Two Towns Protest FirstLight s Position
Post on: 2011-08-28 By: admin
In July, following actions taken by FirstLight Power Resources, which operates hydropower facilities on Candlewood Lake, regarding its voluntary contribution to the Candlewood Lake Authority (CLA), which patrols the body of water that was created to provide hydroelectric power, three letters of complaint were filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).The federal body, which is the licensing agent for use of the lake as a power source, requires that the licensee submit a Shoreline Management Plan—which addresses public access to both water and shoreline for recreation and navigation purposes; development of shoreline and riverfront area; and natural resource conservation environmental protection. A proposal has been submitted.According to FirstLight, New Fairfield and Sherman (two of the towns bordering the lake) and the Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials have protested the power company’s stance regarding the voluntary contribution. They are said to be seeking FERC influence in the matter.Howard Berger of Sherman, the CLA’s board chairman, was not available for comment as of press time.However, Larry Marsicano, CLA’s executive director, said that “FirstLight submitted a letter to FERC in response to the letters.“Some of the towns were pulling back support for the Shoreline Management Plan because of the funding issue.”For decades, the CLA has counted on contributions from the municipalities bordering the lake—Brookfield, Danbury, New Fairfield, New Milford, and Sherman—as well as the existing energy generator for its operating budget. The funding formula has been that each contributes an equal share.New Milford Mayor Patricia Murphy said Wednesday that she did not approach the FERC regarding the FirstLight funding matter.“I did not because I thought the Shoreline Management Plan has nothing to do with voluntary participation in providing funds for the CLA,” she said. “The Shoreline Management Plan should stand on its own merits, not on whether voluntary donations are made.”FirstLight’s anticipated $60,500 contribution for fiscal year 2010-11 was initially not forthcoming in the full amount—only $15,000 was presented—which caught the authority by surprise toward the end of its last budget year. Subsequently, during a face-to-face meeting in New Milford July 20, FirstLight made up the difference, presenting the CLA with a check in the amount of $45,500, for a total contribution of $60,500. Continued...
View reader comments (0)Comment on this story
“We agreed to provide them the funds to match the other contributions,” Charles Burnham, the external affairs representative for GDF Suez Energy North America, FirstLight’s parent company, said in an interview at the time, adding that the matter of future contributions would be reviewed.The funds, however, are “voluntary contributions,” and the traditional arrangement is not legally binding, Mr. Burnham reiterated this week.He said that was the crux of the letter FirstLight submitted Aug. 12 in response to the others FERC had received “that asked that FERC should compel us to pay the $60,000 or it would deny the Shoreline Management Plan.”But, he said, “We are complying with everything that the FERC license requires. If something were required by the federal agency, we’d be doing it. It’s fairly logical.“The idea is CLA and DEP [Department of Environmental Protection] have certain responsibilities and we have a certain responsibilities. We feel we’re meeting ours, according to our license,” Mr. Burnham said.In FirstLight’s letter to FERC, it states: “CLA’s decision to conduct supplemental or duplicative activities … cannot be the basis for the Commission to impose a funding obligation on FirstLight.”Mr. Marsicano said regarding the use of the word “duplicative” that “this is the first time I have seen this word come up.”He added, “A lot of things in the Shoreline Management Plan are modeled after what CLA has been doing.”When the authority was formed in 1972, it was a public safety lake patrol, “but it evolved over time to take on other roles as environmental issues became a concern,” Mr. Marsicano has said.Mr. Berger has reportedly estimated that FirstLight benefits from CLA services valued at more than $200,000 annually, not only including the lake patrol. He has noted CLA’s longtime role as the lake’s primary advocate and its education and outreach programs. Continued...
View reader comments (0)Comment on this story
He has pointed out that services such as those being provided by CLA are provided on other lakes by the bodies that are licensed by FERC to harness their water power.
