are you aware that many members of the German public, currently dismiss wind power in          18. As mentioned previously, the process we are required to follow has allowed for multiple
                                           Germany as a green fad, promoted largely for political rhetoric and wind industry interests?       opportunities and avenues for the public to provide comments on the Springwood project
                                                                                                                                              19. The Springwood project does not include a transformer station. Each turbine will have a small transformer
                                                                                                                                              adjacent to the tower. he sound from our project will not exceed 40 dBA at non-participating receptors
                                                                                                                                              (dwellings).
                                                                                                                                              20. Below ground, except at the point where our project ties into the Hydro One network.
                                                                                                                                              21. Before excavation commences, a geotechnical study is completed at all potential sites for ground water
                                                                                                                                              depth. Mitigation methods are put into place to ensure as little impact on ground water as possible
                                                                                                                                              22. All modern turbines are built to shut off if the blades become unbalanced. If ice accumulates on the
                                                                                                                                              turbines, the blades will become unbalanced, and the turbines shut off. Ontario's setback requirements
                                                                                                                                              combined with this advanced technology goes a long way to reduce any potential hazards from ice formation
                                                                                                                                              on the blades.
                                                                                                                                              23. Explained the IESO is responsible for drawing upon Ontario’s electrical utilities. As time goes by they are
                                                                                                                                              better able to develop models and predict wind energy, and include other sources of power as such hydro
                                                                                                                                              from Quebec.
                                                                                                                                              24. Mentioned the RE/MAX market trend report that found farm values had increased even in areas such as
                                                                                                                                              Chatham-Kent where turbines have been installed for some time. Also referred to other studies.
                                                                                                                                              25. Explained that there are many events that draw tourism to the area. Evidence suggests that wind turbines
                                                                                                                                              are not detrimental to tourism. Provided references to different reports
                                                                                                                                              26. Land lease arrangements are confidential documents individually negotiated between
                                                                                                                                              landowners and wpd.
                                                                                                                                              27. Landowners are able to use the surrounding land for farming or other uses, with wpd retaining the right of
                                                                                                                                              access for operational and maintenance purposes.
                                                                                                                                              28. Cables will be installed below ground.
                                                                                                                                              29. wpd will follow the guidelines put in pace by the MOE based on noise not exceeding 40dBA and setbacks


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                               34 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                          Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                               of 550m away
                                                                                                                                               30. Any changes to the program would be evaluated at that time, and dealt with accordingly.
                                                                                                                                               31. wpd is using the REpower MM92 2 megawatt turbine
                                                                                                                                               32. Land lease arrangements are confidential documents individually negotiated between
                                                                                                                                               landowners and wpd.
                                                                                                                                               33. As per O.Reg 359/09 a developer is required to decommission the wind turbine at their own expense at
                                                                                                                                               the end of a typical 20 year Power Purchase Agreement. A decommission plan is designed, monies are
                                                                                                                                               placed in an escrow account and is controlled by a third party
                                                                                                                                               34. All project infrastructure is removed so that activities carried out prior to their introduction can resume. The
                                                                                                                                               details of foundation removal are determined in conjunction with the landowner.
                                                                                                                                               35. A decision regarding our Renewable Energy Approval (REA) application will be made by the Ministry of
                                                                                                                                               the Environment. All questions regarding their decision process should be directed there.
                                                                                                                                               36. because of the standard setbacks put in place through the Green
                                                                                                                                               Energy Act and regulations, regardless of what community an individual lives in, a wind turbine must be
                                                                                                                                               placed a minimum of 550 metres away from non-participating receptors (dwellings) provided the sound level
                                                                                                                                               does not exceed 40 dBA.
                                                                                                                                               37. We know there are supporters and opponents to any project, regardless of where that project is located.
                                                                                                                                               38. I know that many governments throughout Europe and elsewhere have increased their
                                                                                                                                               commitment to deriving their electricity through renewable sources.  

                                                                                                                                                 

                                                                                                                                               • Explained that he may be mistaking the Springwood project for another, as he made reference to meetings
                                                                                                                                               which were not wpd’s, and indicated that he had submitted questions and received a response, of which wpd
                                                                                                                                               had not record.
                                           •Wrote in response to the Notice of Final Public Meeting                                            • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           •Expressed concern regarding the fact that many people invested their entire savings to             regulations. Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal
28-Oct-
           22-Nov-2011   letter            establish businesses that thrive off of tourism, and that the turbines would interfere with that.   to the Environmental Review Tribunal.
2011
                                           •Expressed concern over property values.                                                            • Explained that “There are many events, activities and attractions which draw visitors to your area. Each of
                                           •Stated that there was a schism being created in the community.                                     these has a certain appeal for those who chose to take advantage of them. Reasons visitors have been
                                                                                                                                               drawn to these various events or attractions, for example the Fergus Scottish Games or the Mennonite
                                                                                                                                               farming community, will continue to lure them in the future.” Provided evidence that suggests that the
                                                                                                                                               presence of wind farms is not detrimental to tourism.
                                                                                                                                               • Thanked him for the correspondence and indicated that his opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                               • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                               regulations.
                                                                                                                                               • Apologized in case the letter seemed formulaic, in explained that wpd was attempting to respond
                                                                                                                                               consistently, and explained that to support wpd’s answers, references are made to external studies and
                                                                                                                                               reports.
                                           •Expressed that the project should not move forward because of health concerns. Cited Robert        • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           Hornung of CanWEA. Asked if monetary compensation would be provided to people within 2km            World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
                                           of the project                                                                                      REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
3-Nov-
           22-Nov-2011   email             •Cited a real estate study that indicated a 40% decline in property values for properties within    •Explained how shadow flicker manifested, and indicated that wpd would be happy to run a shadow analysis
2011
                                           5km of wind turbines. Asked what monetary compensation would be provided.                           for adjacent landowners upon request.
                                           •Asked what monetary compensation would be provided to families who’s enjoyment of their            • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                           property declines.                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                           •Expressed concern regarding aviation safety.                                                       •Explained that regarding aviation, at time of crystallization, “there were two registered aerodromes near the
                                                                                                                                               Springwood Wind Project. The Arthur (Metz Field) aerodrome is located approximately three kilometres
                                                                                                                                               northwest of the closest turbine, consisting of two dirt seasonal runways. The Arthur (Arthur South)
                                                                                                                                               aerodrome, located approximately 1.6km west of the closest turbine, consists of one dirt seasonal runway.”
                                                                                                                                               Explained that wpd had obtained appropriate clearance/review from Transport Canada and NAV Canada, as
                                                                                                                                               well as the Department of National Defence.

Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     35 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked her for the correspondence and indicated that his opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                regulations.
                                                                                                                                                • Regarding the public meeting, explained that “we chose a format that we felt not only ensured the safety of
                                                                                                                                                the public, but that of our staff as well. There were many opportunities for the public to receive information
                                           • Explained that she was concerned about potential loss of equity in her home, and asked if wpd
                                                                                                                                                regarding the project and to have their questions or concerns addressed. We prepared a 20 minute video
                                           could provide a guarantee that her property values will not be affected.
                                                                                                                                                presentation, which played several times during the evening, and contained information regarding our project,
                                           • Expressed concern regarding infra sound and low frequency noise affecting her family’s health
                                                                                                                                                as well as a turbine placement exercise illustrating the number of constraints which must be taken into
                                           and the health of her animals. Stated that setbacks were not adequate. Asked if wpd would
                                                                                                                                                account. In addition, 17 team members were available at various stations throughout the room. Prior to the
31-Oct-                                    compensate her if her horse became sick. Expressed concern regarding stray voltage and ice
           22-Nov-2011   email                                                                                                                  open house, we provide a review session for all of staff to ensure that our responses can remain consistent –
2011                                       throw.
                                                                                                                                                especially with commonly-raised concerns. Finally, comment cards and our contact information were made
                                           • State that their fire crews did not have high rescue equipment or ladders to deal with potential
                                                                                                                                                available for those who wished to submit a question or comment post-open house.”
                                           turbine fires. Asked what was being done to ensure adequate fire safety.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           • Stated that the previous public meeting not helpful, and that they needed a meeting with chairs
                                                                                                                                                regulations. Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal
                                           for people to sit and a microphone for asking questions to a panel.
                                                                                                                                                to the Environmental Review Tribunal.
                                                                                                                                                •Explained that wpd was unaware of any scientific research that has been conducted on the issue of impacts
                                                                                                                                                on farm animals, but that thousands of turbines existed across Europe, Australia and the United States, and
                                                                                                                                                the issue did not appear to have surfaced.
                                                                                                                                                •Explained that prior to construction, wpd would work with the appropriate municipal officials to further develop
                                                                                                                                                an emergency response plan. Referred to the Draft Design and Operations Report which could be of interest.
                                                                                                                                                Provided information as to where to locate the report online.
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked her for the correspondence and indicated that his opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                regulations.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible human health effects, and
                                           •Wrote again to express her concerns. Asked what wpd would do about people who would                 presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred to a number of reviews on
                                           suffer from health effects                                                                           the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as approved under Ontario Regulation,
26-Oct-
           25-Nov-2011   letter            •Expressed concern about her daughter who had inner ear and vestibular issues, indicating that       wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
2011
                                           she had a reaction of dizziness and nausea from wind turbines.                                       • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           •Expressed sadness that the project will result in loss of enjoyment of their property               World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                                                                                                                                •Expressed understanding for her concern regarding her daughter. Explained that wpd was unaware of any
                                                                                                                                                medical of scientific research that had been conducted related to her condition and wind turbines, but that
                                                                                                                                                there were thousands of wind turbines across Europe, Australia, and the United States, and that this issue did
                                                                                                                                                not appear to have surfaced.
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked them for the correspondence and indicated that his opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                • Clarified that wpd was not privy to circumstances regarding other developers’ project, and therefore could
                                                                                                                                                not comment.
                                           •Wished to follow up regarding their previous emails.                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           •Previous responses were considered unsatisfactory as they were seen as “form letters”               regulations. Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal
                                           •Requested certain clarifications and assurance prior to the granting of an REA for the project,     to the Environmental Review Tribunal.
                                           including: 1 - requested a property values guarantee, 2 - asked what action wpd would take to        • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           prevent or mitigate visual impacts of the turbines on their property - referenced Arthur project     World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
                                           nearby, 3- expressed concern regarding health, property values, and the potential for project        REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
3-Nov-
           22-Nov-2011                     expansion after gaining a “foothold” in the area, 4 - asked for clarification on what impact the     • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
2011
                                           project would have on winter wind/snowfall on their property, 5 – asked if all monitoring and        wind turbines on property values.
                                           records will be made available to the public, 6 – asked what assurances the public had that their    •Provided assurance that given the maximum sound levels and minimum distances from non-participating
                                           interests would be served to minimize daily disruption to activities and public roads access, 7 –    dwellings which wpd must adhere too, along with the various setbacks from natural features, wpd had
                                           requested that wpd “clarify what oversight and transparency to the public exists for construction,   maximized the number of turbines it was able to place on the land it had access too.
                                           operation and decommissioning of the IWTs and associated buildings, cables and facilities”, 8 –      •Indicated that wpd would comply with all required monitoring and mitigation efforts prescribed by appropriate
                                           requested clarification regarding the removal of foundations                                         governmental agencies, and that questions regarding transparency should be directed to those agencies.
                                                                                                                                                •Explained that the developer is required to decommission the wind turbines at their own expense, and that
                                                                                                                                                wpd establishes an escrow account which would cover the estimated cost. Explained that these monies were
                                                                                                                                                controlled by a third party.
2-Nov-     29-Nov-2011   email             • Expressed concern for the lack documented information on the impact on health and                  • Thanked her for the correspondence and indicated that his opposition to the project had been noted.


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                               36 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
2011                                       wellbeing.                                                                                             • Explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible human health effects, and
                                           • Stated that there was a lack of transparency, referencing another project.                           presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred to a number of reviews on
                                           • Setbacks – expressed that the setbacks were not adequate, given the lack of documented               the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as approved under Ontario Regulation,
                                           research to measure sound and determine the impact of annoyance on sleep patterns.                     wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                           Referenced other jurisdictions where setbacks had changed.                                             • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                           • “Value for investment – I understand the desire to create jobs by investing in new industry.         regulations. Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal
                                           However, wind will never provide more than 2% of our energy needs, and the destruction of our          to the Environmental Review Tribunal.
                                           rural environment and the impact on communities is hardly worth it.”                                   • Explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario (from development to construction to
                                           • “Property values – Efforts to sell our house in anticipation of wind coming in proves the impact     production) are borne by the developer
                                           of property values. Agents are telling local property owners not to bother, as the properties will     • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                           not sell. The estimate is that the value of the property will decline between 20% to 30%.”             relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  •Provided assurance that given the maximum sound levels and minimum distances from non-participating
                                                                                                                                                  dwellings which wpd must adhere too, along with the various setbacks from natural features, wpd had
                                                                                                                                                  maximized the number of turbines it was able to place on the land it had access too.
                                           • In her reply to our previous response, she melt we missed the point. Explained that 40 dBA           • Explained the 40dBA is "acknowledged by the World Health Organization (WHO) Europe to be below the
                                           may not have an effect on hearing but it will have an effect on the rural environment effecting        level at which effects on sleep and health occur, and is below Health Canada’s acceptable threshold value for
6-Dec-                                     causing stress and sleep issues. Stated that there was no standardized way to measure sound            sleep disturbance"• Explained that the wind turbine acoustic emissions data is the accepted method by the
           29-Nov-2011   email
2011                                       from wind turbines in Ontario. She also wanted wpd to address the property value issues and            MOE to determine compliance to its regulations.
                                           not to provide studies that show it does not have an impact, "as we already have seen the              • Confirmed that wpd would follow the highly prescriptive process and meet all government requirements to
                                           impact locally"                                                                                        apply for and develop a wind project.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked them for their correspondence.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                  regulations.
                                           • "I am writing on behalf of my husband, and myself, to let you know that we are opposed to the
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible human health effects, and
                                           proposed wind farm. We are land owners in East Garafraxa, we have a number of concerns.
                                                                                                                                                  presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred to a number of reviews on
                                           The first and foremost being health concerns. One of our children is autistic and is very
                                                                                                                                                  the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as approved under Ontario Regulation,
                                           sensitive to outside stimuli, we are concerned about how he will react to the noise and the
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
12-Nov-                                    flashing of the lights. Our second concern is our property values, we are farming and working
           29-Nov-2011   email                                                                                                                    • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
2011                                       off the farm. If property values drop dramatically it could effect our ability to continue farming,
                                                                                                                                                  World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                           which will greatly affect our quality of life. Our final concern is with our landscape, this is a
                                                                                                                                                  •Expressed understanding for her concern regarding her child. Explained that wpd was unaware of any
                                           beautiful area we live in and we do not want to see it littered with industrial wind turbines. Thank
                                                                                                                                                  medical of scientific research that had been conducted related to her condition and wind turbines, but that
                                           you for taking the time to read this I hope that the concerns of the community are taken
                                                                                                                                                  there were thousands of wind turbines across Europe, Australia, and the United States, and that this issue did
                                           seriously."
                                                                                                                                                  not appear to have surfaced.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained how shadow flicker manifested, and that wpd had agreed to conduct shadow assessments for
                                           • Expressed concern regarding shadow flicker.                                                          properties directly adjacent to the project site.
1-Nov-                                     • Understood that they were never to receive more than 30 hrs a year of flicker from the               •Explained that while their property was identified as being within the study area, it was not part of wpd’s
           29-Nov-2011   email
2011                                       turbines.                                                                                              detailed investigations. Explained that regulations require that a developer conduct studies and assessments
                                           • Requested any information that showed that wpd had addressed this issue.                             upon which turbines and other associated infrastructure is to be located. Reassured them that wpd would not
                                                                                                                                                  access their lands without their approval.
                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked them for their correspondence.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible human health effects, and
                                                                                                                                                  presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred to a number of reviews on
                                                                                                                                                  the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as approved under Ontario Regulation,
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                           • Wished to express opposition to the project                                                          • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
1-Nov-
           29-Nov-2011   email             • Expressed concern regarding health, their pets and livestock, as well as property values.            World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
2011
                                           Asked who was going to compensate them.                                                                •Explained that wpd was unaware of any scientific research that has been conducted on the issue of impacts
                                                                                                                                                  on farm animals, but that thousands of turbines existed across Europe, Australia and the United States, and
                                                                                                                                                  the issue did not appear to have surfaced.
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained what the next steps were for the project, and that there was still opportunity for the public to


