SPILMAN THOMAS 84 A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W

Direct Dial: 304.340.3895 gshuman@spihanlaw,com

February 14,2014

‘VIA HAND DELIVERY Ms. Ingrid Ferrell Executive Secretary Public Service Co&ssion of West Virginia 201 Brooks Street Charleston, West Virginia 25301

Re: Case No. 14- DA 73 - E- c.5 - f e BEECH RIDGE ENERGY LLC AppIication for Waiver of Siting Certificate Modification Requirements or, in the alternative, for a Modification to Siting Certificate and Related Requests for Relief

Dear Ms. Ferrell:

Enclosed for filing on behalf of Beech Ridge Energy LLC (“Beech Ridge”) please find an original and twelve copies of “Beech Ridge Energy LLC’s Application for Waiver of Requirement of Modification or Amendment for its Siting Certificate, or, in the Alternative, Petition for a Modification of a Siting Certificate” (the “Application”) to permit Beech Ridge to construct an energy storage device (“ESD”) in Greenbrier County, West Virginia adjacent to the substation previously constructed pursuant to the Public Service Commission of West Virginia’s (the “Commission”) Order in Case No. 05-1590-E-CS on August 28, 2006 (the “Siting Certificate”).

In the Application, Beech Ridge respectfully requests that the Commission waive any requirement that Beech Ridge obtain a modification or amendment to the Certificate in connection with the planned installation of an ESD at the Beech Ridge Wind Farm that is currently in operation in Greenbrier and Nicholas Counties, West Virginia. In the alternative, if the Commission finds that the proposed modification is material, Beech Ridge respectfully requests that the Commission enter an Order modifying Beech Ridge’s siting certificate to allow construction of the proposed ESD.

Also enclosed are:

(1) An original and twelve copies of Form No, 2 “Notice of Filing” of the Rules Governing SitinP Certificates for Exempt Wholesale Generators, (the “Siting I_ Rules”), W. Va. Code St. R. tit. 150, 5 30-1, S ~ Q . The ESD project will be wholly constructed in Greenbrier County. Thus Beech Ridge would propose, unless the

Spiiman Center 1 300 Kanawha Boulevard, East Post Office Box 273 Charleston, WestVirginia 25321-0273 wspi l rnan lawcom 304340 3800 304340 3801 fax

West Virginia North Carolina Pennsylvania Virginia

SPILMAN THOMAS & BATTLE.,,,,

Ms. Ingrid Ferrell February 14,2014 Page 2

A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W

Commission objects, to publishing the Notice of Filing in newspapers published and circulated in Greenbrier County, and would also propose to publish the Notice of Filing in Kanawha County. The Notice of Filing has been sent electronically to the Executive Secretary’s Office; and

(2) An original and twelve copies of Form No, 3 “Application for Modification to or Amendment of a Siting Certificate”

Pursuant to the requirements of Rule 6.5 of the Sitin? Rules and LonPview Power. LLC, Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN, at 42 (Comm’n Order Feb. 16, 2007), Beech Ridge has enclosed a check representing the minimum filing fee of $1,000.00.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any quest regarding this matter.

GPHS/rh:5783653 Enclosures

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA

CHARLESTON

CASE NO. 14-

BEECH RIDGE ENERGY LLC Application for Waiver of Siting Certificate Modification Requirements or, in the alternative, for a Modification to Siting Certificate and Related Requests for Relief

BEECH RIDGE ENERGY LLC’S APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF REQUIREMEW OF MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT FOR ITS SITING CERTIFICATE,

OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PETITION FOR A MODIFICATION OF A SITING CERTIFICATE

I INTRODUCTION

COMES NOW Beech Ridge Energy LLC (“BRE I” or “Beech Ridge”), by counsel, and

pursuant to Rule 6.1 of the Public Service Commission of West Virginia’s (the “C~mmission”)

Rules Governing Siting Certificates for Exempt Wholesale Generators, (the “Siting Rulesy7), W,

