M E M O R A N D U M

Noise Analysis PPM Top Notch Wind Farm TO: Top Notch Project Team

FROM: Mark Bastasch/CH2M HILL

DATE: April 24, 2006

Summary This memorandum provides a baseline noise assessment for the proposed Top Notch Wind Power Facility (the Facility). Atlantic Wind, LLC proposes to construct a wind generation facility in Herkimer County, New York, with generating capacity of up to approximately 100 megawatts (MW). The facilities noise levels were compared to the local noise requirements and New York State noise guidelines.

The facilities noise levels are predicted to comply with the Town of Fairfield’s Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance limit of 50 dBA at non-participating land owners. In fact, the facility is predicted to comply with the 50 dBA limit at all residences, both participating and non-participating. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NY DEC) published guidance “Assessing and Mitigating Noise Impacts” suggest that “new noise sources should probably not increase the noise level by more than 6 dBA”. The facilities noise level is predicted not to exceed the existing levels by 6 dBA under low wind speeds. Under wind speeds that result in full power generation, the facilities noise level is predicted to exceed existing levels by up to 8 dBA at 10 non-participating landowners, but maintains compliance with the Town of Fairfield’s Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance limit of 50 dBA.

Fundamentals of Acoustics It is useful to understand how noise is defined and measured. Noise is defined as unwanted sound. Airborne sound is a rapid fluctuation of air pressure above and below atmospheric pressure. There are several ways to measure noise, depending on the source of the noise, the receiver, and the reason for the noise measurement. Table 1 summarizes the technical noise terms used in this memo.

TABLE 1 Definitions of Acoustical Terms

Term Definitions

Ambient noise level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

Decibel (dB) A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the measured pressure to the reference pressure, which is 20 micropascals.

A-weighted sound pressure level (dBA)

The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighted filter network. The A-weighted filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. All sound levels in this report are A-weighted.

1

TABLE 1 Definitions of Acoustical Terms

Term Definitions

Equivalent Sound Level (Leq)

The Leq integrates fluctuating sound levels over a period of time to express them as a steady state sound level. As an example, if two sounds are measured and one sound has twice the energy but lasts half as long, the two sounds would be characterized as having the same equivalent sound level. Equivalent Sound Level is considered to be directly related to the effects of sound on people since it expresses the equivalent magnitude of the sound as a function of frequency of occurrence and time.

Day–Night Level (Ldn or DNL)

The Day-Night level (Ldn or DNL) is a 24 hour average Leq where 10 dBA is added to nighttime levels between 10 pm and 7 am. For a continuous source that emits the same noise level over a 24 hour period, the Ldn will be 6.4 dB greater than the Leq.

Statistical noise level (Ln)

The noise level exceeded during n percent of the measurement period, where n is a number between 0 and 100 (for example, L50 is the level exceeded 50 percent of the time)

Table 2 shows the relative A-weighted noise levels of common sounds measured in the environment and in industry for various sound levels.

TABLE 2 Typical Sound Levels Measured in the Environment and Industry

Noise Source At a Given Distance

A-Weighted Sound Level in Decibels

Qualitative Description

Carrier Deck Jet Operation 140

130 Pain threshold

Jet takeoff (200 feet) 120

Auto Horn (3 feet) 110 Maximum Vocal Effort

Jet takeoff (2000 feet) Shout (0.5 feet)

100

N.Y. Subway Station Heavy Truck (50 feet)

90 Very Annoying Hearing Damage (8 hr continuous exposure)

Pneumatic drill (50 feet) 80 Annoying

Freight Train (50 feet) Freeway Traffic (50 feet)

70 Intrusive Telephone Use Difficult

Air Conditioning Unit (20 feet) 60

Light auto traffic (50 feet) 50 Quiet

Living Room Bedroom

40

Library Soft whisper (5 feet)

30 Very Quiet

Broadcasting Studio 20 Recording studio

10 Just Audible

Adapted from Table E, “Assessing and Mitigating Noise Impacts”, NY DEC, February, 2001.

2

It is also useful to understand the difference between a sound pressure level (or noise level) and a sound power level. A sound power level (commonly abbreviated as PWL or Lw) is analogous to the wattage of a light bulb; it is a measure of the acoustical energy emitted by the source and is therefore independent of distance. A sound pressure level (commonly abbreviated as SPL or Lp) is analogous to the brightness or intensity of light experienced at a specific distance from a source and is measured directly with a sound level meter. Sound pressure levels should always be specified with a location or distance from the noise source.