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  37 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                            Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                 express their concern, including at the Environmental Review Tribunal.
                                                                                                                                                 • Thanked her for the correspondence and indicated that his opposition to the project had been noted.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                 regulations.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible human health effects, and
                                                                                                                                                 presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred to a number of reviews on
                                                                                                                                                 the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as approved under Ontario Regulation,
                                                                                                                                                 wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                           • Explained that she lived close to the project, and was concerned about health and property
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
1-Nov-                                     values because no real long-term studies have been done.
           29-Nov-2011   email                                                                                                                   World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
2011                                       • Concerned about the cost of projects like Springwood.
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                           • Wished to register strong opposition to the project.
                                                                                                                                                 no widespread impact from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario (from development to construction to
                                                                                                                                                 production) are borne by the developer
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                 relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal to the
                                                                                                                                                 Environmental Review Tribunal.
29-Nov-                                    • Thanked us for our response but reiterated that she does not want turbines in her
           5-Dec-2011    email                                                                                                                   • Thanked her for her reply and said her comments would be included in the REA approval application
2011                                       neighborhood, period.
                                                                                                                                                 •At the final public meeting, he expressed concern regarding shadow flicker. •Asked what regulations existed
                                                                                                                                                 regarding flicker.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that wpd was also concerned about birds and bats. Explained that under Ministry of Natural
                                                                                                                                                 Resources guidelines for birds and bats and their habitat, there are thresholds set for bird and bat mortality to
                                                                                                                                                 ensure that bird and bat populations are maintained, and that these require three year post construction
                                           •Stated that wind turbines were very bad, and that they killed birds, bats, and insects.
                                                                                                                                                 monitoring. Explained that mitigation measures should they be needed could include increasing the cut-in
                                           •Stated that blinking lights would bother people.
2-Nov-                                                                                                                                           speed of the turbines, or shutting them down during certain periods. Provided information as to where the
           30-Nov-2011   email             •Stated that it would take a lot of energy, fumes and gases to make something that would only
2011                                                                                                                                             NHA could be located.
                                           be used once in a while, and which were expensive to take down.
                                                                                                                                                 •Explained that the Government had regulations in place to ensure that the project turbines do not exceed
                                           •Stated that she had never see the turbines at Arthur move.
                                                                                                                                                 40dBA, or as loud as a quiet bedroom.
                                                                                                                                                 •Explained that the project will be lit, and the reason for this was so that pilots in the area were aware of the
                                                                                                                                                 turbines.
                                                                                                                                                 •Explained that if wpd received MOE approval for the project, it would supply electricity to the local grid for 20
                                                                                                                                                 years, after which it would be wpd’s responsibility to either upgrade the project, or remove them.
                                                                                                                                                 • Thanked him for his correspondence.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                 regulations, and that various Ministries would be reviewing wpd’s REA application for ensure that all
                                           •Stated that he was very dissatisfied with wpd’s consultation, indicating that wpd’s replies to his
                                                                                                                                                 requirements had been met.
                                           previous comments inadequately dealt with his issues
                                                                                                                                                 • Provided an overview of the public consultation process to date, and the various opportunities for the public
                                           • Expressed concern regarding birds, stating that the raptor study was inadequate in that it only
                                                                                                                                                 to express concern, ask questions or voice either support or opposition. Explained that wpd undertook a
                                           concentrated on the proposed site, while raptors do not heed
                                                                                                                                                 calling initiative in the vicinity of the Springwood project to reach out to residents to ensure they were aware of
                                           human land boundaries and of the danger of your turbine blades.
                                                                                                                                                 the project, to answer any questions or concerns, and to make sure they knew how to contact wpd. Explained
                                           • Explained that he lived in the area of the project, within the flicker zone of the turbines and
                                                                                                                                                 that this exercise went beyond the requirement of the REA process in a sincere attempt on our part to ensure
                                           would also be impacted by the noise of all of the units. Asked if wpd would you shut down the
                                                                                                                                                 people were aware of our project and how to provide feedback.
                                           turbines from 4:30 pm until sunset every day in the fall and winter.
31-Oct-                                                                                                                                          •Regarding raptor mortality, stated that “the NHA for the Project is required to determine whether candidate
           29-Nov-2011   email             • Expressed concern regarding the value of his property, and asked if wpd would compensate
2011                                                                                                                                             significant wildlife habitat for raptors is found in or within 120 m of the Project Location. This is determined
                                           him and the other property owners.
                                                                                                                                                 according to provincially established guidance. As referenced in the NHA, the Significant Wildlife Habitat
                                           • Expressed concern that the noise pollution emanating from the turbines would affect his
                                                                                                                                                 Technical Guide (MNR, 2000) is the provincially accepted reference document outlining the criteria for
                                           health, stating that it would far exceed the level of annoyance and would have a direct negative
                                                                                                                                                 candidate significant wildlife habitat components.”
                                           impact on his ability to have a decent night’s sleep. Asked if wpd would you shut down the wind
                                                                                                                                                 •Explained that in discussion with the leadership of Oppose Belwood prior to the open house, wpd agreed to
                                           turbines if the noise exceeded the allowable limits by the Ministry of the Environment. Asked
                                                                                                                                                 conduct flicker tests for those dwellings immediately adjacent to our project site, using professional wind
                                           how wpd proposed to meet its obligations under the law concerning noise.
                                                                                                                                                 project software.
                                           • Was concerned about impacts on farm animals, indicating that anecdotal evidence suggested
                                                                                                                                                 • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                           that flicker had an adverse effect on breeding success in both horses and cattle.
                                                                                                                                                 no evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected property values or cumulative home
                                                                                                                                                 sales.
                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      38 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                                                                                                                                World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
                                                                                                                                                REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
                                                                                                                                                •Explained that wpd was unaware of any scientific research that has been conducted on the issue of impacts
                                                                                                                                                on farm animals, but that thousands of turbines existed across Europe, Australia and the United States, and
                                                                                                                                                the issue did not appear to have surfaced.
                                                                                                                                                • Observed that they indicated having submitted numerous comment cards, however wpd had not record of
                                                                                                                                                receiving them. Suggested that they may have mistaken the Springwood project for a different development.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                regulations, and that various Ministries would be reviewing wpd’s REA application for ensure that all
                                                                                                                                                requirements had been met.
                                                                                                                                                •Explained that in discussion with the leadership of Oppose Belwood prior to the open house, wpd agreed to
                                                                                                                                                conduct flicker tests for those dwellings immediately adjacent to our project site, using professional wind
                                                                                                                                                project software.
                                                                                                                                                • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                                                                                                                                no evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected property values or cumulative home
                                           •Stated that property value was of utmost concern, and that they remain unconvinced by the           sales.
                                           studies presented by wpd.                                                                            • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                           •Expressed concern regarding potential impacts on equines and their trainers, as it was “widely      World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
                                           accepted in the equine community that noise, shadow flicker, and visual impact would have            REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine – the figure used in calculations to
                                           adverse and dangerous effects on the equine community.”                                              ensure compliance.
                                           •Asked if wpd was prepared to sign a property values guarantee for them and their neighbours.        • Explained that natural heritage features were inventoried and assessed and potential impacts from the
                                           •Stated that noise had not been adequately addressed. Indicated that wpd should do the study         project to wildlife and wildlife habitat within the Project Location were identified within the Natural Heritage
4-Nov-                                     and tell her how much noise would be heard on her property, and to what degree her animals           Assessment and Environmental Assessment Report. Stated that provincially accepted protocols and
           2-Dec-2011    email
2011                                       were to be affected by low frequency noise.                                                          guidance were applied to determine the existence and boundaries of all natural features found within 120 m of
                                           •Expressed concern that her family might not be able to sleep at night, in light of “evidence        the Project Location, and that the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) has confirmed that the
                                           submitted at the health tribunal regarding the effects of noise and light pollution”.                determination of natural features and the evaluation of their significance was completed according to
                                           •Expressed that visual impact had not been adequately addressed. Stated that, no mitigation          procedures established or accepted by MNR.
                                           strategies had been discussed with the property owners of surrounding trails.                        • Explained that the MNR had established mandatory requirements for post-construction monitoring of bat
                                           •Stated that the bird and bat studies were failures, as local colonies of birds, bats and raptures   mortality. A threshold of 10 bats/turbine/year had been established, and post-construction monitoring for bat
                                           were not identified.                                                                                 mortality would occur at the Springwood Wind facility in accordance with standard protocols established by
                                           • Stated that wpd would be profiting with no local benefit to the community.                         MNR.
                                                                                                                                                • Provided an overview of the public consultation process to date, and the various opportunities for the public
                                                                                                                                                to express concern, ask questions or voice either support or opposition. Explained that wpd undertook a
                                                                                                                                                calling initiative in the vicinity of the Springwood project to reach out to residents to ensure they were aware of
                                                                                                                                                the project, to answer any questions or concerns, and to make sure they knew how to contact wpd. Explained
                                                                                                                                                that this exercise went beyond the requirement of the REA process in a sincere attempt on our part to ensure
                                                                                                                                                people were aware of our project and how to provide feedback
                                                                                                                                                •Explained that under the Green Energy Act, there is a minimum 50%. domestic content requirement.
                                                                                                                                                •Explained that the project’s expected output would be equivalent to the power use of 1980 homes
                                                                                                                                                •Explained that wpd intends to use competitively priced local suppliers as much as possible, and will develop
                                                                                                                                                a tendering process that gives added weight to contractors that use local labour and supplies.
                                           • Local resident wrote to register her opposition to the project. This was the same letter the
                                                                                                                                                • Thanked her for her reply and said her comments would be included in the REA approval application
                                           person wrote on Sept 23, 2010.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained the REA process and review stage that the project must go through before receiving final
                                           • She feels that the majority of residents are opposed to the project and that they have weighed
                                                                                                                                                approval.
                                           the benefits and risks.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project will adhere to the guidelines put in place by the Ministry of Environment and noted
                                           • She feels that Ontario is ignoring the experiences and recommendations of other jurisdictions
                                                                                                                                                the setback and sound thresholds were similar to those proposed by the WHO Europe and upheld by Ontario
                                           including the WHO with regards to health matters and states that wind syndrome is real.
4-Nov-                                                                                                                                          courts. Reiterated that non-participating receptors will have sounds values at 40dBA or lower
           1-Dec-2011    email             • She wants a system to be put into place to compensate landowners for the loss in property
2011                                                                                                                                            • Mentioned the RE/MAX market trend report that found farm values had increased even in areas such as
                                           value.
                                                                                                                                                Chatham-Kent where turbines have been installed for some time.
                                           • She feels that much more research needs to be conducted before turbines are installed.
                                                                                                                                                • Explained that all application, report, building and decommissioning costs are borne by the developer. That
                                           • She also expressed concerns about the effect of wind turbines one bat populations livestock
                                                                                                                                                developers only get paid for the energy they produce.
                                           and other animals
                                                                                                                                                • Explained the mandatory bat and bird monitoring requirements that MNR requires developers to undergo to
                                           • She also feels the turbines will destroy the peaceful rural setting in her area and surrounding
                                                                                                                                                ensure any fatalities stay under specific thresholds.
                                           community.
16-Nov-                                    • Stated that she was upset with the responses that she received at the second Springwood            • Thanked her for her reply and said her comments would be included in the REA approval application
           5-Dec-2011    email
2011                                       Open House.                                                                                          • Forwarded her an email from a wpd staff member that was sent to her on November 11, 2011 that was


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  39 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date        Date          Correspondence
                                               Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                              Response Summary
Received    Responded     Type
                                               • Stated that when she asked a wpd staff as to how much energy do the wind turbines consume             responding to her question posed at the Springwood Open House about wind turbine power usage. The
                                               per month, the person was unable to answer and said they would email her back a response.               response explained that the power usage of the REpower MM92 2MW model consumed energy equivalent to
                                               • Quoting from "Scientific reports from Europe" she asked a staff member to explain that                0.28% of the energy produced from the turbine.
                                               because of the intermittent tendency of wind turbines that gas power plants would actually              • Explained that her statement about backup power for intermittent wind power assumed that the only
                                               produce higher CO2 emissions because they have to be kept on standby all the time. She                  alternative is gas power. The Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) is able to draw upon an array of
                                               claimed that the staff member responded by saying they did not know that wind turbines needed           different energy sources. Both Premier McGuinty and Opposition Leader Tim Hudak has acknowledged the
                                               t be backed up by gas plants.                                                                           need to import hydro electricity from other provinces. As well with improvements in weather forecasting, the
                                               • She also stated that staff at the Maps and Siting station was unable to answer her question           IESO is more accurately able to predict the amount of wind energy that feeds into the system.
                                               about what the flicker effects will be on residents in the area.                                        • Explained that wpd is able to determine quite accurately whether flickering will occur in a given location and
                                               • Finally she also asked as to why wpd had not included information contained in a widely               estimate how many hours a year it can happen. Indicated that as part of wpd agreement with the Oppose
                                               distributed letter that was sent to wpd on behalf an opponent of wind energy projects. The letter       Belwood leadership that they would conduct flicker assessment tests for dwellings immediately adjacent to the
                                               referred to negative health effects of wind and the responder felt that this information should be      project site
                                               disclosed as was wpd's duty.                                                                            • Indicated that wpd would include all information and correspondence including the health letter that she
                                                                                                                                                       alluded to in her letter
                                               • Wrote to express her dissatisfaction with the second Springwood Open House.
                                               • Felt that staff were unable to provide clear answers and were just quoting company lines.             • Thanked her for her reply and said her comments would be included in the REA approval application
                                               • In all she felt that wpd did nothing to answer her questions: "If anyone was under the                • Acknowledged that there are a number of different ways in which to conduct an Open House.
                                               misconception, that there might be some honest interest in people, on the part of wpd, that             • Explained that wpd chose the format they conducted at Springwood because it ensures the safety of the staff
4-Nov-
            6-Dec-2011    email                concept was swept away in such statements, that if anyone did not like the turbines, then they          and public as well as provides consistency in the information provided.
2011
                                               could move!!!! How lovely!!"                                                                            • Explained that wpd also provided a 20 minute video presentation highlighting where to find information at the
                                               • Shortly after wpd's reply on Nov 29, 2011 she responded by saying: "Thank you for your                open house and provided a siting exercise to explain turbine siting and setback requirements.
                                               response. You may have met the letter of the requirements, but you did not meet the needs of            • Thanked her again for her reply (on Dec 6, 2011) after the first initial response (Nov 29, 2011).
                                               the community"
                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked her for her email and explained that wpd "will follow the highly prescriptive process and meet the
                                               • Expressed disappointment that wpd did not mention possible illness caused by living in close
                                                                                                                                                       requirements put in place by the Ontario Government to apply for, develop and operate a wind project."
10-Nov-                                        proximity to wind turbines
            6-Dec-2011    email                                                                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on health and
2011                                           • She felt that wpd was negligent and was misleading the public. She felt that health warnings
                                                                                                                                                       other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking wind turbines to health
                                               should be included in the health process.
                                                                                                                                                       issues
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that the IESO gives priority to renewable energy but is just one source of energy that can be
                                                                                                                                                       drawn on.
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that both Premier McGuinty and Opposition Leader Tim Hudak has acknowledged the need to
                                                                                                                                                       import hydro electricity from other provinces. As well with improvements in weather forecasting, the IESO is
4-Nov-                                         • Email reply to a conversation the attendee had at the second open house asking about wind             more accurately able to predict the amount of wind energy that feeds into the system.
            6-Dec-2011    email
2011                                           contributions to the power grid                                                                         • Explained that wind turbines typically operate 65-90% of the time, but depending on the strength of the wind
                                                                                                                                                       will operate at less than capacity. Capacity is more of a function of economical turbine design. Larger
                                                                                                                                                       generators result in lower capacity factor but more electricity production.
                                                                                                                                                       • Provided details about the U.S. Department of Energy’s 20% Wind Energy by 2030 Technical Report and the
                                                                                                                                                       estimated reduction in carbon dioxide that it predicts.
                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked him for sharing his concerns, and informed him that wpd Canada must follow very prescriptive
                                                                                                                                                       processed set out by the government in order to apply for REA approval.
                                               • He expressed concern that his home was not included in the study area maps at the Open                • Explained that the maps used at the open house were the ones obtained from MNR as of the date of
                                               House, (it shows old barns that used to exist). He felt that wpd was should be using up to date         crystallization. Dwellings are then verified on site by driving the area and obtain any outstanding building
                                               maps and asked that they we reissued with up to date features.                                          permits from the municipality. The maps continue to reflect the area as they were at the time of crystallization.
                                               • He had concerns about aviation safety as he flies an ultra light. He feels that the introduction of   They landowners property was identified and while it was in the study area, it was not a site of investigation
                                               wind turbines, will but increased pressure and competition in the airspace area for the                 and as such is not required to be included in any reports.
15-Nov-11   12-Dec-2011   email
                                               aerodromes and glider clubs in the area.                                                                • Explained how the municipalities role in the REA process, but explained that that the Green energy act
                                               • He is also concerned about the disturbance that could be created by the flashing red lights on        streamlined the approvals process which was integral in encouraging wind development.
                                               top of the turbines at night on his ability to operate his observatory and conduct                      • Noted at the time of crystallization wpd was aware of two registered aerodromes in the area.
                                               astrophotography.                                                                                       • Explained that wpd consulted with Transport Canada to receive approval for lighting requirements and that
                                               • He felt that Carbon Dioxide is a non issue and as such wind turbines are not needed.                  NAV Canada and the Department of National Defense reviewed the project and had no objections. Both NAV
                                                                                                                                                       Canada and Transport Canada do review of the Springwood Project takes into consideration the impacts and
                                                                                                                                                       risks to local aviation including potential interference with air navigation systems.
                                               • Letter from local resident expressing her strong concern about health issues related to noise         • Thanked her for her email. Explained that wpd Canada will follow all guidelines put in place by the Ministry of
25-Nov-                   Letter attached to   from wind turbines. She explained that she suffers from Sleep Apnea and has had difficulty              Environment. Noted that the WHO Europe supports the 40dBA standard and the setback requirements have
            12-Dec-2011
2011                      email                sleeping. She is under the care of a specialist in a n effort to maintain quality sleep. She has        been supported by the Ontario courts. Cumulative sound levels will not exceed 40dBA. Explained that
                                               concerns that the wind turbines will disturb her sleep and cause strong health issues.                  REPower, the turbine manufacturer has guaranteed the maximum sound power level.


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       40 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date       Date          Correspondence
                                              Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                            Response Summary
Received   Responded     Type
                                              • She referred to a study by Dr, Louis Hagler that stated that "even at levels that are not harmful   • Referred her to the Noise Assessment Report available on our website.
                                              to hearing, causes the body to react to the noise with a flight or fight response with resultant
                                              nervous, hormonal and vascular changes that have far reaching consequences." She also noted
                                              that literature from the WHO guidelines says that continuous noise in excess of 30dBA cab
                                              disturb sleep.
                                              • She asked that the turbines be moved a minimum of 2km from her property to protect her
                                              health.
25-Nov-                                       • Copy of the letter received from landowner via email. Contents of letter are listed in item
           12-Dec-2011   Letter                                                                                                                     Response listed in item number 205
2011                                          number 205
                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked her for sharing his concerns, and informed him that wpd Canada must follow very prescriptive
                                              • Responder indicated she lived within 5km of the project.
                                                                                                                                                    processed set out by the government in order to apply for REA approval.
                                              • She boards horses on a property adjacent to the project site and has concerns about the noise
                                                                                                                                                    • Explained that while there has been anecdotal accounts, there has been no scientific study to date
                                              and vibration that the wind turbines produce will have on her horses. She is concerned that the
                                                                                                                                                    conducted on the issue. Explained that REpower that vibration frequencies are below 1 Hz. As well, rotor
                                              noise will cause agitation and anxiety.
                                                                                                                                                    vibrations are not to be expected because sensors would shut the blades down beforehand if unbalances
                                              • She is concerned about the effects of shadow flicker on her home, the impact on the view line
1-Nov-                                                                                                                                              were to be detected.
           12-Dec-2011   Letter               and property values. She asked us to guarantee property values.
2011                                                                                                                                                • Explained that a shadow flicker assessment could be conducted to calculate how many hours a year shadow
                                              • She is concerned about the impact the project will have in area bed and breakfasts.
                                                                                                                                                    flicker might occur. Explained that wpd would provide a shadow flicker assessment on all properties
                                              • She is concerned about the effects the project will have on the greater community.
                                                                                                                                                    immediately adjacent to the area.
                                              • She is concerned about ice throw and asked how much ice build up on the turbines.
                                                                                                                                                    • Confirmed that the project will be lit in accordance to Transport Canada's CAR621.19 regulations.
                                              • She is concerned about the impact the project will have on telecommunications including
                                                                                                                                                    • Mentioned the RE/MAX market trend report that found farm values had increased even in areas such as
                                              internet, cable and satellite.
                                                                                                                                                    Chatham-Kent where turbines have been installed for some time.
                                                                                                                                                    • Explained that the consultation report had not been submitted and that it was not required as part of the
8_Nov-                                        • Responder asked for a copy of the Consultation Report on Nov 8, 2011 and asked for it again         package of reports that was due 60 days before the last open house. Explained that it would be made
           13-Dec-2011   email
2011                                          on December 11, 2011 after she could not locate it on our website.                                    available upon submission of the REA application and will be made available on the website and at the Centre
                                                                                                                                                    Wellington Civic Centre.
                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked her for sharing his concerns, and informed him that wpd Canada must follow very prescriptive
                                              • Responder lives in the community of Belwood and expressed serious concerns about the                processed set out by the government in order to apply for REA approval
                                              project                                                                                               • Explained that regulations require that the developer examine the study area to assess local elements based
                                              • Primary concerns are on health, property values, effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat.          on the information provided from MNR. Reports are based on this information and are submitted as part of the
                                              • She believes that the Green Energy Act is a failure because of its impact on communities and        REA approval.
                                              residents.                                                                                            • In comparison the project location is the specific land where the turbines access roads and connector cables
                                              • Concerned about health and feels that there has not been enough studies on the issue. Sites         will be located. An area 120m beyond this area was also assessed. Where the 120m area was on non-
                                              the Chatham-Kent ERT and anecdotal evidence                                                           optioned lands a visual inspection was conducted from adjacent optioned lands. wpd has not and will not
                                              • On property values she felt that the case in Chatham-Kent did was not applicable for the            access lands without the landowner's permission.
                                              Belwood area because of different economies.                                                          • Detailed what wpd has identified in the study area including homes, businesses, community centres etc.
                                              • Feels that if the wind industry is confident that property values will not decrease they should     • Acknowledged that there is potential for an increase in traffic and disturbance to the surrounding land
6-Nov-                   Letter attached to
           13-Dec-2011                        provide a guarantee.                                                                                  including noise and dust, but these are expected only in the short duration.
2011                     email
                                              • Felt that the reporting on wildlife and related habitat was deficient and would leave wildlife      • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the developer's
                                              habitats unprotected.                                                                                 expense.
                                              • Pointed out that geotechnical studies were not presented in the reports and should be.              • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study and other reports on potential effects of wind
                                              • Felt that not enough attention was given to bat mortality, and felt that bird surveys were too      turbines on health and the reason behind the setback limits
                                              short and needed to be more comprehensive                                                             • Mentioned the RE/MAX market trend report that found farm values had increased even in areas such as
                                              • Wanted to know where the APRD document was and why it was not public                                Chatham-Kent where turbines have been installed for some time.
                                              • She felt that several wetlands in the study area were not consulted properly.                       • Explained the process and regulations concerning natural heritage assessment. Provincially accepted
                                              • Felt that our statement that no businesses were located inside the project area was incorrect       protocols were followed. Specific mention of the assessments on bats was provided.
                                              • Concerned about viewscape and noted that there were few options to mitigate this issue. Felt        • No candidate significant wildlife habitat fir bats was identified in the area.
                                              that it would impact quality of life.                                                                 • Explained post construction monitoring and mortality threshold requirements. A link to the MNR's Bat
                                                                                                                                                    guidelines was also provided
                                              • Landowners near the project area wrote to express their opposition to the project                   • Thanked her for her reply and said her comments would be included in the REA
                                              • Opposition based on a number of different reasons but declared that "during the consultation         • Addressed questions as to why their land property was not fully assessed. Explained that regulations
                                              process, wpd Canada and the MOE take into consideration, properly investigate, communicate,           require that the developer examine the study area to assess local elements based on the information provided
1-Nov-                                        address, and resolve through mitigation strategies and proposals, all concerns raised that could      from MNR. Reports are based on this information and are submitted as part of the REA approval.
           13-Dec-2011   Letter
2011                                          possibly result in any negative impacts with respect to the Springwood Industrial Wind Turbine        • In comparison the project location is the specific land where the turbines access roads and connector cables
                                              Project Proposal prior to filing their application."                                                  will be located. An area 120m beyond this area was also assessed. Where the 120m area was on non-
                                              • stated that they are not against responsible installation of renewable energy sources but           optioned lands a visual inspection was conducted from adjacent optioned lands. wpd has not and will not
                                              "approval of this Industrial Power Plant poses undue substantial risks to an unacceptable             access lands without the landowner's permission.