Va. Code St. R. tit. 150, 0 30-1, et seq., respectfully requests that the Commission waive’ any

requirement that Beech Ridge obtain a modification or amendment to its existing siting

certificate (the “Certificate”) in connection with the planned installation of an energy storage

device (“ESD”) at the Beech Ridge Wind Farm (the “Wind Farm” or the “Project”) that is

currently in operation in Greenbrier and Nicholas Counties, West Virginiam2 In the alternative, if

the Commission finds that the proposed modification is material, Beech Ridge respectfully

requests that the Commission enter an Order modifying Beech Ridge’s siting certificate to allow

construction of the proposed ESD,

Beech Ridge has used the term “waiver” because it is set forth in 6.1 of the Siting Rules as the mechanism to accomplish the instant request. Should the Commission conclude that a “waiver” is not the appropriate remedy, Beech Ridge respectfully requests that the Commission issue a determination that the modification sought herein is not material. * The combined wattage of BRE I, the previously certificated Beech RidgeEnergy I1 LLGproject-and the-proposed ESD will not exceed 186 megawatts (,‘MW”) of generation, which was previously approved by the Commission in this case. At present, BRE I has constructed 67 turbines, producing 100.5 MW.

Beech Ridge represents that the ESD will not constitute a material modification to the

Wind Farm in that it will not alter the design, change the footprint, or increase the transmission

or generation of the Wind Farm, nor will it materially affect viewshed, sound levels, emissions or

other environmental concerns with regard to the Project. Beech Ridge also requests that the

Commission retain this Petition for decision, and accord it expedited consideration pursuant to

the Commission’s procedure^.^

11. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1 . On November 1, 2005, Beech Ridge filed with the Commission, pursuant to W.

Va. Code $5 24-2-1(c) and 24-2-11c, an application for a siting certificate for the construction

and operation of a wholesale electric generating facility, including a 138 kV related transmission

support line, associated interconnection facilities, and other necessary appurtenances (the

“Application”).

2. On August 28,2006, the Commission granted Beech Ridge a siting certificate for

a wind-powered generating facility of up to 186 MW capacity to be located nine miles northeast

of Rupert in Greenbrier County and for an approximately 13.8 mile 138 kV transmission line tQ

connect the generating facility to Allegheny Power’s (now Monongahela Power, a FirstEnergy

Company) Grassy Falls substation near Nettie in Nicholas County. By its terns, the siting

certificate was contingent upon various pre-construction, post-construction and operational

conditions. (Comm’n Order, August 28, 2006, at 1, 87). Certain intervenors petitioned the

Commission to reconsider the

petitions.

order, and on January 11, 2007, the Commission denied these

A full filing fee is not necessary for a waiver petition pursuant to Rule 6.1 of the Siting Rules, unless fie Commission determines that the modification is material. See Longview Power. LLC, Case No. 03-1 ~~O-E-CS-CN, at 42 (Comm’n Order Feb. 16,2007). Beech Ridge has tendered the minimum filing fee under-Rde 6.5 of t h e m Rules, and, should the Commission determine that the modification sought herein is “material,” Beech Ridge shall submit the required fee forthwith.

2

3. The case was appealed twice to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia,

where the Commission Orders were affirmed, Beech Ridge satisfied the conditions in the

Commission’s August 28, 2006 Order, and ultimately sixty-seven wind turbines representing

100.5 MW were completed and placed into service in 2010.

4. In Animal Welfare Institute v. Beech Ridge Energy, 675 F. Supp. 2d 540 (D. Md.

2009) (the “Federal Litigation”), Beech Ridge opponents sought to enjoin construction of the

Project, alleging that it would “take” listed Indiana bats in violation of Section 9 of the

Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), In early 2010, the federal District Court approved a settlement

that prohibited construction beyond sixty-seven wind turbines until Beech Ridge had secured an

Incidental Take Permit (“ITP”) under Section 10 of the ESA from the United States Fish and

Wildlife Service (“USFWS”).

5 . Beech Ridge began the process of securing the ITP in January 2010 and was

issued an ITP on December 5,20 13,

6. In the meantime, on August 24, 2012, Beech Ridge Energy I1 LLC (“BRE 11”)

applied for a siting certificate for the construction of up to 33 turbines, which could generate

between 53.5 and 85.5 MW, on land adjacent to the land where the 67 BRE I turbines are

installed. This is the project known as the BRE I1 Project, for which the Commission entered an

Order granting it a separate siting certificate with conditions on June 19, 2013. As of February

20 14, construction has not commenced on BRE IL4

111. TECHNICAL DATA

7 . The ESD will have a combined nominal output of up to 32.4 MW, comprised of

18 1.8 MW modules consisting of lithium-ion batteries, inverters, transformers and cooling

It should be noted that the 100.5 MW BRE I Wind Farm currently operating is sufficient for the proposed ESD to function and to provide the benefits set forth below.