Sound power level data is used in acoustic models to predict sound pressure levels. This is because sound power levels take into account the size of the acoustical source and account for the total acoustical energy emitted by the source. For example, the sound pressure level 15 feet from a small radio and a large orchestra may be the same, but the sound power level of the orchestra will be much larger because it emits sound over a much larger area. Similarly, a 2-hp and 2,000-hp pumps can both achieve 85 dBA at 3 feet (a common specification) but the 2,000-hp pump will have significantly larger sound power level. Consequently the noise from the 2,000-hp pump will travel farther. A sound power level can be determined from a sound pressure level if the distance from and dimensions of the source are known. Sound power levels will always be greater than sound pressure levels and sound power levels should never be compared to sound pressure levels such as those in Table 2. The sound power level of a wind turbine will typically vary between 100 and 110 dBA, this will result in a sound pressure level of about 55 to 65 dBA at 130 feet (similar in level to a normal conversation).

Existing Land Use All Facility components will be located on private land on which the Applicants have negotiated long-term wind energy leases with the landowners. The majority of the area consists of open crop fields (primarily hay and corn) and pastures, with forested areas generally confined to small woodlots and slopes that descend into adjacent valleys. A few areas of relatively large, contiguous forest tracks exist. In the area where the Facility will be located, scattered residences exist.

Significance Thresholds The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NY DEC) published guidance “Assessing and Mitigating Noise Impacts” (NY DEC, 2001) is the basis used to assess the Facilities potential for noise impacts. This guidance does not provide quantitative noise limits but its key recommendations are briefly summarized below:

• New noise sources should not increase noise level above 65 dBA in non-industrial areas.

• EPA found that 55 Ldn was sufficient to protect public health and welfare, and in most cases did not create an annoyance. (55 Ldn is equal to a continuous level of 49 dBA)

• New noise sources should probably not increase the noise level by more than 6 dBA. An increase of 6 dBA may result in complaints, although there may be occasions where increases of 6 dBA might be acceptable.

• In determining the potential for an adverse noise impact, consider not only ambient noise levels, but also the existing land use, and whether or not an increased noise level or the introduction of a discernable sound that is out of character with existing sounds will be considered annoying or obtrusive.

3

• Any unavoidable adverse effects must be weighed along with other social and economic consideration in deciding whether to approve or deny a permit.

In addition to the NY DEC guidelines, the Town of Fairfield’s Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance (January 23, 2006) states the following : “The Applicant shall provide documentation that the maximum noise level generated by wind power facilities shall not exceed 50 dBA, as measured at the closest residence owned by a non-participating landowner. A non-participating landowner can waive this requirement by a written recordable agreement with the applicant, which shall further require a resolution of the Town Planning Board consenting to such waiver.”

Table 3 summarizes the significance thresholds established for this analysis. Two types of thresholds are established, absolute and relative. Absolute limits are limits on project generated noise that should not be exceeded. Relative limits are limits on the increase in noise resulting from the project. Because a project participant becomes one willingly and derives benefit from the project, significance thresholds for participants allow higher noise levels.

TABLE 3 Summary of Significance Thresholds

Participating Landowner Non-Participating Landowner

Absolute Threshold (Leq) 55 dBA 50 dBA

Relative Threshold (Leq) None 6 dBA1

Notes: 1. Resulting noise level must exceed 35 dBA to be considered potentially significant increase.

For a conventional power plant or industrial facility, the increase in noise resulting from the projects would be evaluated under calm wind conditions when ambient noise levels are low. Because a wind turbine needs wind to operate, evaluating increases in noise under calm conditions, when noise levels are lowest, is inappropriate. The speed at which the wind turbine starts to operate and generate power is called the cut-in wind speed. The speed at which the wind turbine generates the maximum noise level can be referred to as the full power wind speed.

The NY DEC guidance document states that “For estimation purposes, ambient SPL’s (sound pressure levels) will vary from approximately 35 dBA in a wilderness area to approximately 87 dBA in a highly industrial setting. A quiet seeming serene setting such as rural farm land will be at the lower end of the scale at about 45 dBA”. Although the NY DEC guidance does not specify, the EPA reference cited states that these levels are in terms of Day-Night sound level (Ldn). The equivalent (Leq) average steady state noise level, what one would hear or measure with a sound level meter would be approximately 6 dB less than the Ldn. That is, a steady noise of 39 dBA would result in a Day-Night level (Ldn) of 45 dBA. Figures 1 and 2 provide examples of outdoor Day-Night sound levels (Ldn) provided in the EPA documents referenced by the NY DEC.