View reader comments (0)Comment on this story
View reader comments (0)Comment on this story
In July, following actions taken by FirstLight Power Resources, which operates hydropower facilities on Candlewood Lake, regarding its voluntary contribution to the Candlewood Lake Authority (CLA), which patrols the body of water that was created to provide hydroelectric power, three letters of complaint were filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).The federal body, which is the licensing agent for use of the lake as a power source, requires that the licensee submit a Shoreline Management Plan—which addresses public access to both water and shoreline for recreation and navigation purposes; development of shoreline and riverfront area; and natural resource conservation environmental protection. A proposal has been submitted.According to FirstLight, New Fairfield and Sherman (two of the towns bordering the lake) and the Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials have protested the power company’s stance regarding the voluntary contribution. They are said to be seeking FERC influence in the matter.Howard Berger of Sherman, the CLA’s board chairman, was not available for comment as of press time.However, Larry Marsicano, CLA’s executive director, said that “FirstLight submitted a letter to FERC in response to the letters.“Some of the towns were pulling back support for the Shoreline Management Plan because of the funding issue.”For decades, the CLA has counted on contributions from the municipalities bordering the lake—Brookfield, Danbury, New Fairfield, New Milford, and Sherman—as well as the existing energy generator for its operating budget. The funding formula has been that each contributes an equal share.New Milford Mayor Patricia Murphy said Wednesday that she did not approach the FERC regarding the FirstLight funding matter.“I did not because I thought the Shoreline Management Plan has nothing to do with voluntary participation in providing funds for the CLA,” she said. “The Shoreline Management Plan should stand on its own merits, not on whether voluntary donations are made.”FirstLight’s anticipated $60,500 contribution for fiscal year 2010-11 was initially not forthcoming in the full amount—only $15,000 was presented—which caught the authority by surprise toward the end of its last budget year. Subsequently, during a face-to-face meeting in New Milford July 20, FirstLight made up the difference, presenting the CLA with a check in the amount of $45,500, for a total contribution of $60,500.“We agreed to provide them the funds to match the other contributions,” Charles Burnham, the external affairs representative for GDF Suez Energy North America, FirstLight’s parent company, said in an interview at the time, adding that the matter of future contributions would be reviewed.The funds, however, are “voluntary contributions,” and the traditional arrangement is not legally binding, Mr. Burnham reiterated this week.He said that was the crux of the letter FirstLight submitted Aug. 12 in response to the others FERC had received “that asked that FERC should compel us to pay the $60,000 or it would deny the Shoreline Management Plan.”But, he said, “We are complying with everything that the FERC license requires. If something were required by the federal agency, we’d be doing it. It’s fairly logical.“The idea is CLA and DEP [Department of Environmental Protection] have certain responsibilities and we have a certain responsibilities. We feel we’re meeting ours, according to our license,” Mr. Burnham said.In FirstLight’s letter to FERC, it states: “CLA’s decision to conduct supplemental or duplicative activities … cannot be the basis for the Commission to impose a funding obligation on FirstLight.”Mr. Marsicano said regarding the use of the word “duplicative” that “this is the first time I have seen this word come up.”He added, “A lot of things in the Shoreline Management Plan are modeled after what CLA has been doing.”When the authority was formed in 1972, it was a public safety lake patrol, “but it evolved over time to take on other roles as environmental issues became a concern,” Mr. Marsicano has said.Mr. Berger has reportedly estimated that FirstLight benefits from CLA services valued at more than $200,000 annually, not only including the lake patrol. He has noted CLA’s longtime role as the lake’s primary advocate and its education and outreach programs.He has pointed out that services such as those being provided by CLA are provided on other lakes by the bodies that are licensed by FERC to harness their water power.
View reader comments (0)Comment on this story
Return to Story «
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of The Litchfield County Times.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
*Password:Remember login?(requires cookies)Forgot Your Password?
Not Registered? Sign up today for free!
Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!
(children under 13 cannot register)
Return to Story «
Best Internet Sites To Track Hurricane IrenePreparing To Eat Without Electricity With Hurricane IreneHurricane Irene Tips From Ct Consumer Protection And Insurance Departments
See wrong or incorrect information in a story? Tell us here
Berkshire StyleJudy York: It Comes in ColorsAugust Bids 'Fair' For Good FoodThe Heart of the MatterStyle Writ Large in White
Summer of ContentmentCelebrating a Lake and MoreOld Bones, New LusterDirect Current ImagesMagnetic Millerton
View more photos from Litchfield County Times
Recent Activity on Facebook
View all AP National Headlines
Housatonic Media Group:
© CopyrightThe Litchfield County Times, aJournal Register Propertypart of Journal Register CT -- All rights reserved | Our Publications | About Our Ads | Privacy Policy/Terms of Service
Article original from: http://www.countytimes.com/articles/2011/08/18/news/doc4e4d7ac117a5d845810175.txt