3

system^.^ The lithiunion batteries used in the ESD are the same kind of batteries used

worldwide in a variety of applications, including cordless power tools and battery powered or

hybrid vehicles. The batteries are grouped into battery packs or modules that are loaded into

trays and the trays are mounted in floor-to-ceiling racks inside a standard shipping container,

Exact configuration and dimensions of the container will vary depending on the final vendor

selected to provide the battery units, The shipping containers used by one likely vendor are 40’

long, 8’ wide and 9-1/2’ tall.

8. Each 1.8 MW module includes: one standard shipping container housing four

battery strings; four 450 kW inverters to convert power between direct current and alternating

current; a chiller to cool the battery containers; and a transformer for the inverter. A preliminary

layout of the 1.8 MW modules is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

9. The ESD will produce 480 V output that will be converted to 34.5 kV by

padmount transformers inside the battery yard, The battery yard will be connected to the Wind

Farm substation by a short overhead line (4000 fi) or an underground cable that will lead to a

new 34.5 kV breaker and switches to be installed in the Wind Farm substation. (& Exhibit 2).

10. The construction process will involve minimal site work due to the location of the

ESD adjacent to the site of the Wind Farm’s substation, which is already constructed. (‘

Exhibits 3-4). Once the site is prepared, foundations for the shipping containers and concrete

pads for other components of the ESD will be installed and the shipping containers and other

components will then be trucked in and offloaded onto the foundations. Conduits and wiring

(mostly at grade or underground) will be installed to connect the various components of the ESD

The BRE I wind turbines and ESD will have a nominal rating of 132.9 MW-collectively (100.5 MW of wind turbines and 32.4 MW of ESD capacity). To ensure the total output from BRE I and BRE I1 does not exceed the 186 MW limit of the current PJM approvaIs, BRE I1 would be limited to 53.1 MW of potential generation.

4

Lighting will only be used when outdoor activities are being performed in the battery yard.

11. Each battery storage container will contain a fire detection and suppression

system. The suppression system will be gas-based using the common HFC-227ea gas, which is

suited for a workplace. The ozone depletion potential (‘‘0”’’) of the gas is zero. The release

material would be a gas with no color, taste or pollution. The air inside the battery storage

containers will be clean with no leftover gas after ventilation. i 12. The purpose of the ESD is twofold: to regulate the “ramp rate” of the Project and

to provide automatic generation control (“AGC”). The Project will gain the capability to regulate

its own ramp rate, controlling the rate at which power output from the Project to the grid

changes. For example, the ESD will be able to store energy generated by the wind turbines, and

release it when appropriate. Additionally, the AGC capability will enable the Project to provide

the ancillary service of “Regulation” by increasing or decreasing its power output. Regulation

helps PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (“PJM”), the grid operator, to match generation levels with

short-term changes in electricity use in order to maintain stable grid frequency at 60.0 Hz. The

resources selected to provide Regulation in each hour earn a payment based on the amount of

flexible capacity being provided. The market-based payment to each resource, known as the

“regulation market clearing price,” is determined hourly by PJM based on the set of resources

offering and clearing in the market. The Project will earn revenue through its participation in the

PJM Regulation market. The Project’s participation in this market is authorized under the

Project’s authorization by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) to make sales

at market based rates.

13. PJM conducted a study concerning the movement of approximately 33 MW of

wind generation of the previously approved interconnection capacity to approximately 32 MW of

I 5

battery technology. PJM found that there were no issues concerning this proposal. Beech Ridge

will be tendered a revised Interconnection Services Agreement that will be executed by Beech

Ridge, PJM and FirstEnergy, which will be in place before the ESD goes online.

14. The estimated cost of the ESD is $20 million. Beech Ridge intends to transfer the

portion of the siting certificate that concerns the ESD to Beech Ridge Energy Storage LLC

(“BRES”), which will be a wholly-owned subsidiary of Beech Ridge and will own and operate

the ESD assets. The BRES transfer enables the ESD to be financed separately f’rom the BRE I

project. In form and function, the ESD will be owned and operated by the same individuals who

own and operate Beech Ridge. Because the proposed ESD is located within the “footprint” of

Beech Ridge and because it is an enhancement of the ability of BRE I to deliver its energy to the

PJM system, the right to build and operate the ESD is sought with respect to the B E I

certificatee6

15. All of the funding required for construction, installation, and implementation of

the ESD will be private. BRES will not rely on any government or state funds, such as a federal

loan guarantee or direct grants, to develop or construct the ESD.’

