Enter your email address to receive new posts in your inbox:

Delivered by FeedBurner


Like what you see? Share!


DISCLAIMER: This blog is published for general information only - it is not intended to constitute legal advice and cannot be relied upon by any person as legal advice. While we welcome you to contact our authors, the submission of a comment or question does not create an attorney-client relationship between the Firm and you.

Entries in Maine DEP (24)


First Wind's Bingham Wind Power Project Approved by Maine DEP

The 62-turbine Bingham wind power project has been approved by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection.  Earlier this month the DEP issued the project license pursuant to Maine’s Site Location of Development Act and Natural Resources Protection Act.  The project, which has elements in several towns and unorganized townships in southern Piscataquis and Somerset counties, will be the largest wind power project in Maine.  Construction on the project could begin as early as this winter.  The Bingham project is represented by Verrill Dana Attorneys Juliet Browne and Gordon Smith.


Energy News Roundup: October 5-October 11

This week in regional energy news …


Energy News Roundup: July 27-August 2

This week in regional energy news …


Energy News Roundup: March 16-March 22

This week in regional energy news …  


Energy News Roundup: March 2-March 8

This week in regional energy news …


Energy News Roundup: January 26-February 1

This week in regional energy news …


Law Court Hears Oral Argument in Appeal of Oakfield Wind Power Project

The Maine Supreme Court heard oral argument yesterday in an appeal of the Department of Environmental Protection license issued to First Wind for the construction of a 150-megawatt wind power project in and around Oakfield, Maine.  The single issue raised in the appeal was the project opponents’ claim that the statutory visual impact standard applied by the DEP was unconstitutionally vague.  Counsel for the project opponents faced an uphill task as the Court recently held in Uliano v. Board of Environmental Protection that a similar, less detailed visual impact standard contained in the Natural Resources Protection Act was sufficiently specific to withstand a void for vagueness challenge.  The justices appeared skeptical of the opponents’ legal claim, at one point noting that that the statutory standard’s requirement that visual impacts be “reasonable” is an objective concept found throughout the law.  The Court also questioned whether the opponents had waived their right to raise the issue of unconstitutional vagueness because they had not raised it during the administrative appeal to the Maine Board of Environmental Protection.  First Wind was represented in the appeal by Verrill Dana Attorneys Juliet Browne and Gordon Smith.