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                41 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date        Date          Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
Received    Responded     Type
                                           number of residents . . ."                                                                             • Detailed what wpd has identified in the study area including homes, businesses, community centres etc.
                                           • Concerned about the impact the project will have on their horse breeding operation, the family       • Acknowledged the existence of homes and many different business in the project area.
                                           and well being                                                                                         • Acknowledged that there is potential for an increase in traffic and disturbance to the surrounding land
                                           • concerned about visual impact, declaring that the noise and visual impact will affect their          including noise and dust, but these are expected only in the short duration.
                                           business.                                                                                              • Explained the ways in which they landowners had an opportunity to engage us. Detailed wpd engagement
                                           • Concerned about Shadow flicker impacts on their horses, children who use their facilities and        strategy (involving landowners within 1km area above the 500m requirement).
                                           their family. They want proper evaluations on shadow flicker and visual impacts completed.             • Explained that the wind turbines are tall to maximize wind energy and are likely to be seen from kilometres
                                           • Concerned about noise monitoring and MOE guidelines to how sound is measured. They want              around.
                                           assurances from the MOE that strict standards will be followed                                         • Explained mitigation methods against ice throw
                                           • They breed bats to control mosquito population. Concerned about the impact of turbines on            • Explained that shadow flicker reports can be produced to project the number of hours a given property may
                                           bats and birds and that the wildlife summary reports omitted to study everything in the study          be affected.
                                           area.                                                                                                  • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study and other reports on potential effects of wind
                                           • They want more assurance that their property/well being will not be affected by tornado              turbines on health and the reason behind the setback limits. Reinforced that wpd would follow all guidelines
                                           damage on wind turbines.                                                                               put in place by MOE
                                           • Want more information on transmission line, and impact on telecommunications
                                           • Letter sent to wpd on behalf of 13 area residents in the Springwood Project area expressing          • Explained that regulations require that the developer examine the study area to assess local elements based
                                           their opposition to the project and their specific concerns.                                           on the information provided from MNR. Reports are based on this information and are submitted as part of the
                                           • Recreation areas: the Design and Operation Report (D&O) stated that there are no recreation          REA approval.
                                           or businesses in the Project Study area other than those for agricultural use. Stated that there       • In comparison the project location is the specific land where the turbines access roads and connector cables
                                           were 2 bed and breakfasts, a veterinary clinic, an equestrian facility, and several livestock          will be located. An area 120m beyond this area was also assessed. Where the 120m area was on non-
                                           operations. "We request that the impact to recreation areas, local businesses, and livestock           optioned lands a visual inspection was conducted from adjacent optioned lands. wpd has not and will not
                                           Operations be properly evaluated and mitigation strategies be developed and proposed”                  access lands without the landowner's permission.
                                           • Airstrips: The D&O states that there are no known private or public airstrips in the project area.   • Detailed what wpd has identified dwellings in the study area including homes, businesses, community
                                           However the responders mention that there are two in the area. "We request that the impact to          centres etc.
                                           these airstrips be properly evaluated and mitigation strategies be developed and proposed."            • Acknowledged that there is potential for an increase in traffic and disturbance to the surrounding land
                                           • Tornados: Expressed dissatisfaction with D&O felt more evaluation should be needed at                including noise and dust, but these are expected only in the short duration
1-Nov-
            13-Dec-2011   Letter           tornados have been measured as high as F4 (in the D&O description, wind towers are built to            • Acknowledged that wpd is aware of two registered aerodromes in the area and explained as to why they
2011
                                           stand F2 tornados).                                                                                    should not be impacted
                                           • Visual Impact: Felt that the D&O report did not detail or evaluate visual impact enough. Also        • Acknowledged the destructive force of tornados. Explained that wind turbines are built to withstand extreme
                                           mentioned that a local assessment for shadow flicker was conducted that indicated 41                   weather conditions. wpd would develop a emergency response plan in conjunction with Wellington County
                                           properties might be impacted. They requested extensive evaluations on shadow flicker and               • Explained that the wind turbines are tall to maximize wind energy and are likely to be seen from kilometres
                                           visual impact be conducted and mitigations developed and proposed                                      around. Explained that wpd will conduct shadow flicker assessment test for residents in the immediate
                                           • Noise: Concerned that the noise impact assessment report mentions that turbine noise will still      neighbouring area
                                           be audible at many residences even when sound levels are below MOE guidelines.                         • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study and other reports on potential effects of wind
                                           • Concerned about impact on property values and anecdotal evidence that suggests negative              turbines on health and the reason behind the setback limits. Reinforced that wpd would follow all guidelines
                                           impact on land values.                                                                                 put in place by MOE
                                           • Concerned about the effects on telecommunications                                                    • Mentioned the RE/MAX market trend report that found farm values had increased even in areas such as
                                           • Concerned that there was no inclusion of the Hydro One transmission details.                         Chatham-Kent where turbines have been installed for some time.
                                                                                                                                                  • Informed responder that wpd would be happy to meet with them but that they needed to finish up contractual
                                           • Asked if it was possible to book a meeting with wpd to discuss the newly awarded FIT contract
09-Apr-10   27/05/2010    Email/Call                                                                                                              obligations with the OPA first.
                                           for the Springwood Project
                                                                                                                                                  • A scheduled a phone meeting was set at June 1, 2010 with Khlaire Parre at 9am
                                           • wpd emailed to confirm the phone meeting with the responder
31-May-10   31-May-10     Email            • Also sent a document the highlights the process wind developers must go through before a             • responder confirmed the time
                                           project is given approval.
                                           • wpd spoke with responder for about 30 minutes providing general details about the project and
                                           answered some questions about the positioning of the turbines, the approval process and noise          •Informed her that the closest participating lot line is 2km away meaning that she will be more than 2km from
01-Jun-10   01-Jun-10     Email/Call       guidelines                                                                                             the nearest turbine.
                                           • In a follow up to the call that morning, the responder sent coordinates of her home so as to
                                           determine how far away she is from the project location.
01-Jun-10   01-Jun-10     email            n/a                                                                                                    • In follow up to the earlier call wpd sent a noise guideline from the MOE to the responder
26-Jul-10   27-Jul-10     Email            • Responder asked if there were any updates on the Belwood (Springwood) project                        • Informed her that there were none to report as of yet
                                           • Email citing opposition to the Springwood Wind Project and other projects in the area.
11-Aug-10   n/a           email            • Express that there was little support in the community for these projects.                           • Thanked them for their correspondence.
                                           • Felt that the Belwood area is not appropriate for industrial operations
                                           • Follow up email to previous request from responder asking if wpd had any more information on         • Informed her that wpd is still working with Hydro One to work out the details of the transmission line. Wpd
16-Oct-11   28-Oct-10     email
                                           the transmission line.                                                                                 has no further information to give at this point.


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 42 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Stakeholder Communication Summary
  
Date        Date         Correspondence
                                           Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                         Response Summary
Received    Responded    Type
                                           • The local area resident wrote to wpd to express concerns about the potential impact the          • Thanked the person for expressing their concerns and comments about their personal health issues
                                           Springwood Project would have on his health                                                        • Explained that wpd is unaware of any scientific or medical research that has been conducted regarding ME
                                           • The person suffers from Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) and moved to the country because          and wind turbines.
                                           they found their health improved living in the country when compared to the noisy city             • Confirmed that wpd would abide by the highly prescriptive requirements put in place by the Ontario
                                           environment.                                                                                       Government.
23-Nov-11   21-Dec-11    Letter            • The person outlines the different impairments that people with ME face including Sleep           • Acknowledged the debate around health effects and wind turbines, where some beleive there are effects
                                           Dysfunction, Overload Phenomena, Motor and Perceptual Disturbances                                 while others believe that scientific evidence does not support a direct causal relationship between health and
                                           • Explained that a recent trip to the Shelburne Ontario to see the wind turbines caused the        wind turbines. Noted recent health studies by Government agencies around the world. Confirmed wpd would
                                           person to have headaches and visual problems.                                                      abide by government setbacks.
                                           • The person feels that the wpd economic benefit should not arise at the expense of the            • Informed the person that based on distance from the closted turbine to their house, sound would be no more
                                           person's health.                                                                                   than 33.7dBA. Confirmed a shadow flicket test would be conducted on their property
                                                                                                                                              • Thanked the person for expressing their concerns and comments about their personal health issues
                                           • The local area resident wrote to wpd to express concerns about the potential impact the          • explained that there is a difference between electro-magnetic field (EMF) and "dirty pollution" (stray voltage).
                                           Springwood Project would have on his health                                                        • Attached fact sheets from Health Canada and the Canadian Electricity Association to address concerns
                                           • Explained that the person suffers from severe migraines and provided examples of the             about EMF
                                           migraines she used to suffer in her office because of high frequency Electromagnetic Pollution     • Explained that the collector line connecting the proposed project to Hydro One's transmission system will be
                                           or "Dirty Electricity".                                                                            buried. Explained that this can help alleviate some of the symptoms mentioned in her letter.
                         Email with
16-Nov-11   21-Dec-11                      • She provided a link to a story about high levels of dirty electricity along transmission lines   • Noted a recent study in Europe that suggested that EMF "are not emitted on the operation of wind turbines
                         attached letter
                                           leading from wind turbines.                                                                        or they are so small that they are insignificant compared to the values to be found in other measurements in
                                           • She is worried about the effect turbines will have on her health as she hears of stories of      residential areas and homes"
                                           people getting nausea and dizziness from living near them                                          • Noted that Stary voltage is a function of how electricity is transmitted not how it is produced. Properly
                                           • She asked that our project not jepardize her health and asked that the turbvines be moved        constructed infrastructure and maintenance reduces the potential for stray voltage to occur
                                           2km away from her home.                                                                            • Confirmed wpd would be paying for the majority of costs of the upgraded transmission lines
                                                                                                                                              Confirmed wpd would follow all setback and noise requirements under the provincial guidelines

  

  

  




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  43 of 43
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
RENEWABLE ENERGY APPROVAL REPORTS
January 2012




                        Appendix E3

     Public Meeting #1 Comment/Response
                   Summary




160960606
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                    Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
                                           Type

                                                                                                                                                         • This question was emailed to us on Sept 24, 2010 and was answered by Stantec on Oct 26,
       24-Sep-10        26-Oct-10                      • Repeat question: Inquired as the impact on a tree line near their property, felt that we were   2010
                                      Comment Card
                                                       not following setback guidelines                                                                  • Explained that we were aware of the tree lines but that we were building away from them and
                                                                                                                                                         they would not be disturbed
       26-Oct-10       29-Nov-10                                                                                                                         • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                      Comment Card     • Expressed opposition to project
                                                                                                                                                         submitted as part of the REA application

                                                                                                                                                         • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
                                                                                                                                                         submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about health
       26-Oct-10       29-Nov-10                                                                                                                          • Explained the reason behind of the small group format for the open house and reason behind
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about Health
                                                                                                                                                         having small topic specific working groups
                                                       • Believed Wind energy is not green
                                                                                                                                                         • Explained that wpd provided a number of different ways in which questions could be asked or
                                                       • Did not like how wpd responded to question or the event setup
                                                                                                                                                         answered.


       26-Oct-10       29-Nov-10                       • Expressed opposition to project                                                                 • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Concerned about animals                                                                         submitted as part of the REA application


                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
       26-Oct-10       29-Nov-10                                                                                                                         • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                      Comment Card     • Concerns about wildlife and bird migration
                                                                                                                                                         submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about cost and the environment
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
       26-Oct-10       29-Nov-10                                                                                                                         • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                      Comment Card     • Did not like how wpd responded to question his questions
                                                                                                                                                         submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about the lack of public consultation

                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
                                                       • Did not like how wpd responded to question his questions
       26-Oct-10       29-Nov-10                       • Concerned about the lack of public consultation                                                 • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Concerned about Health/noise                                                                    submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about Property Value
                                                       • Concerned about Landscape

       26-Oct-10       29-Nov-10                       • Suggested that a seated open house event where people asked question to the stage would         • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                      Comment Card
                                                       have been better                                                                                  submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
       26-Oct-10       29-Nov-10                       • Felt like only misinformation was provided                                                      • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Concerned about watershed                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about Landscape

                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
       26-Oct-10       29-Nov-10                       • Did not like how wpd responded to question or the event setup could not here questions or       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                      Comment Card
                                                       answers from staff or residents                                                                   submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about tourism

                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
                                                       • Did not like how wpd responded to question or the event setup could not here questions or
       26-Oct-10       29-Nov-10                       answers from staff or residents                                                                   • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Concerned about lack of municipal control,                                                      submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Feels that wind is not green because of need for backup energy and greenhouse gas used to
                                                       make turbines


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                         1 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                 Response Summary
                                           Type

                                                                                                                                                         • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                                                                                                                         submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                                         • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
       26-Oct-10       21-Dec-10                       • Concerned about Birds
                                      Comment Card                                                                                                       health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                       • Concerned about Health
                                                                                                                                                         wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Concerned about Property Values
                                                                                                                                                         • Acknowledge the vocal opposition in the area, and also those that have voiced quite support for
                                                                                                                                                         the project

                                                                                                                                                         • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                                                                                                                         submitted as part of the REA application
       26-Oct-10       21-Dec-10                       • Stated that he saw no benefit to him for the project                                            • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years,
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Wanted to know how wind offset other power sources                                              and the relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. When accounting for subsidies other
                                                                                                                                                         sources of power cost is comparable to wind
                                                                                                                                                         • Explained how wind is given priority over other sources of power


                                                                                                                                                         • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                                                                                                                         submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                         • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                                                                                                                         health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
       26-Oct-10       21-Dec-10                       • Concerned about health and the effect of wind turbines on their livestock and milk production
                                      Comment Card                                                                                                       wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Asked why wpd continues to pursue the project with wide spread opposition
                                                                                                                                                         • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                                                                                                                         from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                         • Explained the consultation process and the opportunities that people had to add their voice to the
                                                                                                                                                         project


                                                                                                                                                         • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                       • Expressed outright opposition to the project                                                    submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Mentioned health, property values, environmental impact, but spoke at length about the cost     • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years,
                                                       of wind energy and the subsidies                                                                  and the relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. When accounting for subsidies other
       26-Oct-10       21-Dec-10                       • Wanted to know who was responsible for decommissioning                                          sources of power cost is comparable to wind
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Why were the turbines not located in northern Ontario in a more sparse area                     • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the
                                                       • Inquired as to the changes that will be made to the roads                                       developer's expense.
                                                       • Inquired as to whether the transmission lines will be buried or above ground                    • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Inquired as to who will pay for the loss in property values                                     from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                         • Addressed their concerns about stray voltage and explained mitigation


                                                                                                                                                         • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                                                                                                                         submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Main concerns are health and community involvement in the decision making process               • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
       26-Oct-10       21-Dec-10
                                      Comment Card     • Inquired who would compensate them for Health costs, property values, Environmental             health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                       destruction, loss of farm land                                                                    wind turbines to health issues
                                                                                                                                                         • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                                                                                                                         from wind turbines on property values.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                2 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                               Response Summary
                                           Type

                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                                                                                                                        submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Concerns about Health,
       26-Oct-10       21-Dec-10                                                                                                                        health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                      Comment Card     • Concerns about Property Values
                                                                                                                                                        wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Concerns about cost effectiveness and that wind is not green
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years,
                                                       • She feels that the community is being ignored and is not being consulted
                                                                                                                                                        and the relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. When accounting for subsidies other
                                                                                                                                                        sources of power cost is comparable to wind


                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
                                                       • He felt that the open house was a waste of time and that he did not get any of his questions
                                                                                                                                                        submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       answered. Wanted a Q and A session instead of a small group setting
       26-Oct-10       21-Dec-10                                                                                                                        • Explained the decisions behind the open house format
                                      Comment Card     • Felt that the community had no say,
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the
                                                       • Asked if there was a way to store electricity
                                                                                                                                                        developer's expense.
                                                       • Inquired as to what happened to the turbines after the 20 year contract period
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained how setbacks are regulated.

                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to the project, attached a letter to the open house comment card          submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerns about her property being in the study area, because of the forest area she has        • Explained that the project map in the media notice was bigger than the study area to give
       12-Nov-10        4-Jan-11      Comment Card
                                                       around her.                                                                                      residences a frame of reference of the project
                                      and letter
                                                       • Concerns about the overall effect it has on the community                                      • Acknowledged that many are upset with the lack of control municipalities have over the project.
                                                       • Informed us of the extreme weather that is present in the area                                 Explained that the rules were changed to streamline the process across the province. Expressed
                                                                                                                                                        that there was still many opportunities to consult.