16. Beech Ridge intends to use local electrical and mechanical workers to construct

the ESD yard, foundations, and connections to the substation, many of whom are expected to be

drawn from the local area.

Beech Ridge intends to affect the transfer pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Siting Rules after the conclusion of this case. ’ An energy storage device is considered “wind energy property,” as defined by Treasury Regulations, Subchapter A, 5 1.48-9(e)(I), and is thus eligible to qualify for a federal investment tax credit (“ITC”) after it has been constructed and placed into service. Because an ITC is only available after the ESD has been constructed and placed into commercial operation, an ITC is not considered public funding. Under Section 1603 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009, BRES may elect to seek a payment from the United States Department of the Treasury in lieu of the ITC that-would otherwise beavailable foF the Projeck Again, because any such payment is not available to BRES until after the Project is constructed and placed into service, it does not constitute public funding.

6

IV, LEGAL ANALYSIS

17. Since this case was first filed in 2005, wind turbine technology, and related

alternate renewable energy facilities, have improved, and become more efficient and diverse.

ESD is one of these i.mprovements. This is no surprise given the increased demand for

renewable energy. And, indeed, in June 2009, the West Virginia Legislature passed &e

Alternative and Renewable Energy Portfolio Act (the “Energy Portfolio Act”). W. Va. Code $3

24-2F- 1, et sea. In it, the West Virginia Legislature declared that “[tlhe development of a robust

and diverse portfolio of electric-generating capacity is needed for West Virginia to continue its

success in attracting new businesses and jobs. This portfolio must include the use of alternative

and renewable energy resources at new and existing facilities.” a. 9 24-2F-2(4). The Legislature

also stated that “[it] is in the public interest for the state to encourage the construction of

alternative and renewable energy resource facilities that increase the capacity to provide for

current and anticipated electric energy demand at a reasonable price.” Id. 9 24-2F-2(7).

18. Beech Ridge does not believe that the I construction of the ESD is a material

modification within the meaning of the Siting Rules, and, therefore, a waiver of any requirement

to seek amendment or modification of Beech Ridge’s siting certificate is appropriate pursuant to

Rule 6.1. AES Laurel Mountain, LLC, Case No. 10-1824-E-CS-PC (Comm’n Order June

29,201 1) (concluding that a nearly identical ESD project was not a material modification),

19. The Siting: Rules provide a mechanism for seeking a waiver of the requirement to

obtain a modification or amendment of a siting certificate. Indeed, the Sitinn Rules state, in

pertinent part, as follows:

If an owner or operator of a 24-2-1 (c) generating facility for which a Siting certificate has been issued plans to: construct the facility using engineering design plans different than those filed with its original Siting certificate application; modify the footprint of the 24-2-l(c) generating facility; increase the transmission or

7

generation of the 24-2-1(c) generating facility; make any modification to the 24-2-1(c) generating facility with a potential for environmental impact, then the owner or operator must obtain prior Commission approval of such modification. If the owner or operator believes that when considering the totality of the circumstances surrounding any such modification, the modification is not material or that the modification will not materially affect the viewshed impacts, noise Ievels, emissions or other environmental impacts, it may petition the Commission for waiver of the requirement to obtain a modification or amendment to its Siting certificate. The Commission may deny or grant such request or it may limit the information required to be filed, depending on the circumstances of the proposed modification.

Siting; Rule 6.1 (emphasis added).

20. With respect to this regulatory provision, the Commission has previously stated

that “[als the Commission previously granted , . . [a] siting certificate, it is now necessary to look

at the proposed incremental changes in the Project and determine whether those proposed

incremental changes sway the outcome or have an influence or effect on the terms of the original

siting certificate.” Lonaview Power, LLC, Case No. 03-1 860-E-CS-CN, at 41 (Comm’n Order

Feb. 16, 2007). The Commission fbrther observed that “[mlateriality is not an absolute concept,

It is necessary to look at the surrounding circumstances.” Id. With these preliminary legal

parameters in place, Beech Ridge believes that the very minor incremental changes occasioned

by the construction of the ESD would neither sway the outcome of the original siting certificate,

nor have any effect on the terms of the original siting certificate.

