Moratoriums recommended

Moratoriums may be put in place on solar and battery storage developments.

Jay County Plan Commission recommended up to one-year moratoriums for future battery storage and solar facilities in the county after public hearings Thursday.

The decision moves next to Jay County Commissioners. If both recommendations are approved, the moratoriums would prevent developers from creating battery storage and solar facilities in Jay County for up to one year.

More than 30 visitors crammed into Community Resource Center’s meeting room Thursday, with several speaking in favor or against either facility coming to Jay County.

Battery storage

Jay County Plan Commission has discussed potential battery storage projects from NextEra Energy Resources and Jay County REMC.

Neil Draper, president and CEO of Jay County REMC, noted Thursday that his organization has been planning battery storage projects at some substations.

“This project allows our peak demand to be reduced during projected high-power usage times through the month and year,” he said. “Many people do not realize this, but the cost of electricity varies greatly throughout the day … the goal of this project is to charge batteries during night time with less expensive energy and use it to offset usage during those peak hours.”

Draper added that all of the power would be used locally for members of Jay County REMC. In addition, he said, a contract between Jay County REMC and generation and transmission electric cooperative Wabash Valley Power Alliance for moving forward with the project would provide guaranteed proceeds to Jay County REMC every month, helping keep members’ electricity costs low and bringing in capital funds to the cooperative.

Brent Reyher of Wabash Valley Power Alliance said there are three sites that have been earmarked as potential battery storage locations in Jay County. (Those sites are alongside substations in the areas of Trinity and Mount Zion — Mount Zion substation is currently in development — and Greene Township.)

Plans are to store energy alongside substations, he explained, on land owned by the cooperative. The properties would be fenced in and remotely monitored at all times.

Other protections include thermal management systems and battery cell isolation, according to documents shared at the meeting. The batteries would be made from lithium iron phosphate, which documents say is safer and more stable.

Paul Brown of Energy Safety Response Group noted battery storage is regulated, requiring various safety protocols to be put in place and approved for each facility.

Each site would store less than eight megawatts of energy.

“Battery storage would play a pivotal role to help keep costs down and offset some significant upward pressures in the cost of power today,” Reyher said.

If the three battery storage projects were to be delayed or canceled, he continued, there would be “upward pressure on retail rates for cooperative members.”

Taylor Christian, lead project manager at NextEra Energy Resources, noted his company is also undergoing safety measure discussions and testing for a potential project in Jay County.

Rural Portland resident Bob Lyons said NextEra Energy Resources, which owns and operates Bluff Point Wind Energy Center in southern Jay County and northern Randolph County, is planning a battery storage facility on his farm ground. He talked about the subsequent raise in assessed value and potential tax abatements that he said would benefit the whole of the county.

Rural Union City resident Diane Siegrist read from a prepared statement, voicing safety concerns with battery storage facilities and questioning whether Jay County REMC members would see benefits from it.

“How much more do we want to put in our county for the benefit of people not living here?” she asked. “Too many of our young, productive youth are moving out of the county. I just want it to be safe for my children, my grandchildren, future generations and don’t you want the same for your children and your grandchildren?”

 Commission member Jeanne Houchins said the commission needs to educate itself on battery storage before creating an ordinance. Plan commission member and Jay County Commissioners president Chad Aker and commission members Brad Daniels and Todd Skirvin shared similar sentiments.

“I just don’t want this to be the wild west,” Aker said.

Commission member Matt Minnich, who also serves as Jay County Council president, said landowners should be able to do what they want on their land.

Solar farms

Four companies — Invenergy, Scout Clean Energy, Leeward Renewable Energy and Hodson Energy — are planning solar farms in Jay County.

Jay/Portland Building and Planning director John Hemmelgarn noted none of the projects have started construction yet. Pati McLaughlin, assistant director of Jay/Portland Building and Planning, pointed out the moratorium will not impact those projects.

Several residents spoke in opposition of solar farms Thursday.

Approximately 5,441 acres of Jay County are slated for solar farms in the coming years, noted Diane Siegrist. She questioned how many of those acres are in “prime farm land” and how much more farm land the county plans to give up to solar farms.

Jeff Birsfield of rural Portland — he also previously served on a committee made to put together solar and wind ordinances — shared concerns about whether renewable energy sources are helping to reduce pollution and issues with current setback requirements for solar facilities.

Brady Johnson of rural Bryant noted he’ll have solar panels across from his property with one of the planned projects. He told plan commission not to listen to recommendations from company representatives who don’t live in Jay County. (Birsfield soon after read off a list indicating a majority of farmers involved in pending renewable energy projects don’t live in Jay County.)

Mark Trumbauer of NextEra Energy Resources suggested plan commission look at legislation passed from other counties and states, saying there are many others going through the same situation.

Lyons cautioned the county on setting a moratorium.

“It seems to me like you’re closing the barn door after the horse is out,” he said. “You’ve got four (projects), and you won’t let anymore in?”

Commissioner Duane Monroe said he would like to see a moratorium in place for solar companies to give officials time to consider ordinance stipulations, such as setback requirements.

Hemmelgarn noted some solar projects have asked for and received extensions on construction timelines. (Companies have cited delays with regional transmission organization PJM Interconnection's process.)

Aker questioned whether the county will see the solar projects take shape. He pointed out the projects would bring economic development dollars into the county and referenced Indiana Senate Bill 1, which in part could reduce county revenue. Aker said the county will need to look for a revenue replacement if the bill passes. 

Commission members and Hemmelgarn voiced concerns about the current solar ordinance, pointing out the county can’t measure its effectiveness on solar projects because none of the planned Jay County facilities have been completed.

Minnich noted when the solar ordinance was originally created more than six years ago, there weren’t commercial solar facilities near Jay County. That has since changed, he added.

Recommendations

Plan commission president Scott Hilfiker reminded commission members they weren’t making a decision Thursday on whether to accept or deny proposed projects.

Casey Wagner and Aker, Hilfiker, Skirvin, Daniels, Houchins and Minnich, absent Steve McIntosh, recommended up to one-year moratoriums on commercial battery storage and commercial solar operations. (As reminded by McLaughlin, officials can choose to end a moratorium at any time.)