                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked him for attending the open house and supporting the project, informed him that his
                                                       • Supported our project, suggested that we find a different way to educate people about the
       26-Oct-10        4-Jan-11                                                                                                                        comments will be submitted as part of the REA application
                                      Comment Card     wind turbines. Indicated that he felt most people did not know what they were are really
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained the different ways in which wpd and the government, and the OPA were trying to
                                                       opposing wind farms
                                                                                                                                                        educate the public


                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                                                                                                                        submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                                                                                                                        health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                       • Concerned about cleanup if there is liquid spilt from turbine
                                                                                                                                                        wind turbines to health issues
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about wildlife, Osprey nesting sight
                                      Comment Card                                                                                                      • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Had questions about transmission poles and road construction effects on surrounding land
                                                                                                                                                        from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       • Asked why the study area is so wide
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained that we are still working with Hydro One to determine power line locations and road
                                                                                                                                                        allowance changes, details will be made public 60 days before the open house
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained that the project map in the media notice was bigger than the study area to give
                                                                                                                                                        residences a frame of reference of the project


                                                                                                                                                        • Explained that we are still working with Hydro One to determine power line locations and road
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Inquired as to the costs, placement and size of the power lines
                                      Comment Card                                                                                                      allowance changes, details will be made public 60 days before the open house
                                                       • Inquired as to what compensation was available to landowners in the area
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained the economic benefits of the project in the area




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                               3 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                           Response Summary
                                           Type


                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                                                                                                                    submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
                                                                                                                                                    • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Concerned about the lack of public consultation
                                                                                                                                                    health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about Health/noise
                                      Comment Card                                                                                                  wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Concerned about Property Value
                                                                                                                                                    • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Concerned about Landscape
                                                                                                                                                    from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       • Concerned about wildlife and livestock
                                                                                                                                                    • Explained that the wildlife and environmental assessment are part of the process of which the
                                                                                                                                                    results will be made available 60 days before the last open house


                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project                                                            submitted as part of the REA application
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about Property Value                                                             • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Concerned about Livestock                                                                  from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       • Concerned about responsibility for decommissioning                                         • Explained the decommissioning process, and creation of an escrow account, to fund the closure
                                                                                                                                                    of the project

                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
                                                                                                                                                    submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about the lack of public/ municipal consultation
                                                                                                                                                    • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about Health/noise
                                      Comment Card                                                                                                  health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                       • Concerned about Property Value
                                                                                                                                                    wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Concerned about Landscape
                                                                                                                                                    • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Concerned about wildlife and livestock
                                                                                                                                                    from wind turbines on property values.


                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                                                                                                                    submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                    • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Concerned about Health/noise                                                               health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about Property Value                                                             wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Had questions about transmission poles and road construction effects on surrounding land   • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                                                                                                                    from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                    • Explained that we are still working with Hydro One to determine power line locations and road
                                                                                                                                                    allowance changes, details will be made public 60 days before the open house

                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                    submitted as part of the REA application
                                      Comment Card     • Concerns about wildlife and bird migration
                                                                                                                                                    • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Concerned about Property Value
                                                                                                                                                    from wind turbines on property values.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                           4 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                              Response Summary
                                           Type


                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project                               submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about the lack of public consultation               • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Concerned about Health/noise                                  health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about Property Value                                wind turbines to health issues
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Concerned about Landscape                                     • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Concerned about lack of municipal control                     from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       • Concerned about cost                                          • Acknowledged that many are upset with the lack of control municipalities have over the project.
                                                       • Concerned about effect on wildlife, birds and bats            • Explained that the turbines will provide an increase in tax revenue, and provide farmers in the
                                                                                                                       area a steady income over the years




                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                       • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Concerned about the lack of public consultation
                                                                                                                       health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                       • Concerned about Health/noise
                                                                                                                       wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Concerned about Property Value
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                       • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about Landscape
                                                                                                                       from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       • Concerned about lack of municipal control
                                                                                                                       • Acknowledged that many are upset with the lack of control municipalities have over the project.
                                                       • Had questions about the location of the transmission towers
                                                                                                                       • Explained that we are still working with Hydro One to determine power line locations and road
                                                       • Concerned about effect on wildlife, birds and bats
                                                                                                                       allowance changes, details will be made public 60 days before the open house
                                                                                                                       • Explained that the turbines will provide an increase in tax revenue, and provide farmers in the
                                                                                                                       area a steady income over the years



                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                       • Thanked him for his support and noted that many of those that do support the project are not as
                                      Comment Card     • Expressed support for the project
                                                                                                                       vocal.
                                                                                                                       • Noted that wpd's responsibility was to ensure the public was aware of the project and provide
                                                                                                                       and reporting information a minimum of 60 days before the last open house


                                                                                                                       • Thanked him for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be submitted as
                                                                                                                       part of the REA application
                                                                                                                       • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
                                                                                                                       health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about Health/Noise
                                      Comment Card                                                                     wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Concerned about Property Value
                                                                                                                       • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Concerned about extreme weather damage-turbines
                                                                                                                       from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                       • Acknowledged that we are aware of the extreme weather that can happen in area, explained
                                                                                                                       turbine safety features




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                              5 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                               Response Summary
                                           Type


                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responders for attending the open house, informed them that their comments will be
                                                                                                                                                        submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Concerned about impact on agriculture
                                                                                                                                                        health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                       • Concerned about Health/noise
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                        wind turbines to health issues
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about Property Value
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Concerned about Landscape
                                                                                                                                                        from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       • Concerned about lack of municipal control
                                                                                                                                                        • Acknowledged that many are upset with the lack of control municipalities have over the project.
                                                       • Asked why wpd was only interested in building wind with Government subsidy and not before
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained that the turbines will provide an increase in tax revenue, and provide farmers in the
                                                                                                                                                        area a steady income over the years



                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Wanted to see a property value study that was conducted in a more rural area.
                                      Comment Card                                                                                                      submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Inquired as to how much income in tax dollars the project would provide for the municipality
                                                                                                                                                        • Commented on the public consultation process and ways to provide input about the project


                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                                                                                                                        submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                                                                                                                        health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about Health/noise
                                      Comment Card                                                                                                      wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Concerned about Property Value
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Concerned about wildlife
                                                                                                                                                        from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds and other wildlife referenced the policies set out by
                                                                                                                                                        the MNR


                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
                                                                                                                                                        submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                                                                                                                        health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Explained that wpd's job was to inform and the public aware of the project. Explained the      wind turbines to health issues
                                      Comment Card
                                                       economic benefits of the project                                                                 • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                                                                                                                        from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                        • Acknowledged that many are upset with the lack of control municipalities have over the project.
                                                                                                                                                        The rules were changed to streamline the process. Expressed that there was still many
                                                                                                                                                        opportunities to consult.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                               6 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                         Response Summary
                                           Type



                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                                                                                                                  submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                                                                                                                  health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                                                                                                                  wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Concerned about Health
                                                                                                                                                  • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Concerned about Property Value
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                  from wind turbines on property values.
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about Landscape
                                                                                                                                                  • Acknowledged that many are upset with the lack of control municipalities have over the project.
                                                       • Concerned about mechanical or electrical risks
                                                                                                                                                  Explained that the rules were changed to streamline the process across the province. Expressed
                                                       • Concerned about impact on agricultural products
                                                                                                                                                  that there was still many opportunities to consult.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the
                                                                                                                                                  developer's expense.
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained wind efficiency, capacity factors
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained the mitigation strategies behind stray voltage




                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project                                                          submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about Health/noise                                                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about Property Value                                                           health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Concerned about environment                                                              wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Had questions about turbine size and output                                              • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Will she be compensated if she suffers from health effects or devaluation of the land    from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                  • Answered her questions about the capacity output and the size of the turbine height



                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project                                                          submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about Health/noise                                                             • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about Property Value                                                           health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                       • Concerned about livestock and wildlife mentioning the birds of prey in the area          wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Questioned as to why they were not put on non-ag land                                    • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                                                                                                                  from wind turbines on property values.



                                                                                                                                                  • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                  submitted as part of the REA application
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about Health/noise
                                                                                                                                                  • Explained that wpd's job was to inform and the public aware of the project. Explained the
                                                       • Concerned that the community is being ignored and that they have no say in the process
                                                                                                                                                  economic benefits of the project




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                         7 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                    Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                             Response Summary
                                           Type


                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                       • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project                                                               health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about Health/noise, environment and community consultation                          wind turbines to health issues
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Concerned that the area is to populated to allow for wind turbines                            • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       •Wanted to know what health and property value studies would be conducted and by whom           from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that wpd's job was to inform and the public aware of the project. Explained the
                                                                                                                                                       economic benefits of the project
                                                                                                                                                       • Acknowledged the opposition in the area to the project


                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                       • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Concerned about the effect on health on humans and animals
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                       health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about cost
                                                                                                                                                       wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Asked whether we had starting building the turbines or if we were still proposing the sites
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years,
                                                                                                                                                       and the relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. When accounting for subsidies other
                                                                                                                                                       sources of power cost is comparable to wind


                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
                                                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                       • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Expressed opposition to project
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                       health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about Health and setbacks
                                                                                                                                                       wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Felt that the information presented at the Open house was not relevant for the area
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years,
                                                                                                                                                       and the relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. When accounting for subsidies other
                                                                                                                                                       sources of power cost is comparable to wind

                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Felt that it was a bad area to locate and we should move somewhere less populated.            submitted as part of the REA application
                                      Comment Card
                                                       Suggested alternative locations                                                                 • Explained that wpd's job was to inform and the public aware of the project. Explained the
                                                                                                                                                       economic benefits of the project


                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responders for attending the open house, informed them that their comments will be
                                                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                       • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about Health/noise                                                                  health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Concerned about Property Value                                                                wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Question why we had chosen to build in the Wellington County area                             • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                                                                                                                       from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that months of tests revealed suitable wind conditions in the Wellington County area


                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
                                                        • Concerned about property values, explained that our turbines would make it impossible to
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                      Comment Card     expand on the land that they already have
                                                                                                                                                       • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Indicated that they were applying for a building permit that may impact our project
                                                                                                                                                       from wind turbines on property values.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                              8 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                              Response Summary
                                           Type


                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about surface water and drainage onto their property                                • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds and referenced the policies set out by the MNR
       1-Dec-10        25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about wildlife                                                                      • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Concerned about Landscape                                                                     developer's expense.
                                                       • Did not think the Open house adequately answered her questions. She did not like the layout   • Explained that an environmental impact assessment was part of the application. All possible
                                                                                                                                                       impacts and mitigation methods would be used
                                                                                                                                                       • Acknowledged the opposition in the area to the project



                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to the project                                                           submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about health felt that evidence to date proved that there is a health issue         • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Concerned about property value, wanted us to guarantee that selling their house will not be   health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                      Comment Card
                                                       difficult                                                                                       wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • She did not feel the open house addressed her concerns, and did not feel that the community   • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       was involved enough in the decision making process and were being ignored                       from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained we are aware of the opposition and explained our role in informing the public


                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                       • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                                       • Concerned about health wanted to know what reports we could provide to disprove her
                                                                                                                                                       • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       health concerns
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                       health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about property value, wanted us to guarantee that selling their house will not be
                                                                                                                                                       wind turbines to health issues
                                                       difficult
                                                                                                                                                       • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • She did not feel the open house addressed her concerns, and did not feel that the community
                                                                                                                                                       from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       was involved enough in the decision making process
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained we are aware of the opposition and explained our role in informing the public


                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
                                                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                       • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Had concerns about the health effects
                                                                                                                                                       health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                       • Inquired as to what are the positive and negative environmental impacts will be
                                      Comment Card                                                                                                     wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • inquired as to the size of the transmission wires and who was responsible for building them
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained requirements surrounding decommissioning planning, and that it would be at the
                                                       and eventually taking down the project
                                                                                                                                                       developer's expense.
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that there will be an environmental assessment available 60 days before the last open
                                                                                                                                                       house


                                                                                                                                                       • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that the comments will be
                                                                                                                                                       submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that wpd was still in the early planning stages, and some items must be worked out
                                                       • Had concerns about the lack of community and citizen involvement in the process
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                       before we could determine and provide the information requested.
                                      Comment Card     • Questioned why they were placed in a high population area
                                                                                                                                                       • Acknowledged that many are upset with the lack of control municipalities have over the project.
                                                       • Concerns about using up agricultural land
                                                                                                                                                       Explained that the rules were changed to streamline the process across the province. Expressed
                                                                                                                                                       that there was still many opportunities to consult.
                                                                                                                                                       Acknowledged the opposition in the area




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                              9 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                               Response Summary
                                           Type

                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that the comments will be
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                        submitted as part of the REA application
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned about setbacks, thought they were inadequate
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study and other reports on potential effects of
                                                                                                                                                        wind turbines on health and the reason behind the setback limits


                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him that his comments will be
                                                                                                                                                        submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Concerns about turbines not being green,                                                       health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                       • Concerns about Health                                                                          wind turbines to health issues
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11
                                      Comment Card     • Concerns about Property Values                                                                 • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Concerns about effects on livestock                                                            from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       • Concerns about cost                                                                            • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years,
                                                                                                                                                        and the relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. When accounting for subsidies other
                                                                                                                                                        sources of power cost is comparable to wind
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained environmental requirements under O. Reg. 359/09



                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed her that her comments will be
                                                                                                                                                        submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Expressed opposition to the project
                                                                                                                                                        health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                       • Concerns about Health, shadow flicker
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11                                                                                                                        wind turbines to health issues
                                      Comment Card     • Concerns about Property Values
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Concerns about effects on migrating birds
                                                                                                                                                        from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       • Has had problems selling her land, her real estate agent says it is because of wind turbines
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds and referenced the policies set out by the MNR
                                                                                                                                                        • Offered to provide a shadow flicker assessment on her property.
                                                                                                                                                        • Acknowledged the presence of the organized opposition




                                                                                                                                                        • Thanked responder for attending the open house, informed him/her that their comments will be
                                                                                                                                                        submitted as part of the REA application
                                                                                                                                                        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study on potential effects of wind turbines on
                                                       • Expressed opposition to the project                                                            health and other reports that have similar conclusions, that there was no scientific evidence linking
                                                       • Concerns about Health, stray voltage                                                           wind turbines to health issues
                                                       • Concerns about Property Values                                                                 • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
       26-Oct-10       25-Feb-11
                                      Comment Card     • Concerns about effects on wildlife                                                             from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       • Concerns about the effect on agricultural land                                                 • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years,
                                                       • Inquired the meaning of study area                                                             and the relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. When accounting for subsidies other
                                                       • Informed us that they were nesting hawks on their land                                         sources of power cost is comparable to wind
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained that the project map in the media notice was bigger than the study area to give
                                                                                                                                                        residences a frame of reference of the project
                                                                                                                                                        • Explained relative impacts on bats and birds and referenced the policies set out by the MNR


       26-Oct-10          n/a                          • 24 Comment cards, 1 supportive, 22 expressed concerns or opposition, 1 expressed no
                                      Comment Cards                                                                                                     Document contains POH comment cards where no name or contact information was provided
                                                       opinion




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                               10 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                    Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                  Response Summary
                                           Type



                                                                                                                                                            • Apologized for the delay in response.
                                                                                                                                                            • Attempted to help Shannon understand that those with photosensitive epilepsy may experience
                                                                                                                                                            seizures due to light flickering over 3Hz, which would equate to 60 revolutions per minute for a 3
                                                       • Felt that all wind projects should cease due to insufficient studies regarding potential impacts   bladed turbine, and that the maximum speed of rotation for the REpower MM92s was 15 rpm.
                                                       on the environment.                                                                                  • Explained the studies that have to be undertaken regarding potential impacts on the environment
       26-Oct-10        24-Oct-11                      • Concerned with key issues including property values, noise, health, visual impacts, impacts        prior to approval, and that even should the project be approved, post construction monitoring was
                                      Comment Card
                                                       on tourism, wildlife, livestock, environment, and cost of electricity.                               required, which could result in the implementation of mitigation measures.
                                                       • Greatest concern was regarding her daughter who had been diagnosed with epilepsy, and              • Presented a number of comprehensive studies regarding property values and wind turbines in an
                                                       the potential for wind turbines to trigger seizures.                                                 effort to help her see what has happened elsewhere.
                                                                                                                                                            • Explained that the key consideration regarding health effects was the noise level, and explained
                                                                                                                                                            the requirements that must be met.
                                                                                                                                                            • Acknowledge the opposition in the community, and also the support.




                                                                                                                                                            • Apologized for the delay in response
                                                                                                                                                            • Attempted to reassure her that there would be no impact on groundwater as a result of the
                                                       • Felt that given the nature of the land as a prime agricultural area, that roads should not be
                                                                                                                                                            project, explaining that geotechnical assessment is performed to ensure that project infrastructure
                                                       built and turbines should not be erected as they may restrict the flow of water and interfere
                                                                                                                                                            is designed and built in ways that are suitable for the area. Outlined water management practices
                                                       with crop growth.
       26-Oct-10        24-Oct-11                                                                                                                           to be implemented during project construction.
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned with bald eagles being affected.
                                                                                                                                                            • Referenced studies on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact
                                                       • Felt that property values would go down, and that wind energy was too costly
                                                                                                                                                            from wind turbines on property values.
                                                       • Asked how wpd planned to protect tile drained land
                                                                                                                                                            • Explained the studies that have to be undertaken regarding potential impacts on the environment
                                                       • Asked is wpd would live in the study area
                                                                                                                                                            prior to approval, and that even should the project be approved, post construction monitoring was
                                                                                                                                                            required, which could result in the implementation of mitigation measures.




                                                                                                                                                            • Apologized for the delay in response.
                                                       • Concerned that the project will cause loss of congressional members for the local parish.          • Attempted to explain what local benefits may be accrued from the project. Explained the 50%
                                                       • Asked whether or not there were any mineral or aggregate claims on the proposed project            local content requirements, and that wpd intends to use competitively priced local suppliers as
                                                       lands, and whether this would affect the decision to locate the project in the area.                 much as possible, adding weight to bidding contractors that use local labour and supplies.
       26-Oct-10        24-Oct-11                      • Concerned with potential impacts on property values in the area, stating that studies from the     Explained that the project would also result in an increase in tax revenue for the local municipality.
                                      Comment Card
                                                       US were irrelevant.                                                                                  • Provided some insight into the Canadian real estate market, showing that property values in
                                                       • Asked what wpd would offer the community. Gave examples of businesses supporting minor             Chatham-Kent, where wind turbines have been installed for some time, had actually increased.
                                                       teams, and explained that the community was attempting to build a new hospital in Fergus.            Explained that farmers and rural landowners are using wind projects to supplement their income in
                                                       • Concerned with the use of agricultural land for wind projects.                                     a reliable way over a long period of time.
                                                                                                                                                            • Explained what factors tend to impact the decision of where to site a wind farm.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    11 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                    Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                 Response Summary
                                           Type



                                                                                                                                                            • Apologized for the delay in response
                                                                                                                                                            • Told him that wpd had checked and that his home was approximately 750m from the nearest
                                                                                                                                                            turbine.
                                                                                                                                                            • Expressed understanding that there was a great deal of information available regarding wind
                                                                                                                                                            turbines and health, and that often folks will rely on popular literature to inform themselves.
                                                       • Felt that distances of turbines from houses, barns and livestock were insufficient. Concerned      Provided information on peer-reviewed reports regarding health and wind turbines, and explained
                                                       about the health of family and livestock.                                                            that wpd is required to remain below noise thresholds that comply with the World Health
                                                       • Concerned that the market values of properties will be negatively affected.                        Organization's guidelines on nighttime noise.
       26-Oct-10        24-Oct-11
                                      Comment Card     • Concerned regarding stray voltage.                                                                 • Explained the studies that have to be undertaken regarding potential impacts on the environment
                                                       • Felt that the wind project would have negative effects on birds and bats which should be           prior to approval, and that even should the project be approved, post construction monitoring was
                                                       considered.                                                                                          required, which could result in the implementation of mitigation measures.
                                                       • Concerned about potential negative health effects,                                                 • Explained to Dave that there would be no impact on groundwater as a result of the project,
                                                                                                                                                            explaining that geotechnical assessment is performed to ensure that project infrastructure is
                                                                                                                                                            designed and built in ways that are suitable for the area. Outlined water management practices to
                                                                                                                                                            be implemented during project construction.
                                                                                                                                                            • Presented a number of comprehensive studies regarding property values and wind turbines in an
                                                                                                                                                            effort to help him see what has happened elsewhere.