2 1. The impact of the ESD on the Wind Farm is not material. And, as a matter of fact,

the ESD does not change the engineering design plans or generating capacity of the Project. The

ESD will fall within the existing footprint of the Project. The ESD will utilize approximately 1-2

8

acres of land (not otherwise occupied) owned by Plum Creek Timberlands, LP8 and leased by

BRES, directly adjacent or in close proximity to the Project substation. Only minor changes or

additions to roads constructed for the Project will be necessary for access to the ESD site. Due to

the short installation schedule for the ESD, the volume and frequency of any increased

construction-related traffic will be minimal and short-lived.

A. The construction of the ESD will not materiallv affect viewshed imllacts.

22. The viewshed of the Project will be virtually unchanged. The total height of the

ESD will be approximately 12-1 5’ above grade, which is significantly lower than portions of the

adjacent substation.

23. The existing Wind Farm substation covers an area of approximately 0.5 acres

(127 feet x 143 feet), and contains steel structures up to 50 feet tall.

24. Therefore, it is apparent that the construction of the ESD would neither sway the

outcome of the original siting case, nor have any effect on the terms of the original siting

certificate because of the ESD’s low profile.

25. Additionally, it is important to note that the Commission has permitted a waiver

of the requirement of seeking a modification of a siting certificate in analogous circumstances in

the past. Indeed, in the Longview case cited above, the Commission concluded as a matter of

law that “increasing the boiIer building from 257 feet high to 270 feet and increasing the steam

turbine building from 100 to 120 feet, where such increases result in the buildings being seen

from an additional 0.096 square miles of land . , . does not constitute a material modification of

the existing siting certificate.” Lonaview, at 43. Further, in AES Laurel Mountain, supra, the

Commission approved a nearly identical request concerning an ESD.

Whin the Beech Ridge Siting Certificate was originally granted, the site was owned by MeadWestvaco Corporation (“MeadWestvaco”), but on December 6, 2013, MeadWestvaco sold the property to Plum Creek Timberlands, LP, a wholIy-owned subsidiary of Plum Creek Timber Company Inc.

9

26. As in AES Laurel Mountain, the construction of the ESD does not constitute a

material modification for the purposes of viewshed.

B. The construction of the ESD will not materiallv affect noise levels.

27. An analysis of sounds associated with the components of the ESD has determined

that the ESD will have negligible effects on total Project sound levels, with increases in total

modeled Ldn sound levels at the closest residences being less than 0.2 decibel. (See Exhibit 5).

The projected sound impact of the ESD was modeled under a worst case scenario with both the

wind turbines and the ESD operating at full load conditions. Consequently, the construction of an

ESD does not constitute a material modification for the purposes of noise impacts.

C. The construction of the ESD will not materiallv affect emissions.

28. The ESD generates no emissions and will have no impact on air or ground water

quality. A General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System - Water Pollution Control

Permit for Stomwater Associated with Construction Activities will be required from the West

Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (“DEP”).

D, The construction of the ESD will not materiaIlv affect environmental imaacts.

29. Nothing in the size, composition, location, operation or nature of the ESD

suggests that it will have any adverse impact on the environment, any protected or endangered

species, or any architectural or archaeological resources in the area of the Project. Currently,

Beech Ridge believes that no additional environmental permits are required either for the ESD or

for the Project as a result of the ESD.

30. Beech Ridge will consult with DEP, together with any other applicable agency, to

ensure that no hrther permitting is required.

31. Of course, Beech Ridge would comply, where applicable, with all conditions

contained in the Commission’s prior Orders.

10

E. Conclusion

32. As discussed above, the proposed construction of the ESD has no effect on the

Additionally, the proposed viewshed analysis previously conducted by the Commission,

construction of the ESD will not affect noise in a material way. There are no endangered species

in the vicinity of the Project, but, in any event, Beech Ridge will adhere to the requirements of its

ITP. There is no reason to expect that the construction of the ESD would cause an increase in

bird or bat mortality.