4

FIGURE 1 Examples of Outdoor Day-Night Sound Levels (Ldn dBA)

FIGURE 2 Additional Examples of Outdoor Day-Night Sound Levels (Ldn dBA)

5

For the purposes of this impact assessment, the existing average sound pressure level is assumed to be 35 dBA Leq at wind speeds corresponding to above cut-in conditions and 41 dBA Leq at wind speeds corresponding to full power. This results in relative significance thresholds of 41 dBA under cut-in conditions and 47 dBA under full power conditions at non-participating residences. As shown in Table 4, these relative thresholds are more restrictive than the 50 dBA limit established in the Town of Fairfield’s Wind Energy Ordinance.

TABLE 4 Thresholds of Potential Significance

Participating Landowner Non-Participating Landowner

Absolute Threshold (Leq) 55 dBA 50 dBA

Relative Threshold (Leq)

Low Windspeeds (above cut-in)

55 dBA 41 dBA

High Windspeeds (full power)

55 dBA 47 dBA

Facility Sound Levels Standard acoustical engineering methods were used in the noise analysis. The noise model, CADNA/A by DataKustik GmbH of Munich, Germany, is a sophisticated software program that facilitates noise modeling of complex projects. The sound propagation factors used in the model have been adopted from ISO 9613 (ISO, 1993) and VDI 2714 (VDI, 1988). Atmospheric absorption for conditions of 10°C and 70 percent relative humidity (conditions that favor propagation) was computed in accordance with ISO 9613-1, Calculation of the Absorption of Sound by the Atmosphere.

Each wind turbine was considered to be a point source of noise at the hub height with an overall sound power level of 100 dBA under cut-in conditions or 106 dBA under full power conditions. The full power conditions corresponds to the guaranteed maximum noise level generated by the turbines as measured in accordance with IEC61400-11 (the turbine noise level would be less at lower windspeeds). Transformers are expected to have a National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) sound rating of 87 dBA. The transmission line is 115-kilovolt (kV) therefore audible corona noise is anticipated to be negligible (corona noise is generally associated with voltages exceeding 345 kV).

All turbines and substations were assumed to be operating at the sound power levels shown in Table 5.

6

TABLE 5 Modeled Octave Band Sound Power Levels

Octave Band Center Frequency, Hz (A-weighted)

Overall (dBA) 63 125 250 500 1,000 2,000 4,000 8,000

GE 1.5-MW Turbine (Full Power – Hub height winds of 20 mph)

106 87 96 99 101 100 97 89 80

GE 1.5-MW Turbine (Hub height winds of 11 mph)

97 78 87 90 92 91 88 80 71

Substation Transformers 107 84 96 98 104 101 97 92 83

Figure 3 presents the predicted project levels under full power conditions. Because full power conditions represent the loudest project levels, Table 6 compares the predicted project noise levels to the absolute noise limits under these conditions. No residences are predicted to exceed the Town of Fairfield’s limit of 50 dBA, even at participating homes.

TABLE 6 Comparison of Predicted Project Noise Levels to Absolute Project Noise Limits

Map ID Participant Absolute Limit

(Leq dBA) Predicted Project Level

(Leq dBA) Exceed

Absolute Limit?

R164 Yes 50 48.8 No

R149 No 50 48.2 No

R147 No 50 48.1 No

R153 No 50 47.3 No

R138 No 50 47.1 No

R143 Yes 55 47.0 No

R150 Yes 55 46.8 No

R122 No 50 46.7 No

R142 No 50 46.6 No

R120 Yes 55 46.4 No

R184 No 50 46.3 No

R145 No 50 46.0 No

R183 No 50 46.0 No

R117 No 50 45.7 No

R105 Yes 55 45.6 No

R151 No 50 45.4 No

R154 No 50 45.3 No

R148 Yes 55 45.2 No

R155 No 50 45.2 No

R107 No 50 45.2 No

R169 Yes 55 45.2 No

R118 No 50 45.2 No

7

TABLE 6 Comparison of Predicted Project Noise Levels to Absolute Project Noise Limits

Map ID Participant Absolute Limit

(Leq dBA) Predicted Project Level

(Leq dBA) Exceed

Absolute Limit?