                                                                                                                                                            • Apologized for the delay in response
                                                                                                                                                            • Expressed understanding that there was a great deal of information available regarding wind
                                                                                                                                                            turbines and health, and that often folks will rely on popular literature to inform themselves.
       26-Oct-10        25-Oct-11                      • Stated that the local environment did not support turbines.                                        Provided information on peer-reviewed reports regarding health and wind turbines, and explained
                                      Comment Card
                                                       • Asked who was paying for health effects and property losses.                                       that wpd is required to remain below noise thresholds that comply with the World Health
                                                                                                                                                            Organization's guidelines on nighttime noise.
                                                                                                                                                            • Presented a number of comprehensive studies regarding property values and wind turbines in an
                                                                                                                                                            effort to help him see what has happened elsewhere.



                                                       • Felt that the information from the Open House was one-sided.
                                                       • Stated that "The green strip along the boundary of Lot 19 and 20 is situated from 2nd Line to
                                                       the 3rd Live without interruption."                                                                  • Apologized for the delay in response.
       26-Oct-10        25-Oct-11                      • Referenced an article that quotes the Chief Medical Officer of Health's report on wind             • Explained that wpd would follow the guidelines set by the Ministry of the Environment regarding
                                      Comment Card
                                                       turbines and health. Stated that as the minimum setback is 550m, and that it should increase         minimum distances for wind turbines. The key factor of course being the sound level . Provided
                                                       with each additional turbine, that project setbacks should be greater thatn 550m.                    Dieter with where to find the Noise Assessment Report.
                                                       • Asked to see a chart of noise level distribution from the project turbines at distances of 550m,
                                                       750m, and 1400m.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                               12 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                 Response Summary
                                           Type



                                                                                                                                                          • Apologized for the delay in response.
                                                       • Expressed dissapointment that the Open House was not held before wod spoke with farmers.         • Explained to Therese the studies that have to be undertaken regarding potential impacts on the
                                                       • Was concerned that the community would lose many types of birds.                                 environment prior to approval, and that even should the project be approved, post construction
       26-Oct-10        25-Oct-11                      • Expressed concern that the tax payers were paying for the turbines and then having to live by    monitoring was required, which could result in the implementation of mitigation measures.
                                      Comment Card
                                                       them.                                                                                              • Explained that the cost for renewable energy projects, from development to construction to
                                                       • Asked how much each turbine cost, and asked if excess power went into the ground when            production, were born by the developer. And that no funds flowed to the developer until the
                                                       the grid was full.                                                                                 electricity was supplied to the grid. Explained that the 13.5c/kwh was competitive with other forms
                                                                                                                                                          of newly constructed generation, and that the IESO managed the operation of the grid.




                                                       • Stated that most information presented at the Open House was not true.
                                                       • Stated that bald eagles nested in the area, a water well acquifer was below it, and species at
                                                       risk lived within it.
                                                       • Concerned about the price of electricity.
       26-Oct-10        26-Oct-11
                                      Comment Card     • Stated that wind is not a clean technology, that the REA process does not have stringent
                                                       environmental approvals compared to the Planning Act and other legislation.
                                                       • Asked what plans were sought from the municipality.
                                                       • Stated that the nature of sound from turbines was different than background sound.
                                                       • Stated that sound modeling was not accurate


       26-Oct-10        31-Oct-11
                                      Comment Card




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                               13 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 1 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
                                      Correspondence
     Date Received   Date Responded                                                    Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                Response Summary
                                           Type




                                                       • Asked why the community was not canvassed prior to the meeting.                                  • Apologized for the delay in response.
                                                       • Asked how sites are selected                                                                     • Explained that the studies required for REA application completed to date could be found on the
                                                       • Asked whether costs relating to transportation of turbines will be borne by the company.         website. Included a copy of the reports on a CD as well.
                                                       • Asked about the issue of torsional flexing                                                       • Explained how projects are sited, including what necessary components must be present in order
                                                       • Asked what the height of the turbines was.                                                       for a project to work. Explained the need for a good wind regime, interested landowners, ability to
                                                       • Asked if there were any restrictions on the height of turbines, and if so who determined this,   connect to the provincial electricity grid, and the required considerations when determining the
                                                       • Asked how long the turbines would last.                                                          exact location of each turbine.
                                                       • Asked what the maintenance program was.                                                          • Provided information about the proposed turbines to be used, including the life of their use for the
                                                       • Asked about effects on the turbine relating to winter conditions.                                project, safety mechanisms with regards to winter weather.
                                                       • Asked for specifics with respect to ice shedding                                                 • Explained that wpd was responsible for the decommissioning of the project, that an escrow
                                                       • Asked if the turbines could "withstand a tornado, micro burst, or wind sheer"                    account managed by a third party had been set aside specifically for that purpose, and that a
                                                       • Asked if the turbines were constructed to withstand earthquakes                                  Decommissioning Plan Report was a part of the REA application.
                                                       • Asked what the decommissioning plan for the project would be                                     • Referred back to the Design and Operations Report for more information on the maintenance of
       26-Oct-10        31-Oct-11                                                                                                                         the project.
                                      Comment Card     • Asked "if the company that owns the wind turbines is foreign how it going to be aware of the
                                                       local Canadian Issues"                                                                             • Explained the studies that have to be undertaken regarding potential impacts on the
                                                       • Asked "what percent of the turbines will have foreign owners"                                    environment prior to approval, and that even should the project be approved, post construction
                                                       • Asked about local landing strips                                                                 monitoring was required, which could result in the implementation of mitigation measures.
                                                       • Asked how the local environment would be affected                                                • Presented a number of comprehensive studies regarding property values and wind turbines in an
                                                       • Asked who's responsibility it was to account foot changes in property values                     effort to help paint a picture of what has happened elsewhere.
                                                       • Asked if there had been any studies done regarding property values in other areas                • Expressed understanding that there was a great deal of information available regarding wind
                                                       Asked why the company wished to use wind energy specifically and instead of other sources          turbines and health, and that often folks will rely on popular literature to inform themselves.
                                                       • Asked what the actual cost difference was between wind and alternatives                          Provided information on peer-reviewed reports regarding health and wind turbines, and explained
                                                       • Asked what the environmental footprint of the project was.                                       that wpd is required to remain below noise thresholds that comply with the World Health
                                                       • Asked what research had been done on bald eagles in the area                                     Organization's guidelines on nighttime noise.
                                                       • Asked if wpd had received the appropriate approvals from NAVCAN                                  • Explained that the costs for renewable energy projects, from development to construction to
                                                                                                                                                          production, were borne by the developer. And that no funds flowed to the developer until the
                                                                                                                                                          electricity was supplied to the grid. Explained that the 13.5c/kwh was competitive with other forms
                                                                                                                                                          of newly constructed generation, and that the IESO managed the operation of the grid.




  




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  14 of 14
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
RENEWABLE ENERGY APPROVAL REPORTS
January 2012




                        Appendix E4

     Public Meeting #2 Comment/Response
                   Summary




160960606
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                    Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                          Response Summary


                                                                                                                                                            •Requested to be sent the Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan
                                               •Attended Final Public Meeting                                                                               •Explained that the environmental effects monitoring plan had been developed in accordance with the
                                               •Requested to be sent the Environmental Effects Monitoring Plan                                              Ministry of Natural Resources Bird and Bat Guidelines
     4-Nov-11      7-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                          •Provided a copy of the EEMP


                                                                                                                                                            • Explained that wpd did not have details surrounding the line upgrade, as Hydro One had taken ownership.
                                                                                                                                                            Suggested that questions regarding the upgrade should be directed to Hydro One.
                                                                                                                                                            • In terms of cost, explained that if the upgrade to the transmission is simply to accommodate electricity
                                                                                                                                                            generated by a project, then it falls to the developer to cover that cost. If, on the other hand, the upgrade
                                                                                                                                                            was required regardless of the new wind project, then the cost is borne by the network, and the developer of
                                               • Asked for clarification regarding the connection line, specifically regarding ownership, cost, and stray
                                                                                                                                                            the wind project covers a portion of that cost. The upgrade to the transmission line in the Belwood area is
                                               voltage.
                                                                                                                                                            part of an upgrade to the system.
                                                                                                                                                            • Regarding stray voltage, sometimes referred to as dirty electricity, explained that it is a function of electrical
                                                                                                                                                            transmission, not in how electricity is produced. Properly constructed and maintained transmission
                                                                                                                                                            infrastructure reduces the potential for stray voltage to occur. wpd has a rigorous construction and
     4-Nov-11     29-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                          maintenance program in place for all of its projects.



                                                                                                                                                            • Thanked them for their comment card, and explained that wpd was in the process of collecting and
                                                                                                                                                            summarizing the feedback for inclusion in the REA application.
                                                                                                                                                            • Explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible human health effects, and
                                                                                                                                                            presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred to a number of reviews on
                                               • Stated that the public meeting did not have real answers.                                                  the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as approved under Ontario
                                               • Believed that the key issues included the need for more open discussion, as well as satisfactory answers   Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                               regarding health. Stated that those who have contracts for the turbines had been silenced by their           •Explained how shadow flicker manifested, and indicated that wpd had agreed with the leadership of Oppose
                                               contracts.                                                                                                   Belwood to conduct shadow tests for those dwellings immediately adjacent to the project site.
                                               •Asked why wpd would wait until after the turbines were erected to investigate flicker, noise and shadow.    • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                               •Asked what wpd’s plans were to address devalued property.                                                   wind turbines on property values.
                                               •Asked what wpd was doing to prevent the destruction of birds.                                               • Explained that under Ministry of Natural Resources guidelines for birds and bird habitat, there are
                                                                                                                                                            thresholds set for bird mortality to ensure that bird populations are maintained, and that these require three
                                                                                                                                                            year post construction monitoring. Explained that mitigation measures should they be needed could include
                                                                                                                                                            increasing the cut-in speed of the turbines, or shutting them down during certain periods. Provided
                                                                                                                                                            information as to where the NHA could be located.
                  29-Nov-11   POH2


                                                                                                                                                            • Thanked them for their correspondence, and explained that “There are certainly a number of ways to
                                                                                                                                                            conduct an open house. O. Reg. 359/09 does not specify the format of an open house.”
                                                                                                                                                             • Explained that wpd felt that the format chosen not only ensured the safety of the public and staff, but was
                                                                                                                                                            also the most effective way to achieve the spirit of the request from Oppose Belwood prior to the open house
                                                                                                                                                            – that of consistency in the information provided to the public.
                                               • Follow up to comment card, expressing that wpd staff failed to engage in discussion, and appeared to        • Explained that prior to the open house, staff were provided a review session to ensure that our responses
                                               have undergone public relations training, which was patronizing to those who have taught it. Did not feel    remained consistent – especially with commonly-raised concerns.
                                               that the public meeting served as consultation.                                                               • Stated that for the open house, a video presentation was played several times, and contained information
                                                                                                                                                            regarding the project. Explained that the presentation also contained a turbine placement exercise,
                                                                                                                                                            illustrating the number of constraints which must be taken into account. In addition, participants were able to
                                                                                                                                                            speak to the 17 team members available at various stations throughout the room, to ask questions relating to
                                                                                                                                                            their subject-matter expertise or which may have arose as a result of the presentation.
                  29-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                           • Finally, explained the objective of the comment cards for those who wished to submit a question or
                                                                                                                                                            comment post-open house.


Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       1 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                    Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                            Response Summary




                                                                                                                                                                • Thanked them for their correspondence.
                                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                                regulations.
                                                                                                                                                                • Explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible human health effects, and
                                                                                                                                                                presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred to a number of reviews on
                                                                                                                                                                the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as approved under Ontario
                                                                                                                                                                Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                               • Was impressed with the slick visual aids, the CD’s, and the handouts that were available.                      World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.
                                               • Was not impressed however, with the superficial manner with which wpd dealt with concerns.                     •Explained that modern turbines were built to shut off if the blades were to become imbalanced, for example
                                               • Expressed concerns regarding lack of proper health studies                                                     by ice buildup. Referred to a 2007 risk assessment specifically regarding icing performed by Garrad Hassan.
                                               • Stated that there was little or no protection for those living close to the turbines from ice throw, turbine   •Regarding strong winds, explained that modern wind turbines were located in the windiest areas of the
                                               collapse, lightning strikes and turbine malfunctions causing fires.                                              world and were designed to deal with serious wind conditions. Explained that the REpower MM92 was
                                               • Expressed concern regarding potential harm from tornados, environmental damage, declines in property           equipped with a lightning protection system, and was built to withstand a level 2 tornado.
                                               values, decommissioning funds, the resources required to construct a wind project, and the visual impact         • Explained that under Ministry of Natural Resources guidelines for bats and bat habitat, there are thresholds
                                               that the project would have on the rural landscape.                                                              set for bat mortality to ensure that bat populations are maintained, and that these require three year post
                                                                                                                                                                construction monitoring. Explained that mitigation measures should they be needed could include increasing
                                                                                                                                                                the cut-in speed of the turbines, or shutting them down during certain periods. Provided information as to
                                                                                                                                                                where the NHA could be located.
                                                                                                                                                                • Referenced a recent study on property values which concluded that there was no widespread impact from
                                                                                                                                                                wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                                •Explained that the developer is required to decommission the wind turbines at their own expense, and that
                                                                                                                                                                wpd establishes an escrow account which would cover the estimated cost. Explained that these monies were
                                                                                                                                                                controlled by a third party.
     6-Nov-11     29-Nov-11   email Re: POH2


                                                                                                                                                                • Explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible human health effects, and
                                                                                                                                                                presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred to a number of reviews on
                                                                                                                                                                the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as approved under Ontario
                                               • At the open house, expressed concerns regarding health effects and sound.
                                                                                                                                                                Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                                • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
     4-Nov-11     29-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                              World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     2 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                           Response Summary



                                                                                                                                                              • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible human health effects, and
                                                                                                                                                              presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred to a number of reviews on
                                                                                                                                                              the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as approved under Ontario
                                                                                                                                                              Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                              • Regarding the cost of hydro, explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario (from
                                               • Asked “how much influence” the public meetings had. Asked if all the “opinions (were) taken into
                                                                                                                                                              development to construction to production) are borne by the developer, and no funds flow to the developer
                                               consideration before the shovel hits the ground.”
                                                                                                                                                              until electricity if supplied to the grid.
                                               • Was mainly concerned regarding potential health effects, financial impacts, cost of hydro, and effect on
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                               the local community.
                                                                                                                                                              relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. Compared the FIT rate with other sources of new
                                                                                                                                                              generation, explaining that the relative cost was competitive.
                                                                                                                                                              •Regarding comments and opinions provided and how they are considered, explained that concerns are
                                                                                                                                                              noted, and provided an overview of what next steps were, and that there was still opportunity for the public to
                                                                                                                                                              appeal further on in the process through the Environmental Review Tribunal.
                                                                                                                                                              •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.
     4-Nov-11     29-Nov-11   POH2



                                                                                                                                                              • Thanked them for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                              • Regarding their concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                              possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                              Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                               • Asked “how does the project affect people” and commented that there was “no information available on         as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                               the hazards of sound and low frequency noise.”                                                                 • Specifically regarding noise, explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines
                                               •Believed that the key issues regarding the project were health, property values, proximity of windmills to    which were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical
                                               residences, and noise.                                                                                         Officer of Health. Stated that REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine.
                                                                                                                                                              Referred them to the Noise Assessment Report on the project website.
                                                                                                                                                              • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                                                                                                                                              no widespread impact from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                              •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.
     4-Nov-11     29-Nov-11   POH2

                                                                                                                                                              • Thanked them for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                              • Stated that there were several routes by which people could have their say regarding wind project
                                                                                                                                                              development. Explained some of the goals which drove the Green Energy Act and the standardization of
                                               • Stated that the main issue was the location of the project, given the number of areas available which were
                                                                                                                                                              regulatory approvals.
                                               unused, unoccupied, and unfit for agriculture.
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained that concerns are noted, and provided an overview of what next steps were, and that there was
                                               •Was concerned about property values.
                                                                                                                                                              still opportunity for the public to appeal further on in the process through the Environmental Review Tribunal.
                                               •Felt that further studies were necessary.
                                                                                                                                                              • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
 21-Nov-11        29-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                            no widespread impact from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                              •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    3 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                  Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                           Response Summary




                                                                                                                                                             • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                             • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                             regulations, and that various Ministries would be reviewing wpd’s REA application for ensure that all
                                                                                                                                                             requirements had been met.
                                                                                                                                                             • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                             possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                             Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                             as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                               • Stated that there was a lack of open discussion regarding the pros and cons of the turbines.                • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                               •Indicated that the key issues for her were health, land values, and the fact the people did not have a say   World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
                                               as to whether there were turbines in their township.                                                          REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine. Referred them to the Noise
                                               •Asked if wpd would buy their properties without a gag order. Asked is wpd would compensate landowners        Assessment Report on the project website.
                                               for declines in property values. Asked why wpd did not conduct health studies.                                Explained that concerns are noted, and provided an overview of what next steps were, and that there was
                                                                                                                                                             still opportunity for the public to appeal further on in the process through the Environmental Review Tribunal.
                                                                                                                                                             • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                                                                                                                                             no widespread impact from wind turbines on property values.
                                                                                                                                                             •Explained some of the goals behind the Green Energy Act, and the standardization of setbacks. Explained
                                                                                                                                                             that working with the local municipalities was a part of the REA process.
                                                                                                                                                             • Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal to the
                                                                                                                                                             Environmental Review Tribunal.
                                                                                                                                                             •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.

     9-Nov-11     29-Nov-11   POH2



                                                                                                                                                             • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                             • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                             possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                             Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                             as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                             • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                                                                                                                                             World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
                                               •Indicated that the key issues for her were public health and government subsidies                            REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine. Referred them to the Noise
                                               •Asked why Australia moved setbacks to being 2km, while Ontario was at 500m.                                  Assessment Report on the project website.
                                                                                                                                                             • Regarding government subsidies, explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario
                                                                                                                                                             (from development to construction to production) are borne by the developer, and no funds flow to the
                                                                                                                                                             developer until electricity if supplied to the grid.
                                                                                                                                                             • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                             relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. Compared the FIT rate with other sources of new
                                                                                                                                                             generation, explaining that the relative cost was competitive.
                                                                                                                                                             •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.
     4-Nov-11     29-Nov-11   POH2




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   4 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                           Response Summary



                                                                                                                                                               • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                               • Regarding his concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                               possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                               Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                               as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                               • Explained that the project would adhere to the new MOE noise guidelines which were supported by the
                                               •Indicated that the key issues for him were public health, local councils being passed, visual landscape, and
                                                                                                                                                               World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health. Stated that
                                               the potential for the project to turn into “another Shelburne in 10 years.”
                                                                                                                                                               REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the turbine. Referred them to the Noise
                                                                                                                                                               Assessment Report on the project website.
                                                                                                                                                               •Explained some of the goals behind the Green Energy Act, and the standardization of setbacks. Explained
                                                                                                                                                               that working with the local municipalities was a part of the REA process.
                                                                                                                                                               • Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal to the
     4-Nov-11     29-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                             Environmental Review Tribunal.