33. Based upon the foregoing, therefore, it is evident that Beech Ridge’s construction

of the ESD is not a material modification within the meaning of Rule 6.1 of the Siting Rules. As

a result, Beech Ridge respectfully requests that the Commission waive any requirement for

Beech Ridge to seek an amendment or modification of its siting certificate in order for Beech

Ridge to construct an ESD, or to declare that the modification sought herein is not material. In

the alternative, if the Commission finds that the proposed modification is material, Beech Ridge

respectfully requests that the Commission enter an Order modifying Beech Ridge’s siting

certificate to allow construction of the proposed ESD.’

V. CONCLUSION

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth herein, and those reasons apparent to the

Commission, Beech Ridge Energy LLC respectfully requests that the Commission enter an

Order waiving any requirement for Beech Ridge to obtain an amendment or modification of its

siting certificate in order for Beech Ridge to construct the ESD, or to declare that the

modification sought herein is not material In the alternative, if the Commission finds that the

proposed modification is material, Beech Ridge respectfully requests that the Commission enter

In this regard, Beech Ridge has filed herewith Form No. 3 “Application for Modification to or Amendment of a Siting Certificate” out of an abundance of caution.

11

an Order modifying Beech Ridge’s siting certificate to allow construction of the proposed ESD,

together with such other and further relief as the Commission deems proper.

Respectfully submitted this 14th day of February 20 14.

BEECH RIDGE ENERGY LLC

Spilman Center 300 Kanawha Boulevard, East Charleston, West Virginia 25301

Ifeinberg@spilmanlaw.com sriggs@spilmanlaw.com gshurnan@spihanlaw.com

(304) 340-3800

12

CASE NO. 14-

BEECH FUDGE ENERGY LLC Application for Waiver of Siting Certificate Modification Requirements or, in the alternative, for a Modification to Siting Certificate and Related Requests for Relief

VERIFICATION

KEWV E. PARZYCK, the Vice-president of Development of Invenergy LLC

(“Invenergy”), being first duly sworn, says that the swements contained in the foregoing

BEECH RIDGE ENERGY LLC’S APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF REQUIREMENT OF

MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT FOR ITS SITING CERTIFICATE, OR, IN THE

ALTERNATIVE, PETITION FOR A MODIFICATION OF A SITING CERTIFICATE are

true, except so far as they are therein stated to b

therein stated to be on information and belief, he believes

Taken, sworn to and subscribed before me this 13 t/\ day of February 2014.

MY commission expires 3 * g 2 01 7

Notary Pubhc OFFICIAL SEAL

RUTH M NAOOLNY Nolary Public - Stale of Illinois

My Commission Expires Mar 8, 2017

[SEAL]

13

I ,-----_I

I I

I I I

I I

: 8 ” I

BEECH RIDGE ENERGY STORAGE DEVICE (ESD)

15 mile Transmission Line (138 kv) I

Invenergy

- EXISTING - PROPOSED

I EXHIBIT2 I

Ch!:OgO. I#!noIl56606 13121 Z2d.ilW Beech Ridge Baftery Sforage, Greenbrier County, West Virginia January 29,2014 1 I

Turbine Layout Map Beech Ridge Energy Wind Farm Project, Greenbrier County, West Virginia

EXHIBIT4 I Rev.03 1 1 lnvenergy One SeulhWwkerDOveSulte I?@? 1 Chicog$, ill,, I*,_llM lillncli bCh@C December 12, 2013

/ I ," ~ ... -- I

*' Telephone: 617-499-8018 Facsimile: 617-499-8074 E-mail: jbames @ acentech.com

c

Acentech Incorporated 33 Moulton Street Cambridge, MA 02138

Acentech 30 January 2014

Invenergy Wind LLC 120 N. Lee Street Falls Church, VA 22046

*** via email (EMiller@invenergyllc.com) ***

Attention: Eric Miller Director, Business Development

SEbject: Acoustical Analysis of Proposed Energy Storage Facility Beech Ridge Wind Project - Phase 1 Greenbrier County, WV Acentech Project No. 624468

References: Your Jan. 2014 emails to me Acentech Project Nos. 618556 and 621206

Dear Mr. Miller:

At your request, we have estimated the potential sound of the planned new Energy Storage Device (ESD) facility that you propose to install near the substation serving the Beech Ridge Wind - Phase 1 Project in Greenbrier County, WV. The proposed ESD facility will consist of 18 BYD containers with batteries and supporting electronic equipment, plus 18 pad-mounted transformers, each rated at approximately 2 MVA. This letter presents estimated ESD facility sound levels at representative community residential locations and compares them to measured ambient and estimated turbine sound levels developed during the Beech Ridge Wind - Phase 1 studies in 2005-2006 with the original proposed turbine layout, and also, to updated turbine sound estimates developed more recently using the as-built (existing) turbine layout.

