Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group
Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group
Elizabeth Cord, President
286 Sorrento Way
San Jose, CA 95119
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
State Energy Resources
Conservation and Development Commission
In the Matter of ) ) DOCKET NO.: 99-AFC-3 ) Metcalf Energy Center ) MOTION FOR STAY OF SITE ) CERTIFICATION PROCEEDINGS ) _______________________________)
Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group hereby requests a stay of site certification proceedings pending consideration of petitioner's Motion to Rescind the Commission Acceptance of the Application for Certification, for the above referenced AFC:
I. THE MOTION
This request is made on the grounds that there will be irreparable harm to the Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group if the Energy Commission allows continuation of the review of the subject AFC. In the absence of the stay, community members will be required review multiple projects within a constrained time period, depriving concerned residents of the required one-year timeframe for AFC review.
Furthermore, Petitioner's Motion to Rescind demonstrates that the original project has been materially changed; a new project is now being pursued by Applicant; the required one year timeline has not been applied to the new project. For these reasons, the public's right to participate in the project has been compromised.
The above is true to the best of my ability:
X Continuation pages are attached
Motion for Stay of Site Certification Proceedings pending review of Petitioner's Motion to Rescind the Commission Acceptance of the Application for Certification, filed December 16, 1999, is seconded by the following parties to the Siting Case:
Jeffrey Wade, Intervener
Scott Scholz, Intervener
Jim Cosgrove, Intervener
Mike Boyd for Californians for Renewable Energy, Intervener
Michael Murphy, Intervener
Michael Grothus, Intervener
The Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group submits this Request for Stay of Site Certification Proceedings to prevent irreparable harm to residents of San Jose and surrounding areas. The following reasons illustrate that harm:
1. New project is now being pursued; the original project submitted by Applicant has been abandoned. On April 30, 1999, Applicant submitted a 1,200 page Application for Certification (AFC). Community members, after reviewing AFC, traveled to Sacramento on June 23, 1999 to express numerous concerns about the AFC's substantial inadequacies.
Since AFC was deemed Data Adequate by the Energy Commission on June 23, 1999, Applicant has submitted numerous lengthy documents amending original submittal, including Supplement A, Supplement B, and responses to Data Requests.
Supplements and additions to AFC have numbered in excess of 2,500 pages, more than twice the number of pages in the original AFC. This will require review of enough pages to comprise more than two new AFC's. The original AFC was in fact inadequate, and now describes a project that is no longer under review by the California Energy Commission. Residents of San Jose and surrounding areas are irreparably harmed when a project is advanced with substantial errors and omissions requiring frequent and continuous amendments/supplements, and subsequent reviews of multiple projects.
2. Statutory one year timeline not applied to new project. As the revisions and supplements to the original AFC in fact comprise a substantively new project, this new project must be allowed a full one-year review period. Nearly half the year has already elapsed; residents of San Jose face irreparable injury unless the many changes recently submitted by Applicant trigger a new review process.
3. Public's right to participate in current project has been compromised. Neighbors of the proposed project have spent thousands of hours reviewing an AFC deemed Data Adequate by the California Energy Commission. Based on recent submittals changing substantive portions of the AFC, a completely new set of data must now be analyzed. Thousands of calculations meticulously prepared during first half year of review will now not be admissible in evidentiary hearings, as they apply to a project no longer under review. San Jose residents and concerned individuals and agencies face irreparable harm without the normally required one-year timeline in which to review the new project.
The 04/30/99 AFC is little more than a "placeholder" by an Applicant whose project was not adequately defined, in violation of siting statutes, regulations, and CEQA. Given the scarce resources of the California Energy Commission, it is reasonable to expect Applicant to define project before submitting an AFC, not develop the project during the review process, requiring numerous reviews as changes are submitted, wasting taxpayer resources reviewing a interim project configurations later abandoned, and seriously reducing staff's ability to produce a quality decision within the one-year timeline, as multiple reviews are undertaken.
Finally, as citizens and taxpayer, Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group believes that the Energy Commission should enforce a standard that promotes efficiency and fairness in its review process. The CEC should require that the Applicant pursue and secure the following entitlements and any others before utilizing CEC's scarce and valuable staff time on a project that may well never be entitled.
Many laws, ordinances, regulations, and standards (LORS) are not complied with in this project. Applicant must change project or seek variances or amendments to at least, but not limited to, the following LORS:
- City of San Jose's long-standing General Plan;
- Coyote Valley Master Plan;
- Current height restriction of 90' (project requires 145' stacks);
- City project on site currently under County jurisdiction; requires annexation from County and potential LAFCO issues;
- Riparian Corridor Setback requirement of 100'; project proposes 65' setback; and
- Significant Tree removal permits and loss of 73 Significant Trees
Site control in terms of LORS must precede lengthy analysis and review of project. Changes to site configuration to belatedly try to meet LORS after AFC is under review is unacceptable; research and analysis to configure original project to conform to LORS or seek amendment in advance of submittal of AFC should be required before an AFC is considered Data Adequate.
The Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group respectfully requests a Stay of Site Certification Proceedings to prevent irreparable harm pending the decision on Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group's Motion to Rescind the Commission Acceptance of the Application for Certification.