                                                                                                                                                               • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                               • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                               possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                               Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                               • Indicated that she did not receive information related to her concerns regarding real estate values.
                                                                                                                                                               as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                               •Stated that her concerns were regarding health, light pollution, and low frequency noise,
                                                                                                                                                               • Regarding setbacks as a key issue, explained that the project would adhere to the guidelines put in place
                                               • Believed that the key issues were expropriation/compensation, limiting the size of projects, and setbacks.
                                                                                                                                                               but the MOE regarding sound levels and minimum distances for wind projects in Ontario. Explained that the
                                               •Indicated that the key issues for him were public health, local councils being passed, visual landscape, and
                                                                                                                                                               noise guidelines were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief
                                               the potential for the project to turn into “another Shelburne in 10 years.”
                                                                                                                                                               Medical Officer of Health. Stated that REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the
                                                                                                                                                               turbine. Referred them to the Noise Assessment Report on the project website.
                                                                                                                                                               • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
     4-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                             no widespread impact from wind turbines on property values.




                                                                                                                                                               • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                               • Regarding setbacks as a key issue, explained that the project would adhere to the guidelines put in place
                                                                                                                                                               but the MOE regarding sound levels and minimum distances for wind projects in Ontario. Explained that the
                                                                                                                                                               noise guidelines were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada, and the Ontario Chief
                                                                                                                                                               Medical Officer of Health. Stated that REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level from the
                                                                                                                                                               turbine. Referred them to the Noise Assessment Report on the project website.
                                                                                                                                                               • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                               • Commented that the maps were inaccurate, and that property values questions could not be answered             no widespread impact from wind turbines on property values.
                                               properly.                                                                                                       •Explained that wpd was unaware of any scientific research that has been conducted on the issue of impacts
                                               •Indicated that her main concerns were property values, setbacks, visual impacts, and impacts to animals.       on farm animals, but that thousands of turbines existed across Europe, Australia and the United States, and
                                               • Asked about subsidies.                                                                                        the issue did not appear to have surfaced.
                                                                                                                                                               • Regarding subsidies, explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario (from
                                                                                                                                                               development to construction to production) are borne by the developer, and no funds flow to the developer
                                                                                                                                                               until electricity if supplied to the grid.
                                                                                                                                                               • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                               relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. Compared the FIT rate with other sources of new
                                                                                                                                                               generation, explaining that the relative cost was competitive.
                                                                                                                                                               •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.
     4-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   5 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                          Response Summary


                                                                                                                                                              • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                              • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                              possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                              Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                              as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                              • Regarding setbacks as a key issue, explained that the project would adhere to the guidelines put in place
                                                                                                                                                              but the MOE regarding sound levels and minimum distances for wind projects in Ontario. Explained that the
                                               • Commented that the information did not address “land severance issue”
                                                                                                                                                              noise guidelines were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada, the Ontario Chief
                                               • Indicated that his main concerns were the health and wellbeing of humans and wildlife, and the fact that
                                                                                                                                                              Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada, and by Ontario Courts, and ensured at least 550m from non-
                                               the process for approvals “does not allow smaller areas / municipalities to have any input.”
                                                                                                                                                              participating receptors.
                                                                                                                                                              •Regarding the ability for the public to decide whether or not wind turbines are located in their township,
                                                                                                                                                              explained some of the goals behind the Green Energy Act, the standardization of setbacks, and streamlining
                                                                                                                                                              of the approvals process. Explained that working with the local municipalities was a part of the REA process.
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal to the
                                                                                                                                                              Environmental Review Tribunal.
     9-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                            •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.


                                                                                                                                                              • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                              • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                              possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                              Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                              as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                              • Regarding setbacks as a key issue, explained that the project would adhere to the guidelines put in place
                                               • Indicated that his main concerns were the health, property values, and setbacks.                             but the MOE regarding sound levels and minimum distances for wind projects in Ontario. Explained that the
                                                                                                                                                              noise guidelines were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada, the Ontario Chief
                                                                                                                                                              Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada, and by Ontario Courts, and ensured at least 550m from non-
                                                                                                                                                              participating receptors.
                                                                                                                                                              • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                                                                                                                                              no widespread impact from wind turbines on property values.
     4-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                            •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.

                                                                                                                                                              • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                              • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                                                                                                                                              no evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected property values or cumulative
                                               • Commented that the key issues were the lack of ability for local residents to stop a project, and the fact
                                                                                                                                                              home sales.
                                               that the authority of local elected councillors is overrided.
                                                                                                                                                              •Regarding the ability for the public to decide whether or not wind turbines are located in their township,
                                               •Asked if wpd was willing to compensate local residents for loss of their property values.
                                                                                                                                                              explained some of the goals behind the Green Energy Act, the standardization of setbacks, and streamlining
     4-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                            of the approvals process. Explained that working with the local municipalities was a part of the REA process.
                                                                                                                                                              •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   6 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                  Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                           Response Summary



                                                                                                                                                             • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                             • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                             possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                             Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                             as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                             • Regarding CO2 reductions, referenced the US Department of Energy’s 20% Wind Energy by 2030
                                                                                                                                                             technical report, which calculated that obtaining 20% of our electricity from wind would reduce CO2
                                                                                                                                                             emissions by over 825 million tons in the year 2030 alone.
                                               • Commented that her key concerns were mitigation of bat mortality, human health impacts, stray voltage,
                                                                                                                                                             • Explained that under Ministry of Natural Resources guidelines for bats and bat habitat, there are thresholds
                                               property values, and lack of CO2 reduction.
                                                                                                                                                             set for bat mortality to ensure that bat populations are maintained, and that these require three year post
                                               • Indicated that previous response from wpd was nothing but a FAQ sheet.
                                                                                                                                                             construction monitoring. Explained that mitigation measures should they be needed could include increasing
                                                                                                                                                             the cut-in speed of the turbines, or shutting them down during certain periods. Provided information as to
                                                                                                                                                             where the NHA could be located.
                                                                                                                                                             • Explained that stray voltage is a function of electrical transmission, not of the type of generation.
                                                                                                                                                             • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                                                                                                                                             no evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected property values or cumulative
                                                                                                                                                             home sales.
     9-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                           •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.


                                                                                                                                                             • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                             • Regarding municipal power, explained that O. Reg. 359/09 recognizes the importance of working with
                                                                                                                                                             municipalities. Explained some of the goals behind the Green Energy Act, the standardization of setbacks,
                                               • Commented that projects should be put to a vote within the municipality.                                    and streamlining of the approvals process.
                                                                                                                                                             • Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal to the
                                                                                                                                                             Environmental Review Tribunal.
 17-Nov-11        28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                           •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.


                                                                                                                                                             • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                             • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                             possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                             Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                               • Commented that it appeared wpd had gone to great efforts to address concerns, however the issue of          as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                               setbacks had not been discussed.                                                                              •Regarding setbacks, explained that wpd completely agrees that they must be “a function of the science”,
                                               • Expressed concern regarding health concerns.                                                                and that out project would follow the guidelines put in place by the MOE – the key consideration being sound
                                               • Expressed that the 550m minimum setback was inadequate. Asked why turbines needed to be located in          level. Explained that the noise guidelines were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada,
                                               populated areas. Asked if wpd would purchase the homes of people who got sick.                                the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada, and by Ontario Courts, and ensured at least
                                               • Stated that property values had been proven to drop as a result of the proximity of turbines. Stated that   550m from non-participating receptors.
                                               wind farms should be forced to purchase any home at fair market value, as well as the associated costs of     •Explained that the developer is required to decommission the wind turbines at their own expense, and that
                                               moving                                                                                                        wpd establishes an escrow account which would cover the estimated cost. Explained that these monies were
                                               •Asked how much money had been set aside for decommissioning.                                                 controlled by a third party.
                                               •Asked if the concrete foundation would be removed entirely.                                                  • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                                                                                                                                             no evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected property values or cumulative
                                                                                                                                                             home sales.
                                                                                                                                                             •Regarding siting of wind projects, explained the key factors that went into siting a wind project.
 10-Nov-11        28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                           •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  7 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                        Response Summary



                                                                                                                                                            • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                            • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                            possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                            Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                            as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                            •Regarding setbacks, explained that wpd would follow the guidelines put in place by the MOE – the key
                                               • Commented that the public meeting did not fully address the health issues.
                                                                                                                                                            consideration being sound level. Explained that the noise guidelines were supported by the World Health
                                               • Stated that the key issue was community acceptance.
                                                                                                                                                            Organization, Health Canada, the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada, and by Ontario
                                                                                                                                                            Courts, and ensured at least 550m from non-participating receptors.
                                                                                                                                                            •Regarding municipal power, explained that O. Reg. 359/09 recognizes the importance of working with
                                                                                                                                                            municipalities. Explained some of the goals behind the Green Energy Act, the standardization of setbacks,
                                                                                                                                                            and streamlining of the approvals process.
     9-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                          •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.



                                                                                                                                                            • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                            • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                            possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                            Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                            as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                            •Regarding setbacks, explained that wpd would follow the guidelines put in place by the MOE – the key
                                               • Stated that the key issues for him were health risks, property values and the eco system.
                                                                                                                                                            consideration being sound level. Explained that the noise guidelines were supported by the World Health
                                               •Stated that he had not been provided with “a written copy that these turbines are perfectly safe and good
                                                                                                                                                            Organization, Health Canada, the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada, and by Ontario
                                               for us humans, wildlife and property.”
                                                                                                                                                            Courts, and ensured at least 550m from non-participating receptor.
                                               •Asked how efficient the turbines were, and why the Arthur and Shelburne turbines were not working.
                                                                                                                                                            • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                                                                                                                                            no evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected property values or cumulative
                                                                                                                                                            home sales.
                                                                                                                                                            • Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal to the
                                                                                                                                                            Environmental Review Tribunal.
     4-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                          •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.



                                                                                                                                                            • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                            • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                            possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                            Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                            as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                               • Commented that he wanted there to be an open discussion.                                                   •Regarding setbacks, explained that wpd would follow the guidelines put in place by the MOE – the key
                                               • Stated that the key issues for him were health risks, property values and the fact that people of the      consideration being sound level. Explained that the noise guidelines were supported by the World Health
                                               township should have a say in whether the turbines go up or not.                                             Organization, Health Canada, the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada, and by Ontario
                                                                                                                                                            Courts, and ensured at least 550m from non-participating receptors.
                                                                                                                                                            •Regarding municipal power, explained that O. Reg. 359/09 recognizes the importance of working with
                                                                                                                                                            municipalities. Explained some of the goals behind the Green Energy Act, the standardization of setbacks,
                                                                                                                                                            and streamlining of the approvals process.
     4-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                          •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                8 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date         Date          Correspondence
Received     Responded     type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                   Response Summary



                                                                                                                                                   • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                   • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                   possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                   Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                   as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                   •Regarding municipal and individual persons’ power, explained that there was still opportunity for any
                                                                                                                                                   member of the public to express their concern, to ask questions, or to voice either support or opposition.
                                                                                                                                                   Explained what the next steps would be in wpd’s work to obtain an REA, and explained that there would be
                                                                                                                                                   opportunity to appeal to the Environmental Review Tribunal.
                                            • Stated that the key issues for her were health risks, and the livelihood of farmers.                 •Explained that under the Green Energy Act, there is a minimum 50% domestic content requirement.
                                            • Stated that the local community should receive a split share of the profits from the wind farm.       •Explained that the project’s expected output would be equivalent to the power use of 1980 homes
                                                                                                                                                   •Explained that wpd intends to use competitively priced local suppliers as much as possible, and will develop
                                                                                                                                                   a tendering process that gives added weight to contractors that use local labour and supplies.
                                                                                                                                                   •Explained that wind projects can also increase e the security of family farm owners by providing farmers with
                                                                                                                                                   a guaranteed income for a number of years, while allowing them to continue the use of the surrounding land
                                                                                                                                                   for farming and other purposes.
                                                                                                                                                   • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                                                                                                                                   no evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected property values or cumulative
                                                                                                                                                   home sales.
                                                                                                                                                   •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.
 10-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2


                                                                                                                                                   • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                   • Regarding his concerns about noise, explained that wpd would follow the guidelines put in place by the
                                                                                                                                                   MOE – the key consideration being sound level. Explained that the noise guidelines were supported by the
                                                                                                                                                   World Health Organization, Health Canada, the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada, and
                                                                                                                                                   by Ontario Courts, and ensured at least 550m from non-participating receptors.
                                                                                                                                                   •Explained how shadow flicker manifested, and that it was possible to calculate whether shadow would fall
                                                                                                                                                   on a given location near a wind project and for how many hours a year.
                                            • Stated that his key concerns were real estate value, flicker, noise, and loss of government input.
                                                                                                                                                   • Regarding municipal power, explained that O. Reg. 359/09 recognizes the importance of working with
                                            • Stated that he would like facts from Ontario regarding his concerns.
                                                                                                                                                   municipalities. Explained some of the goals behind the Green Energy Act, the standardization of setbacks,
                                                                                                                                                   and streamlining of the approvals process. Stated that the process retained municipal participation by
                                                                                                                                                   mandating that municipal consultation must occur at minimum 90 days before the final open house.
                                                                                                                                                   • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                                                                                                                                   no evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected property values or cumulative
                                                                                                                                                   home sales.
 17-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                    •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                        9 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date         Date          Correspondence
Received     Responded     type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                    Response Summary




                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                    •Explained that the developer is required to decommission the wind turbines at their own expense, and that
                                                                                                                                                    wpd establishes an escrow account which would cover the estimated cost. Explained that these monies were
                                                                                                                                                    controlled by a third party.
                                                                                                                                                    • Regarding her concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and
                                                                                                                                                    possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health.
                                                                                                                                                    Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that
                                                                                                                                                    as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                            • Stated that he did not feel there was much change from the first public meeting.                      • Explained that under Ministry of Natural Resources guidelines for birds and bats and their habitat, there are
                                            • Expressed that his main concerns were health issues, loss of wildlife, specifically birds and bats,   thresholds set for bird and bat mortality to ensure that bird and bat populations are maintained, and that
                                            disruption to residents and the scenic values of rural Ontario, increases in hydro rates, and noise.    these require three year post construction monitoring. Explained that mitigation measures should they be
                                            • Asked what happened to the concrete foundations after the life of the project.                        needed could include increasing the cut-in speed of the turbines, or shutting them down during certain
                                            • Asked where the service road’s gravel and debris would be placed when farmland was restored.          periods. Provided information as to where the NHA could be located.
                                                                                                                                                    • Regarding cost to taxpayers, explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario (from
                                                                                                                                                    development to construction to production) are borne by the developer, and no funds flow to the developer
                                                                                                                                                    until electricity if supplied to the grid.
                                                                                                                                                    • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                    relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. Compared the FIT rate with other sources of new
                                                                                                                                                    generation, explaining that the relative cost was competitive.
                                                                                                                                                    • Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal to the
                                                                                                                                                    Environmental Review Tribunal.
 15-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2




                                                                                                                                                    • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                    • Stated that it was wpd’s understanding that he found the public meeting unsatisfactory. Explained that “we
                                                                                                                                                    chose a format that we felt not only ensured the safety of the public, but that of our staff as well. There were
                                                                                                                                                    many opportunities for the public to receive information regarding the project and to have their questions or
                                                                                                                                                    concerns addressed. We prepared a 20 minute video presentation, which played several times during the
                                                                                                                                                    evening, and contained information regarding our project, as well as a turbine placement exercise illustrating
                                                                                                                                                    the number of constraints which must be taken into account. In addition, 17 team members were available at
                                            • Stated that they needed a 5 mile setback                                                              various stations throughout the room. Prior to the open house, we provide a review session for all of staff to
                                            •Asked who he could sue if he was unable to sell his property.                                          ensure that our responses can remain consistent – especially with commonly-raised concerns. Finally,
                                                                                                                                                    comment cards and our contact information were made available for those who wished to submit a question
                                                                                                                                                    or comment post-open house.
                                                                                                                                                    •As he had expressed that setbacks were insufficient, explained that wpd would follow the guidelines put in
                                                                                                                                                    place by the MOE – the key consideration being sound level. Explained that the noise guidelines were
                                                                                                                                                    supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada, the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health,
                                                                                                                                                    Health Canada, and by Ontario Courts, and ensured at least 550m from non-participating receptors.
                                                                                                                                                    •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.




 21-Nov-11     28-Nov-11   POH2




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                         10 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                    Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                               Response Summary


                                                                                                                                                   • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                   • Stated that it was wpd’s understanding that he found the public meeting unsatisfactory. Explained that “we
                                                                                                                                                   chose a format that we felt not only ensured the safety of the public, but that of our staff as well. There were
                                                                                                                                                   many opportunities for the public to receive information regarding the project and to have their questions or
                                                                                                                                                   concerns addressed. We prepared a 20 minute video presentation, which played several times during the
                                                                                                                                                   evening, and contained information regarding our project, as well as a turbine placement exercise illustrating
                                               • Stated that the public had been denied a voice and that three were many questions that had gone
                                                                                                                                                   the number of constraints which must be taken into account. In addition, 17 team members were available at
                                               unanswered.
                                                                                                                                                   various stations throughout the room. Prior to the open house, we provide a review session for all of staff to
                                                                                                                                                   ensure that our responses can remain consistent – especially with commonly-raised concerns. Finally,
                                                                                                                                                   comment cards and our contact information were made available for those who wished to submit a question
                                                                                                                                                   or comment post-open house.
                                                                                                                                                   • Provided an overview of what next steps were, and that there was still opportunity for the public to appeal
     4-Nov-11     30-Nov-11   POH2                                                                                                                 further on in the process through the Environmental Review Tribunal.