We updated our CadndA computer sound model for the Beech Ridge Wind project and estimated the sound contributions of the existing 67 turbines, the existing substation transformer, and the ESD facility. The source levels were based on turbine and ESD vendor data and on our measurements near the Beech Ridge substation transformer. Our studies assumed the wind turbines and ESD equipment were operating at the maximum sound levels provided by the vendors. The residential receptor locations within one-mile of the Beech Ridge Wind - Phase 1 project boundary were provided to us by Invenergy. Table 1 presents the pertinent results of our analysis at the nearest residential locations to the ESD facility:

Architecrural Acoustics Audiovisual and Sound System Design IT Infrastructure Noise and Vibration Control Envrronmental ana Indurrrial Acousrics

Eric Miller Beech Ridge Wind - ESD Project 30 January 2014 Page 2

Table 1. Distances and Measured and Estimated A-Weighted Ldn Sound Levels* (dBA) at Nearest

Representative Residential Locations to the Planned ESD Facility. " distance to Sound - Residential ESD facility Location ambient

I Nearest 1 1 213,000 residence to I Nw I I ---

Estimated Sound - original

2006 turbine layout

<47

52

35

44 1 l5 I 44 I <O.l

* Sound levels measured and estimated to 0.1 dBA and rounded off to whole numbers for display.

The results indicate estimated ESD facility Ldn sound levels that are at least 14 dBA below the estimated turbine levels for the original (2006) and existing (2014) turbine layouts and at least 3 1 dBA below the ambient levels measured in 2005. Our model estimates also indicate that addition of the ESD to the wind project increases project sound levels at nearest community residential locations by a negligible amount of less than 0.2 dBA.

* * * * *

Please contact me if you have any questions regarding our analysis or this letter.

Sincerely yours,

James D. Barnes Acentech Incorporated

Acentech

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA

CHAIUESTON

At a session of the PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA in the City of Charleston on the day of February, 2014.

CASE NO. 14-

BEECH RIDGE ENERGY LLC Application for Waiver of Siting Certificate Modification Requirements or, in the alternative, for a Modification to Siting Certificate and Related Requests for Relief

NOTICE OF FILING

By an Order issued in Case Number 05-1590-E-CS on August 28, 2006, the Public Service Commission of West Virginia (the “Commission” granted Beech Ridge Energy LLC (“Beech Ridge”), a Siting Certificate, pursuant to W. Va. Code 0 24-2-1 IC, for a 186 megawatt (MW) wind-powered generating facility, to be located nine miles northeast of Rupert in Greenbrier County, and for an approximately 13.8-mile 138 kV transmission line to connect the generating facility to Allegheny Power’s Grassy Falls substation near Nettie in Nicholas County.

On February 14, 2014, Beech Ridge filed an Application requesting that the Commission waive any requirement that Beech Ridge obtain a modification or amendment to its existing siting certificate (the “Certificate”) in connection with the planned installation of an energy storage device (“ESD”) at the Beech Ridge Wind Farm (the “Wind Farm” or the “Project”) that is currently in operation in Greenbrier and Nicholas Counties, West Virginia, or to declare that the modification sought is not material, In the alternative, if the Commission finds that the proposed modification is material, Beech Ridge requests that the Commission enter an Order modifying Beech Ridge’s siting certificate to allow construction of the proposed ESD.

Beech Ridge represents that the ESD will not constitute a material modification to the Wind Farm in that it will not alter the design, change the footprint, or increase the transmission or generation of the Wind Farm, nor will it materially affect viewshed, sound levels, emissions or other environmental concerns with regard to the Project.

The ESD will have a combined nominal output of up to 32.4 MW, comprised of 18 1.8 MW modules consisting of lithium-ion batteries, inverters, transformers and cooling systems. The lithium-ion batteries used in the ESD are the same kind of batteries used worldwide in a variety of applications, including cordless power tools and battery powered or hybrid vehicles. The batteries are grouped into battery packs or modules that are loaded into trays and the trays are mounted in floor-to-ceiling racks inside a standard shipping container. Exact configuration and dimensions of the container will vary depending on the final vendor selected to provide the battery ~ units. The shipping containers used by one likely ~~ vendor ~~ are 40’ long, ~~ 8’ wide and 9-1/2’ tall.