R125 Yes 55 45.0 No

R157 No 50 45.0 No

R185 No 50 44.7 No

Note: Refer to Figure 3 for predicted levels at more distant locations not included in this table. Noise levels are predicted to be less than 44.7 at locations not listed in this table.

Figure 4 presents the predicted project levels under low wind speeds. Table 7 evaluates increase over the existing level of 35 dBA when the hub height wind speed is approximately 11 mph. At all locations, the predicted existing plus project noise level is less than 41 dBA and the resulting increase is less than 6 dBA over the existing level of 35 dBA.

TABLE 7 Evaluation of Increase over Existing Noise Levels – Low Windspeeds

Map ID Participant Existing Level

(dBA) Predicted Project

Level (dBA) Existing plus Project (dBA)

Increase over Existing (dBA)

R164 Yes 35 39.1 40.5 5.5

R149 No 35 38.8 40.3 5.3

R147 No 35 38.8 40.3 5.3

R153 No 35 38.1 39.8 4.8

R138 No 35 38.1 39.8 4.8

R143 Yes 35 38 39.8 4.8

R150 Yes 35 37.8 39.6 4.6

R122 No 35 37.7 39.6 4.6

R142 No 35 37.6 39.5 4.5

R120 Yes 35 37.4 39.4 4.4

R184 No 35 37.2 39.2 4.2

R145 No 35 36.9 39.1 4.1

R183 No 35 36.9 39.1 4.1

R117 No 35 36.7 38.9 3.9

R105 Yes 35 36.6 38.9 3.9

R151 No 35 36.3 38.7 3.7

R154 No 35 36.2 38.7 3.7

R148 Yes 35 36.2 38.7 3.7

R155 No 35 36.2 38.7 3.7

R107 No 35 36.2 38.7 3.7

R169 Yes 35 36.2 38.7 3.7

R118 No 35 36.1 38.6 3.6

8

TABLE 7 Evaluation of Increase over Existing Noise Levels – Low Windspeeds

Map ID Participant Existing Level

(dBA) Predicted Project

Level (dBA) Existing plus Project (dBA)

Increase over Existing (dBA)

R125 Yes 35 36 38.5 3.5

R157 No 35 36 38.5 3.5

R185 No 35 35.7 38.4 3.4

Table 8 evaluates increase over the existing level of 41 dBA when the hub height wind speed is approximately 20 mph.

TABLE 8 Evaluation of Increase over Existing Noise Levels – High Windspeeds

Map ID Participant Existing Level

(dBA) Predicted Project

Level (dBA) Existing plus Project (dBA)

Increase over Existing (dBA)

R164 Yes 41 48.8 49.5 8.5 R149 No 41 48.2 49.0 8.0 R147 No 41 48.1 48.9 7.9 R153 No 41 47.3 48.2 7.2 R138 No 41 47.1 48.1 7.1 R143 Yes 41 47.0 48.0 7.0

R150 Yes 41 46.8 47.8 6.8

R122 No 41 46.7 47.7 6.7 R142 No 41 46.6 47.7 6.7 R120 Yes 41 46.4 47.5 6.5

R184 No 41 46.3 47.4 6.4 R145 No 41 46.0 47.2 6.2 R183 No 41 46.0 47.2 6.2 R117 No 41 45.7 47.0 6.0 R105 Yes 41 45.6 46.9 5.9

R151 No 41 45.4 46.7 5.7

R154 No 41 45.3 46.7 5.7

R148 Yes 41 45.2 46.6 5.6

R155 No 41 45.2 46.6 5.6

R107 No 41 45.2 46.6 5.6

R169 Yes 41 45.2 46.6 5.6

R118 No 41 45.2 46.6 5.6

R125 Yes 41 45.0 46.5 5.5

R157 No 41 45.0 46.5 5.5

R185 No 41 44.7 46.2 5.2

9

Construction Noise Impact Assessment The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Noise Abatement and Control studied noise from individual pieces of construction equipment, as well as from construction sites for power plants and other types of facilities (see Table 9). Because specific information about types, quantities, and operating schedules of construction equipment is not known at this stage, data from the EPA document for industrial projects of similar size have been used. These data are conservative, because the evolution of construction equipment has generally been toward quieter design. Use of these data is reasonable for estimating noise levels, given that they are still widely used by acoustical professionals.