                                                                                                                                                   • Stated that it was wpd’s understanding that he found the public meeting unsatisfactory. Explained that “we
                                                                                                                                                   chose a format that we felt not only ensured the safety of the public, but that of our staff as well. There were
                                                                                                                                                   many opportunities for the public to receive information regarding the project and to have their questions or
                                                                                                                                                   concerns addressed. We prepared a 20 minute video presentation, which played several times during the
                                                                                                                                                   evening, and contained information regarding our project, as well as a turbine placement exercise illustrating
                                                                                                                                                   the number of constraints which must be taken into account. In addition, 17 team members were available at
                                                                                                                                                   various stations throughout the room. Prior to the open house, we provide a review session for all of staff to
                                                                                                                                                   ensure that our responses can remain consistent – especially with commonly-raised concerns. Finally,
                                               • Expressed that he had expected a question and answer meeting.                                     comment cards and our contact information were made available for those who wished to submit a question
                                               • Asked if the project would still be functional after 15-20 years, or just an eyesore.             or comment post-open house.
                                               • Asked if the general public was paying for the turbines.                                          •Explained that the developer is required to decommission the wind turbines at their own expense, and that
                                               • Expressed that hydro prices were getting out of control.                                          wpd establishes an escrow account which would cover the estimated cost. Explained that these monies were
                                                                                                                                                   controlled by a third party.
                                                                                                                                                   • Regarding rising electricity prices, explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario
                                                                                                                                                   (from development to construction to production) are borne by the developer, and no funds flow to the
                                                                                                                                                   developer until electricity if supplied to the grid.
                                                                                                                                                   • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                   relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. Compared the FIT rate with other sources of new
                                                                                                                                                   generation, explaining that the relative cost was competitive.
                                                                                                                                                   •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.
     4-Nov-11     30-Nov-11   POH2




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                        11 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                         Response Summary


                                                                                                                                                            • Apologized that he did not feel that the public meeting was acceptable. Explained that “we chose a format
                                                                                                                                                            that we felt not only ensured the safety of the public, but that of our staff as well. There were many
                                                                                                                                                            opportunities for the public to receive information regarding the project and to have their questions or
                                                                                                                                                            concerns addressed. We prepared a 20 minute video presentation, which played several times during the
                                                                                                                                                            evening, and contained information regarding our project, as well as a turbine placement exercise illustrating
                                                                                                                                                            the number of constraints which must be taken into account. In addition, 17 team members were available at
                                                                                                                                                            various stations throughout the room. Prior to the open house, we provide a review session for all of staff to
                                               • Stated that the public meeting did not satisfy provincial requirements.
                                                                                                                                                            ensure that our responses can remain consistent – especially with commonly-raised concerns. Finally,
                                               •Stated that all wind projects needed to build a case as to why they are planned in the proposed location.
                                                                                                                                                            comment cards and our contact information were made available for those who wished to submit a question
                                               •Asked why project was going where its going.
                                                                                                                                                            or comment post-open house.
                                                                                                                                                            •Explained that there was still opportunity for any member of the public to express their concern, to ask
                                                                                                                                                            questions, or to voice either support or opposition. Explained what the next steps would be in wpd’s work to
                                                                                                                                                            obtain an REA, and explained that there would be opportunity to appeal to the Environmental Review
                                                                                                                                                            Tribunal.
                                                                                                                                                            •Regarding siting of wind projects, explained the key factors that went into siting a wind project.
 13-Nov-11        30-Nov-11   POH2
                                                                                                                                                            •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.

                                                                                                                                                            • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                               • Asked what technology the project would replace
                                                                                                                                                            •Regarding what technology wind power is meant to replace, explained that the intent from the Ontario
                                               •Asked why wpd had a “gag” on people to prevent them from discussing payments.
                                                                                                                                                            government was to close coal plants by 2014 by promoting clean renewable energy. Furthermore, the
                                               •Stated that wind power will be superseded within a few years by cold fusion power generation systems,
                                                                                                                                                            objective of renewable was to reduce GHG emissions.
 10-Nov-11        30-Nov-11   POH2             which will make solar, wind, coal, fossil fuel and nuclear energy (replaced) within 2 decades.
                                                                                                                                                            •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.


                                                                                                                                                            • Thanked them for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                            •As they had expressed that setbacks were insufficient, explained that wpd would follow the guidelines put in
                                                                                                                                                            place by the MOE – the key consideration being sound level. Explained that the noise guidelines were
                                                                                                                                                            supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada, the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health,
                                                                                                                                                            Health Canada, and by Ontario Courts, and ensured at least 550m from non-participating receptors.
                                                                                                                                                            • Regarding the cost of wind power, explained that that all costs for renewable energy projects in Ontario
                                               •Expressed opposition to the visual impact of the turbines on a rural landscape.
                                                                                                                                                            (from development to construction to production) are borne by the developer, and no funds flow to the
                                               •Stated that the efficiency of the technology did not appear to be very good, and that large amounts of
                                                                                                                                                            developer until electricity if supplied to the grid.
                                               backup was required. Asked who was going to pay.
                                                                                                                                                            • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                                                                                                                                            relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. Compared the FIT rate with other sources of new
                                                                                                                                                            generation, explaining that the relative cost was competitive.
                                                                                                                                                            •Regarding the potential environmental impact of the turbines, explained that wpd, as part of the REA
                                                                                                                                                            process, was required to submit reports outlining potential impacts.
                                                                                                                                                            •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.
 14-Nov-11        30-Nov-11   POH2


                                                                                                                                                            • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                            •Explained that wpd would follow the process and meet the requirements put in place by the Ontario
                                               •Commented that her main concern was property value decline due to proximity of the proposed turbines.
                                                                                                                                                            Government.
                                               • Asked why wpd would not guarantee compensation if property values decreased.
                                                                                                                                                            •Stated that as requested, wpd would not send her a copy of the RE/MAX report which shows that
     4-Nov-11     30-Nov-11   POH2
                                                                                                                                                            agricultural property values had increased throughout rural Ontario, even where wind turbines were present.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                               12 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                  Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                         Response Summary




                                                                                                                                                            • Thanked them for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                            • Regarding concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible
                                                                                                                                                            human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred
                                                                                                                                                            to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as
                                                                                                                                                            approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                            • Regarding CO2 reductions, referenced the US Department of Energy’s 20% Wind Energy by 2030
                                                                                                                                                            technical report, which calculated that obtaining 20% of our electricity from wind would reduce CO2 emission
                                               •Stated that the public meeting had not information on the carbon footprint of the project                   by over 825 million tons in the year 2030 alone.
                                               •Commented that the main concerns were environmental issues, health, livestock, agriculture and property     •Regarding the potential environmental impact of the turbines, explained that wpd, as part of the REA
                                               values.                                                                                                      process, was required to submit reports outlining potential impacts.
                                               •Asked how the project would keep going if there was going to be a nuclear plant in 2015.                    • Referenced studies on property values in a number of different jurisdictions which concluded that there was
                                               •Asked how wpd was “going to put the money back into the community without increasing price of living.”      no evidence to suggest the presence of a wind facility negatively affected property values or cumulative
                                                                                                                                                            home sales.
                                                                                                                                                            •Regarding the question of wind turbines’ necessity in light of new nuclear development, referenced the
                                                                                                                                                            Association of Power Producers of Ontario presentation where Opposition Leader Tim Hudak acknowledged
                                                                                                                                                            the need to use multiple sources of power to meet out electricity needs. Explained that wind was one sources
                                                                                                                                                            of electricity which the Independent Electricity System Operator was able to draw upon to ensure the reliable
                                                                                                                                                            supply of electricity, with priority given the clean renewable sources.
                                                                                                                                                            •Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.

     4-Nov-11     30-Nov-11   POH2

                              POH2 -                                                                                                                        •Explained that the appeals process was handled by the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT)
     4-Nov-11     30-Nov-11   conversation     •At the final public meeting, he asked what the appeal process for a project was, and who to contact when.   •Provided an overview on the next steps for wpd in terms of its REA application, and what review/comment
                                                                                                                                                            or appeal periods existed. Provided the ERT website, email, mailing address and phone number.

                                                                                                                                                            •Explained that it was possible to calculate how many hours per year a particular area would experience
                                                                                                                                                            flickering. Explained that it depended on a number of factors, including location time of day/year, and
                                               •At the final public meeting, he expressed concern regarding shadow flicker.                                 weather conditions.
                              POH2 -           •Asked what regulations existed regarding flicker.                                                           •Stated that wpd had agreed with Oppose Belwood prior to the public meeting on November 4th, to conduct
                                                                                                                                                            shadow assessments on dwellings immediately adjacent to the project site.
     4-Nov-11     30-Nov-11   conversation                                                                                                                  •Stated that to wpd’s knowledge, no applicable regulations existed for the project regarding flicker.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                              13 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                              Response Summary


                                                                                                                                                                 • Thanked them for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                                 • Regarding concerns about health, explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines and possible
                                                                                                                                                                 human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and health. Referred
                                                                                                                                                                 to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal, indicating that as
                                                                                                                                                                 approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human health.
                                                                                                                                                                 •Explained that wpd would follow the guidelines put in place by the MOE – the key consideration being sound
                                                                                                                                                                 level. Explained that the noise guidelines were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada,
                                               •Stated that staff were uninformed
                                                                                                                                                                 the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada, and by Ontario Courts, and ensured at least
                                               •Expressed that they had serious concerns, including whether or not wpd could guarantee that turbines
                                                                                                                                                                 550m from non-participating receptors.
                                               would not affect the health of their family, and whether or not wpd could guarantee that their property value
                                                                                                                                                                 •Regarding the airstrip, explained that at the time of turbine location publication, there were 2 registered
                                               would not decline due to this development.
                                                                                                                                                                 aerodromes. Explained that the project siting had been reviewed by DND, NAV Canada and Transport
                                               •Asked if wpd had considered the impact on “wetlands in the direct vicinity as we all the recreational airstrip
                                                                                                                                                                 Canada.
                                               that backed onto the projected area from property that fronts onto County Rd. 16.”
                                                                                                                                                                 •Regarding wetlands, explained that wetland boundaries were provided in mapping from the Ministry of
                                                                                                                                                                 Natural Resources, and that to confirm these boundaries, the Ontario Wetland Evaluation System was used
                                                                                                                                                                 in 2010, which was above and beyond the information provided to the study team by regulatory agencies.
                                                                                                                                                                 Explained that based on the information collected on-site, the access road and cable for turbine 3 were
                                                                                                                                                                 moved to eliminate potential impacts on wetlands during construction. Explained provincial setbacks
                                                                                                                                                                 regarding wetlands, and stated that potential impacts to wetlands were identified within the Natural Heritage
 14-Nov-11         1-Dec-11                                                                                                                                      Assessment/Environmental Impact Study.



                                                                                                                                                                 • Thanked them for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                                 • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                                 regulations.
                                                                                                                                                                 •Explained that wpd would follow the guidelines put in place by the MOE – the key consideration being sound
                                                                                                                                                                 level. Explained that the noise guidelines were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada,
                                                                                                                                                                 the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada, and by Ontario Courts, and ensured at least
                                                                                                                                                                 550m from non-participating receptors.
                                               •Commented that the key issues for them were more public say in the project, more environmental impact            • Regarding municipal power, explained that O. Reg. 359/09 recognizes the importance of working with
                                               studies, that municipal people should have a say, that there should be greater setbacks, and danger to            municipalities. Explained some of the goals behind the Green Energy Act, the standardization of setbacks,
                                               migrating birds.                                                                                                  and streamlining of the approvals process. Stated that the process retained municipal participation by
                                                                                                                                                                 mandating that municipal consultation must occur at minimum 90 days before the final open house.
                                                                                                                                                                 •Regarding migration of birds, stated that the Natural Heritage Assessment / Environmental Impact Study
                                                                                                                                                                 that forms part of the REA application acknowledged the use of Belwood Lake Conservation Area for
                                                                                                                                                                 waterfowl during migration. Noted that the operating wind facility sited near Shelburne as well as those sited
                                                                                                                                                                 along the Lake Erie shoreline had reported minimal bird mortality during their operations.
                                                                                                                                                                 • Explained what the next steps in the process were, and that there would be opportunity to appeal to the
                                                                                                                                                                 Environmental Review Tribunal.
     4-Nov-11      1-Dec-11




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    14 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date            Date          Correspondence
Received        Responded     type                                                  Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                          Response Summary




                                                                                                                                                            • Thanked him for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                            • Explained that the project would adhere to a highly prescriptive process under the Ontario Government
                                                                                                                                                            regulations.
                                                                                                                                                            • Stated that it was wpd’s understanding that he found the public meeting unsatisfactory. Explained that “we
                                                                                                                                                            chose a format that we felt not only ensured the safety of the public, but that of our staff as well. There were
                                                                                                                                                            many opportunities for the public to receive information regarding the project and to have their questions or
                                                                                                                                                            concerns addressed. We prepared a 20 minute video presentation, which played several times during the
                                                                                                                                                            evening, and contained information regarding our project, as well as a turbine placement exercise illustrating
                                                                                                                                                            the number of constraints which must be taken into account. In addition, 17 team members were available at
                                               •Commented that the public meeting was “a project showcase, not a community consultation process.”
                                                                                                                                                            various stations throughout the room. Prior to the open house, we provide a review session for all of staff to
                                               Stated that they expected a place where attendees can sit down and have their questions spoken to over a
                                                                                                                                                            ensure that our responses can remain consistent – especially with commonly-raised concerns. Finally,
                                               microphone with everyone present listening.
                                                                                                                                                            comment cards and our contact information were made available for those who wished to submit a question
                                               The key issues for them were more public say in the project, more environmental impact studies, that
                                                                                                                                                            or comment post-open house.”
                                               municipal people should have a say, that there should be greater setbacks, and danger to migrating birds.
                                                                                                                                                            •Explained that as part of the REA application process, wpd was required to submit reports outlining the
                                               •”How have you considered the cumulative negative environmental footprint to Ontario when your project I
                                                                                                                                                            potential impacts of the project on the environment, as well as what steps would be taken to mitigate these
                                               added to all the others? Will you be making public the preconstruction and post construction (mortality)
                                                                                                                                                            potential impacts. Explained where all draft reports could be accessed, online and in hardcopy.
                                               studies?”
                                                                                                                                                            •Explained that wpd would follow the guidelines put in place by the MOE – the key consideration being sound
                                               •Asked how people complaining about noise will be helped, and whether or not the turbines will be shut off
                                                                                                                                                            level. Explained that the noise guidelines were supported by the World Health Organization, Health Canada,
                                               at night, or during migratory season.
                                                                                                                                                            the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health Canada, and by Ontario Courts, and ensured at least
                                               •Asked what the plan was for decommissioning, and whether or not wpd had left a bond with the
                                                                                                                                                            550m from non-participating receptors. Referred to the Noise Assessment Report on the project website.
                                               municipality to cover the appreciable costs of decommissioning should wpd go bankrupt.
                                                                                                                                                            •Explained that the developer is required to decommission the wind turbines at their own expense, as well as
                                               •Expressed concern over fire safety.
                                                                                                                                                            submit a decommissioning plan to the Ministry of the Environment. Stated that wpd established an escrow
                                                                                                                                                            account which would cover the estimated cost. Explained that these monies were controlled by a third party.
                                                                                                                                                            •Explained that regarding fire safety, wpd would work with the municipality’s Emergency Services to develop
                                                                                                                                                            a plan using REpower’s suggested protocol.
                                                                                                                                                            •Regarding project location, stated that the project was sited on agricultural land, with no natural habitat
                                                                                                                                                            removal required for the project, and that modifications were made to site components to move them away
                                                                                                                                                            from identified features. Explained that wpd would be reporting the results of onsite monitoring and mitigation
                                                                                                                                                            to the proper government agencies, and that questions regarding public access should be directed to those
                                                                                                                                                            agencies.
     4-Nov-11      1-Dec-11   POH2




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 15 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date         Date          Correspondence
Received     Responded     type                                                  Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                         Response Summary




                                                                                                                                                         • Thanked her for attending the meeting, and taking the time to complete a comment card.
                                                                                                                                                         • Regarding her main concern of health issues, explained that wpd would follow the guidelines put in place
                                                                                                                                                         by the MOE – the key consideration being sound level. Explained that the noise guidelines were supported
                                                                                                                                                         by the World Health Organization, Health Canada, the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Health
                                                                                                                                                         Canada, and by Ontario Courts, and ensured at least 550m from non-participating receptors. Referred to the
                                                                                                                                                         Noise Assessment Report on the project website. Explained that there was a debate regarding wind turbines
                                                                                                                                                         and possible human health effects, and presented two perspectives regarding noise, wind turbines, and
                                            •Commented that calling the ‘open house’ a ‘meeting’ was a misnomer. Stated that is wpd was more             health. Referred to a number of reviews on the issue, including the Environmental Review Tribunal,
                                            forthright with information, then wpd would not encounter such opposition.                                   indicating that as approved under Ontario Regulation, wind turbines would not cause serious harm to human
                                            •Stated that local residents wanted to know exactly how many turbines were slated for the area, what other   health.
                                            properties would be affected which were not in the marked project area, what would happen is wpd were to     •Regarding impact on the environment, and particularly birds, explained that there were thresholds set for
                                            sell off its interests to another corporation, what the greatest impact would be of the “issues raised by    bird and bat mortality to ensure that bird and bat populations are maintained, and that these require three
                                            residents with respect to health, environment, noise, bird safety etc.”                                      year post construction monitoring. Explained that mitigation measures should they be needed could include
                                            •Asked what the benefit was to rural Fergus.                                                                 increasing the cut-in speed of the turbines, or shutting them down during certain periods. Provided
                                            •Asked what the benefit was to wpd                                                                           information as to where the NHA could be located.
                                            •Stated that tornadoes had not been addressed. Asked if anyone had even considered the impact of a           • Further regarding the environment, referenced the US Department of Energy’s 20% Wind Energy by 2030
                                            tornado on the tall wind turbines.                                                                           technical report, which calculated that obtaining 20% of our electricity from wind would reduce CO2 emission
                                            •Thanked wpd for the opportunity to provide input.                                                           by over 825 million tons in the year 2030 alone.
                                                                                                                                                         •Provided assurance that given the maximum sound levels and minimum distances from non-participating
                                                                                                                                                         dwellings which wpd must adhere too, along with the various setbacks from natural features, wpd had
                                                                                                                                                         maximized the number of turbines it was able to place on the land it had access too.
                                                                                                                                                         •Explained that under the Green Energy Act, there is a minimum 50% domestic content requirement.
                                                                                                                                                          •Explained that the project’s expected output would be equivalent to the power use of 1980 homes
                                                                                                                                                         •Explained that wpd intends to use competitively priced local suppliers as much as possible, and will develop
                                                                                                                                                         a tendering process that gives added weight to contractors that use local labour and supplies.

 17-Nov-11      1-Dec-11   POH2




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                            16 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date         Date          Correspondence
Received     Responded     type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                             Response Summary



                                                                                                                                                             • Stated that it was wpd’s understanding that he found the public meeting unsatisfactory. Explained that “we
                                                                                                                                                             chose a format that we felt not only ensured the safety of the public, but that of our staff as well. There were
                                                                                                                                                             many opportunities for the public to receive information regarding the project and to have their questions or
                                                                                                                                                             concerns addressed. We prepared a 20 minute video presentation, which played several times during the
                                                                                                                                                             evening, and contained information regarding our project, as well as a turbine placement exercise illustrating
                                                                                                                                                             the number of constraints which must be taken into account. In addition, 17 team members were available at
                                                                                                                                                             various stations throughout the room. Prior to the open house, we provide a review session for all of staff to
                                                                                                                                                             ensure that our responses can remain consistent – especially with commonly-raised concerns. Finally,
                                                                                                                                                             comment cards and our contact information were made available for those who wished to submit a question
                                            •Commented that democracy has been removed from the process.                                                     or comment post-open house.”
                                            •Asked how the project was being connected to the grid and where the power lines were going to go.               • Regarding municipal power, explained that O. Reg. 359/09 recognizes the importance of working with
                                            Stated that “ask Hydro One” was not good enough.                                                                 municipalities. Explained some of the goals behind the Green Energy Act, the standardization of setbacks,
                                                                                                                                                             and streamlining of the approvals process. Stated that the process retained municipal participation by
                                                                                                                                                             mandating that municipal consultation must occur at minimum 90 days before the final open house.
                                                                                                                                                             •Explained that there was still opportunity for any member of the public to express their concern, to ask
                                                                                                                                                             questions, or to voice either support or opposition. Explained what the next steps would be in wpd’s work to
                                                                                                                                                             obtain an REA, and explained that there would be opportunity to appeal to the Environmental Review
                                                                                                                                                             Tribunal.
                                                                                                                                                             •Regarding how the project was going to connect to the grid, explained that Hydro One was undertaking a
                                                                                                                                                             much-needed upgrade to the transmission system, and that wpd would be tying into the network at the
                                                                                                                                                             project site. Explained that the upgrade was not considered part of the Springwood Project.
 28-Nov-11      1-Dec-11   POH2



                                            •Expressed concern regarding health, property values, light flicker, horses, noise, dust and disruption in the
                                                                                                                                                             • Explained that new information was available at second open house, notably the results of the project
                                            building process.
                                                                                                                                                             studies.
                                            •Stated that wpd had already received their previous letter outlining their concerns but did not provide
                                                                                                                                                             • Explained that there are still opportunities for the public to express their concern about the project.
                                            adequate answers.
                                                                                                                                                             Explained that the municipality and the public still had a role and place to comment during the REA process
                                            • Felt that open house produced the same "propaganda" as the first one
                                                                                                                                                             including the 30 day comment period after the project submission. Explained that the community will also
                                            • Wanted a return of community democracy. Was upset that 2 greedy owners are getting what they want
                                                                                                                                                             have a 15 day window to appeal the decision should the MOE approve the project.
 23-Nov-11      2-Dec-11   POH2             "while several hundred paying neighbours are being rundown by the Green Energy Machine.