The construction process Will involve minimal work due to the location of the ESD adjacent to the site of the Wind Farm’s substation, which is already constructed.

Further information concerning the Application and the Energy Storage Device is available in the case file at the Commission offices at 201 Brooks Street, Charleston, West Virginia, or on the Commission website, w.psc.state.wv.us, by (1) clicking on Case Information in the left-side area of the Commission home page, and then (2) selecting Case, under the heading Search, (3) inserting 14- in the Case Number field, and (4) clicking Search, followed by Activities.

Anyone desiring to protest the Application or intervene in this case must file a written protest or request to intervene within thirty (30) days of the date of the publication of this notice. Anyone requesting a hearing in this case must file such request in writing within the same 30-day period and state why a hearing is necessary. Failure to timely protest or intervene can affect y o u right to protest or participate in future proceedings in this case. If no substantial protests are received within said thirty-day (30-day) period, the Commission may waive formal hearing and grant the Application based on the evidence submitted with the Application and the Commission review of it. All protests or requests to intervene shall briefly state the reason@) for the protest or intervention. Requests to intervene must comply with the Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure, 150 C.S.R. Series 1, which are available via a link on the Commission home page to the website of the West Virginia Secretary of State, All protests, requests to intervene, and requests for hearing must be addressed to Ingrid Ferrell, Executive Secretary, Post Office Box 812, Charleston, West Virginia 25323, and must be marked to be filed in Case Number 14-

BEECH RTDGE ENERGY LLC

[Form No. 31

I

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

CHARLESTON

CASE NO. 14-

BEECH RIDGE ENERGY LLC Application for Waiver of Siting Certificate Modification Requirements or, in the alternative, for a Modification to Siting Certificate and Related Requests for Relief

APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION TO OR AMENDMENT OF A SITING CERTIFICATE

COMES NOW the above-named Beech Ridge Energy LLC, the applicant herein, by

counsel, and respectfully shows the Commission as follows:

1. That the name and address of the applicant is Beech Ridge Energy LLC, One

South Wacker Drive, Suite 1900, Chicago, Illinois 60606

2. That the applicant proposes to install an energy storage device (“ESD”) at its

100.5 MW Beech Ridge Wind Power Project (the “Project”) that is currently operating in

Greenbrier and Nicholas Counties, West Virginia. The Project is more fully described in “Beech

Ridge Energy LLC’s Application for Waiver of Requirement of Modification or Amendment for

its Siting Certificate, or, in the Alternative, Petition for a Modification of a Siting Certificate”

(the “Application”).

3. Attached hereto is a Certificate of Authority of a Foreign Limited Liability

Company issued to Beech Ridge on October 18,2005 by the Secretary of State of West Virginia.

The applicant remains in good standing and authorized to do business in West Virginia.

1

4. Commission approval of the requested modification or amendment should be

granted for the reasons set forth in the Application.

Respectfully submitted this 14th day of February 20 1 4.

BEECH RIDGE ENERGY LLC

By SPILMAN TFJ

$usan J. (WV S t a t e m 5 2 4 6 ) Grant P.H. Shuman (WV State Bar #8856) Spilman Center 300 Kanawha Boulevard, East Charleston, West Virginia 25301

lfeinberg@spiImanlaw.com sriggs@spiIrnanlaw.com gshuman@spilmanlaw .corn

(304) 340-3800

2

I, Betty Ireland, Secretary of State of th e State of West Virginia, hereby certijj that

BEECH FUDGE ENERGY LLC Control Number: 80058

a limited liability company, organized under the Iaws of the State of Delaware has filed its "Application for Certificate of Authority" in my office accofding to the provisions of West Virginia Code $3 1B-I 0-1 002. I hereby declare the organization to be registered as a foreign limited liability company from its effective date of October 18,2005 until a certificate of cancellation is filed with our office.

Therefore, I hereby issue this

CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY OF A FOREIGN LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

to the limited liability company authorizing it to transact business in West Virginia

Given under my hand and the Great Seal of the State of

West P7rginia on this day 01 October 18,2005

B Secrefury of State