                                                                                                                                                             • Explained that there were 6 Stantec employees spread throughout the open house.
                                                                                                                                                             • Acknowledged that the turbines are tall structures and will be seen for kilometres around. As well, wind
                                            • Claimed that there were no staff from Stantec available to answer questions concerning: why turbines           resources are stronger at higher heights which maximizes energy generation, hence why Turbines are so
                                            were so tall (and why was there no 3D rendering of the actual installed site). 2. Why was a gear box design      tall.
                                            from Germany chosen? 3. What is the active life of the project? 4. Why there was no layout of the grid           • Explained that wpd did have simulation photo's depicting what the turbines look like in their location.
                                            system.                                                                                                          • wpd chose the REpower MM92 because they were amongst the most dependable in the industry.
                                            • Other concerns included: Who was going to compensate for loss of property values                               Confirmed contract length is for 20 years.
                                            • What the visual impact of the wind turbines will be                                                            • Assumed that the responder was referring to transmission line when speaking of a grid line. Explained that
                                            • He indicated a support of wind but felt the project was moving too quickly, too soon, and too close to the     Hydro One is responsible for upgrading the infrastructure in the area so it is not considered part of the
                                            scenic Wellington County.                                                                                        project. However, wpd will be paying for most of the costs of the upgrade so that costs are not passed onto
                                            • Wanted to know who owned the wind over his property?                                                           the consumers.
 23-Nov-11      2-Dec-11   POH2                                                                                                                              • Explained that the recent RE/MAX Market trends Report indicated that agricultural property values continue
                                                                                                                                                             to increase across the province even in areas with many wind turbines.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  17 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date         Date          Correspondence
Received     Responded     type                                                    Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                              Response Summary




                                                                                                                                                              • Thanked them for their comments and approval of the siting presentation.
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained why wpd decided on the Open House format that was used. Also explained that all wpd were
                                            • Felt that the wpd representatives were not very vocal and had a hard time getting answers on the floor,         briefed beforehand about their roles to ensure consistency
                                            but she found the siting/screen presentation was a good addition.                                                 • Explained the REA approval process and 20 year contract. As part of the approval process developers
                                            • Asked who pays for the decommissioning costs after 20 years?                                                    have to create an escrow account covering the estimated costs of dismantling the facility. Monies are set
                                            • Both Felt that the process was undemocratic because of the loss of control by local government levels.          aside and controlled by a third party.
                                            They often contact local representatives about issues but feel the province has whitewashed the local             • Explained that the O. Reg. 259/09 still left a role to consult with the municipalities. One of the main goals of
                                            municipality.                                                                                                     the Green Energy Act was to streamline the REA process and create a level playing field. Explained that the
                                            • Did not like increasing costs of hydro to subsidize foreign companies and felt that Canadian opportunities      municipality and the public still had a role and place to comment during the REA process including the 30
                                            were being sold to foreign companies.                                                                             day comment period after the project submission.
                                            • Had concerned that local wildlife would be highly endangered, mentioned the Osprey                              • Explained that the cost of generating electricity from wind has dropped over the past few years, and the
                                            • Wanted to know if wpd will guarantee property values.                                                           relative benefits of it as a clean source of electricity. When accounting for subsidies other sources of power
                                                                                                                                                              cost is comparable to wind
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained that as part of the approval process wpd must submit reports outlining the potential impact on the
                                                                                                                                                              environment and wildlife and what steps will be taken to mitigate impact the projects might have.
 23-Nov-11      2-Dec-11   POH2



                                                                                                                                                              • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study and other reports on potential effects of wind
                                                                                                                                                              turbines on health and the reason behind the setback limits. Reinforced that wpd would follow all guidelines
                                                                                                                                                              put in place by MOE
                                                                                                                                                              • Mentioned the RE/MAX market trend report that found farm values had increased even in areas such as
                                                                                                                                                              Chatham-Kent where turbines have been installed for some time. Also referred to other studies.
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained that as part of the approval process wpd must submit reports outlining the potential impact on the
                                                                                                                                                              environment and wildlife and what steps will be taken to mitigate impact the projects might have. Also
                                                                                                                                                              explained the post construction monitoring that is required to be conducted and reported.
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained that wpd will develop a plan with the municipality in case of emergencies such as fire.
                                            • Felt that most questions were glossed over with best case scenarios and half truths                             • Explained stray voltage is a function of transmission not how power is produced. Properly constructed
                                            • Issues of concern: independent health studies on those living in area, unbiased wildlife studies, property      infrastructure reduces the potential of stray voltage.
21-Nov-11    7-Dec-11      POH2             values, fire protection, stray voltage, electromagnetic fields, water tables/run off, noise/low decibel sounds,   • Explained that geotechnical studies are conducted to determine foundation design and mitigate potential
                                            vandalism, ice throw and shadow flicker, effects on solar panels, visual pollution, gag orders?, housing          impact to ground water and erosion.
                                            hazardous materials, prices, compensation, lack of transparency                                                   • Confirmed again that noise will not exceed 40dBA.
                                            • Asked since the project is funded by the Ontario government, why were there no representatives.                 • Explained ice accumulation and mitigation/braking techniques used to prevent ice throw
                                                                                                                                                              • Agreed that the towers will be tall and seen from a great distance
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained wpd will develop a site-specific plan to deal with hazardous materials before during and after
                                                                                                                                                              construction, please refer to Construction and D&O Report.
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained the cost of wind electricity compared to other newly constructed power plants is very competitive.
                                                                                                                                                              Explained that all report and construction costs are borne by the developer and that we only get money for
                                                                                                                                                              the energy we produce.
                                                                                                                                                              • Wind power is one source of electricity that the IESO can draw on.
                                                                                                                                                              • Explained the REA process and disclosure of reports as well as opportunities for the public to comment and
                                                                                                                                                              appeal a decision to the ERT.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     18 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date        Date        Correspondence
Received    Responded   type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                           Response Summary


                                                                                                                                                       •Thanked him for sharing his concerns, and informed him that wpd Canada must follow very prescriptive
                                                                                                                                                       processed set out by the government in order to apply for REA approval.
                                         • "We live close to the proposed turbines. If we get sick what will your company do to help us . . .?         • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study and other reports on potential effects of wind
21-Nov-11   7-Dec-11    POH2
                                         • Key Issues: Health Studies, environment                                                                     turbines on health and the reason behind the setback limits. Reinforced that wpd would follow all guidelines
                                         • Asked again what wpd would do if turbines cause health issues in our family                                 put in place by MOE.
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that as part of the approval process wpd is required to submit reports outlining the potential
                                                                                                                                                       impacts on the environment and what steps will be taken to mitigate those impacts.

                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that the O. Reg. 259/09 still left a role to consult with the municipalities. One of the main goals of
                                                                                                                                                       the Green Energy Act was to streamline the REA process and create a level playing field. Explained that the
                                                                                                                                                       municipality and the public still had a role and place to comment during the REA process including the 30
                                                                                                                                                       day comment period after the project submission.
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that the maps we used at the Open House were based on information at the time of
                                         • Comments: Old maps did not show a number of homes. Person at D&O and Construction station not               crystallization. The maps we use are from MNR. We verify buildings structures by driving through the area,
                                         aware that wind turbines are backed by fossil fuel operations                                                 and check with the municipality to obtain outstanding building permits.
                                         • Stantec personnel did not have answers to questions, "I was passed from person to person"                   • Explained that her comments regarding fossil fuel only assumes gas as a backup. Other sources such as
                                         • Key Issues: Felt that the wildlife studies were insufficient, could not get clear answers to questions or   hydro in province and bought from elsewhere can be used to backup electricity.
                                         information on grassland birds, raptors including Osprey. Was told there were no Bobolink on site but says    • Explained that no bobolink habitats were found in project location. Confirmed that non bobolink habitat
                                         that is incorrect and that the nest on all adjacent actively farmed lands. Concerned about impact on          would be removed.
                                         migratory birds                                                                                               • Explained that there would be post construction monitoring for the first 3 years of operation. To date other
14-Nov-11   8-Dec-11    POH2
                                         • Wanted information on wpd leases and expected revenues from the project.                                    projects have recorded low mortality rates for raptors and bobolink
                                         • Concerned about placement of turbines in agricultural setting, Need to protect agricultural way of life.    • Given the setback requirements wpd has maximized the number of turbines that can be placed on the land
                                         Wants to know what gives wind developers the power to determine where a future home be built on a             that wpd has access to.
                                         vacant property. Would the project prevent people from building homes elsewhere on their property?            • Explained how vacant properties are treated under O. Reg. 359/09 and how homes are placed. Stressed
                                         • Concerned about impact on tourism                                                                           that landowners were free to build wherever they wanted to. wpd was not restraining where they can build.
                                         • Concerned about property values, feels that politicians are bludgeoning citizens with legislation.          wpd took into account existing structures and phantom receptors on vacant lands based on land patterns.
                                         • Is frustrated because she feels she has no say, no hope and is threatened by the project.                   • Explained that there are many events that draw tourism to the area. Evidence suggests that wind turbines
                                         • Why do developers gag their leaseholders and persons they buy out?                                          are not detrimental to tourism. Provided references to different reports.
                                                                                                                                                       • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study and other reports on potential effects of wind
                                                                                                                                                       turbines on health and the reason behind the setback limits. Reinforced that wpd would follow all guidelines
                                                                                                                                                       put in place by MOE.
                                                                                                                                                       • Mentioned the RE/MAX market trend report that found farm values had increased even in areas such as
                                                                                                                                                       Chatham-Kent where turbines have been installed for some time. Also referred to other studies.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                              19 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date       Date         Correspondence
Received   Responded    type                                                  Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                           Response Summary

                                                                                                                                                     • Explained that 9 wpd staff including engineers, communication and management staff including the
                                                                                                                                                     President and Vice President were available to speak to and wore clear name tags.
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained the reason behind the format of the open house. The goal was to present the results of the
                                                                                                                                                     reports and assessments. wpd briefed all staff in efforts to achieve consistency to questions and answers.
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained the 20 minute presentation was made available and played several times during the open house.
                                                                                                                                                     Comment cards and ways and means of contacting wpd were made available on poster boards and in
                                                                                                                                                     handouts.
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained the wetland boundaries and wildlife information was received from MNR. Information from the
                                                                                                                                                     Ontario Wetland Evaluation System was also used which went above and beyond the requirements. "The
                                         • Mailed comment card, comments placed on attached letter
                                                                                                                                                     Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) has confirmed that the determination of natural features and
                                         • Claimed that no wpd staff were available at Open house, only Stantec staff were around passing out
                                                                                                                                                     the evaluation of their significance were completed according to procedures established or accepted by
                                         promotional material. Complained that there was only pre-recorded presentation and that this should not
                                                                                                                                                     MNR"
6-Dec-11   8-Dec-11     POH2             meet the requirements of public consultation
                                                                                                                                                     • Natural heritage features were inventoried and assessed and potential impacts from the project to wildlife
                                         • Concerned about the impact on the watershed in the area (felt it was one of the most important areas in
                                                                                                                                                     and wildlife habitat within the Project Location were identified within the Natural Heritage Assessment and
                                         the province). Also concerned about impact on wildlife
                                                                                                                                                     Environmental Assessment Report. Provincially accepted protocols and guidance were applied.
                                         • Concerned about impact on tourism because of visual impact, noise and light pollution
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained post construction monitoring and mortality threshold requirements. A link to the MNR's bat
                                         • Located outside the study area but is concerned about impact on the greater Belwood community.
                                                                                                                                                     guidelines was also provided. Reports from other projects report that bird mortalities are low.
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained that there are many events that draw tourism to the area. Evidence suggests that wind turbines
                                                                                                                                                     are not detrimental to tourism. Provided references to different reports.
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained that given the land wpd has access to and the natural feature and receptor setback limits, wpd
                                                                                                                                                     has maximized the number of turbines that can be used. That said should capacity increase on the grid and
                                                                                                                                                     land become available wpd would consider expansion
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained that the benefits of the project include reduction in CO2 emissions and increased business in
                                                                                                                                                     Ontario as 50% content requirements means some of the manufacturing is completed in Ontario.
                                                                                                                                                     • The energy produced by the 4 turbines in Springwood is enough to power 198 homes

                                                                                                                                                     • Answer provided on behalf of REpower: "Airborne particles are very rare because most of the carbon
                                                                                                                                                     particles from the brushes, which is a very small quantity, stay inside the generator slip ring compartment.
                                         • Question asked at the open house: Question was regarding airborne particles from Carbon Brushes in
4-Nov-11   9-Dec-11     POH2                                                                                                                         The compartment is cleaned during usual maintenance periods."
                                         generator.
                                                                                                                                                     • As part of the REA process, wpd is required to produce a decommissioning plan to the MOE detailing how
                                         • Also had a question about the decommissioning process
                                                                                                                                                     this will be acheived. Money is set aside in an escrow account and controlled by a third party representing
                                                                                                                                                     the estimated amount that is required to decommission the project.

                                                                                                                                                     • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study and other reports on potential effects of wind
                                                                                                                                                     turbines on health and the reason behind the setback limits. Reinforced that wpd would follow all guidelines
                                                                                                                                                     put in place by MOE. Explained the Stated that REpower had guaranteed the maximum sound power level
                                                                                                                                                     from the turbine • Sound measurements: "The wind turbine acoustic emissions data is the accepted method
                                                                                                                                                     by which the Ontario Ministry of the Environment determines compliance to its regulation. The sound level at
                                                                                                                                                     a receptor is computed using the Sound Power Level from the noise sources, in terms of full octave
                                                                                                                                                     frequency bands, based on the International Standard ISO 9613-2.
                                                                                                                                                     • "According to REpower vibrations in the ground are dominated by the
                                         • Question asked at the open house: Had questions concerning sound calculations and measurements
4-Nov-11   12-Dec-11    POH2                                                                                                                         tower eigenfrequency which is far below 1Hz. Also, ground vibrations due to rotor imbalances are not to be
                                         • Also had a question about turbine vibrations and shadow flicker
                                                                                                                                                     expected because the various sensors position throughout the turbine tower and nacelle would shut down
                                         • Concerned about live stock
                                                                                                                                                     the turbine beforehand.
                                                                                                                                                     • Explained that it is possible to calculate very precisely whether flickering will fall on a given location near a
                                                                                                                                                     wind project and for how many hours a year. wpd has agreed to conduct shadow flicker assessments for all
                                                                                                                                                     residence bordering the project area.
                                                                                                                                                     • Based on anecdotal accounts, concerns have begun to surface about wind turbines possibly affecting the
                                                                                                                                                     health of farm animals. At present, we are unaware of any scientific research that has conducted on this
                                                                                                                                                     issue. It would appear that this issue has not arisen near existing facilities in the United States, Europe and
                                                                                                                                                     Australia.




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                              20 of 21
  
SPRINGWOOD WIND PROJECT
CONSULTATION REPORT
Appendix E - Public Open House # 2 – Communication s Summary
January 2012
  
Date       Date         Correspondence
Received   Responded    type                                                   Comment or Inquiry Summary                                                                                           Response Summary



                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that regulations require that the developer examine the study area to assess local elements
                                                                                                                                                       based on the information provided from MNR. Reports are based on this information and are submitted as
                                                                                                                                                       part of the REA approval.
                                                                                                                                                       • In comparison the project location is the specific land where the turbines access roads and connector
                                                                                                                                                       cables will be located. An area 120m beyond this area was also assessed. Where the 120m area was on
                                                                                                                                                       non-optioned lands a visual inspection was conducted from adjacent optioned lands. wpd has not and will not
                                                                                                                                                       access lands without the landowner's permission.
                                                                                                                                                       • Explained that the O. Reg. 259/09 still left a role to consult with the municipalities. One of the main goals of
                                                                                                                                                       the Green Energy Act was to streamline the REA process and create a level playing field. Explained that the
                                                                                                                                                       municipality and the public still had a role and place to comment during the REA process including the 30
                                         • Upset about the lack of consultation and contact she has received from wpd. She is opposed to the           day comment period after the project submission.
                                         project especially as she breeds a rare kind of endangered species in the study area.                         • Explained the different ways made available to be able to contact wpd
4-Nov-11   13-Dec-11    POH2             • Key Issue: Noise levels, Habitats being affected, endangered, threatened animals in the area. Breeds        • Referenced the Ontario Medical Officer of Health's study and other reports on potential effects of wind
                                         Hackney horse                                                                                                 turbines on health and the reason behind the setback limits. Reinforced that wpd would follow all guidelines
                                         • She wants to receive a phone call as she feels her opinion does not matter. wpd had apparently not          put in place by MOE. Explained the REpower the turbine manufacturer has guaranteed that 40dBA will not
                                         responded to letter that she sent.                                                                            be exceeded given the regulated setbacks
                                                                                                                                                       • A full Natural Heritage Assessment (NHA) has been undertaken for the Study Area, as required under
                                                                                                                                                       Ontario Regulation 359/09. If any project's infrastructure is sited within 120m of a natural heritage feature
                                                                                                                                                       (wetlands, significant wildlife habitat, etc.), an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) is undertaken to identify
                                                                                                                                                       impacts and mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate those impacts.
                                                                                                                                                       • You are also concerned about the potential effects our project may have on the horses you breed near our
                                                                                                                                                       project site. Based on anecdotal accounts, concerns have begun to surface about possible impacts on farm
                                                                                                                                                       animal health with regard to wind turbines. At present, we are unaware of any scientific research that has
                                                                                                                                                       been conducted on this issue. It would appear that this issue has not arisen near existing facilities in the
                                                                                                                                                       United States, Europe and Australia. The presence of endangered, threatened or species of special concern
                                                                                                                                                       as listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) list were assessed for the Springwood Wind Project.


                                         • Received 9 comment cards (at the open house and later mailed to wpd) that had no name or address
                                         information. As a result these cards were not responded to.
4-Nov-11   n/a          POH2
                                         • 8 expressed opposition to the project, 1 was supportive                                                     n/a
                                         • Expressed concerns include, lack of community involvement, cost of electricity, unfair subsidies, foreign
                                         takeover of Canadian property, Health concerns.

  




Stantec Project Number: 160960606                                                                                                                                                                                                                              21 of 21
  

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:0
posted:7/4/2013
language:English
pages:88
caifeng li caifeng li
About