TABLE 9 Average Noise Levels from Common Construction at a Reference Distance of 50 feet (dBA)

Construction Equipment Typical Average Noise

Level at 50 ft, dBA

Air compressor 81

Backhoe 85

Concrete mixer 85

Concrete pump 82

Crane, mobile 83

Dozer 80

Generator 78

Grader 85

Loader 79

Paver 89

Pile driver 101

Pneumatic tool 85

Pump 76

Rock drill 98

Saw 78

Scraper 88

Shovel 82

Truck 91

Source: U.S. EPA, 1971.

Table 10 shows the total composite noise level at a reference distance of 50 feet, based on the pieces of equipment operating for each construction phase and the typical usage factor for each piece. The noise level at 1,500 feet is also shown. The calculated level at 1,500 feet is probably conservative, because the only attenuating mechanism considered was geometric spreading, which results in an attenuation rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance; attenuation related to the presence of structures, trees or vegetation, ground effects, and terrain was not considered.

10

TABLE 10 Composite Construction Site Noise Levels

Construction Phase

Composite Equipment Noise Level at 50 feet, dBA

Composite Equipment Noise Level at 1,500 feet, dBA

Clearing 88 58

Excavation 90 60

Foundation 89 59

Erection 84 54

Finishing 89 59

Construction activities are anticipated to occur over a 8 month duration. The following Best Management Practices will be followed to reduce potential for annoyance from construction related activities:

• Establish a project telephone number that the public can use to report complaints.

• Ensure equipment is adequately maintained and equipped with manufacturers recommended muffler.

• Conduct noisiest activities during weekdays between the hours of 8 am and 5 pm. For unusually loud activities, such as blasting or pile driving, notify residence by mail or phone at least 1 week in advance.

• Locate stationary construction equipment (air compressors/generators) as far away from residences uses as feasible. When feasible, utilize equipment in acoustically designed enclosures and/or erect temporary barriers.

With the above mitigation measures, project construction activities will be minimized to the greatest extent reasonable. While they may still result in short term annoyance, they do not represent a significant adverse impact.

References Beranek, L.L. 1988. Acoustical Measurements. American Institute of Physics. Woodbury, New York.

CADNA/A Version 3.5. 2005. Datakustik, GmbH, Munich, Germany. August 2005. http://www.datakustik.de/frameset.php?lang=en

International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 61400-11. 2002. Wind Turbine Generator Systems—Part 11: Acoustic Noise Measurement Techniques. Geneva, Switzerland.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 1993. Acoustics—Sound Attenuation During Propagation Outdoors. Part 1: Calculation of the Absorption of Sound by the Atmosphere, 1993. Part 2: General Method of Calculation. ISO 9613. Switzerland.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1971. Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances.

VDI. 1988. Outdoor Sound Propagation. VDI (Verein Deutscher Ingenieure) 2714, Verlag GmbH, Dussledorf, Beuth Verlag, Berlin, Koln, Germany.

11

45dBA

50dBA

35dBA

40dB

A

45dBA

50dB

A

35dB

A

40dBA

35dBA

40dBA

35dB

A

50dB

A

45dB

A

35dB

A

45dBA

45dB

A

40dB

A

50dB

A

50dBA

45dB

A

35dBA

50dB

A

45dB

A

35dB

A

50dBA

40dBA

40dB

A

40dB

A

R275

R257

R250

R265R260

R266

R259

R227

R002

R004

R261

R001

R273

R255

R274

R258

R239

R114R110

R008

R028

R015

R005R032

R026

R014

R251

R249

R228

R119

R010R016R013

R023R012

R246

R136

R242

R144

R019

R268R152

R240

R017

R029

R236

R220

R234R233

R264

R049

R231R232

R159

R022

R020

R230

R011

R018

R209

R226

R021

R156

R204

R165

R225R223

R222

R062

R070

R042

R167

R221

R201

R219

R199

R213

R202

R088

R181

R216

R200

R207R206

R203

R215

R256

R238

R131

R030

R121

R237

R034

R139

R135

R108

R036

R132

R196R194

R134

R041

R126

R113

R130

R043

R129

R243

R076

R235

R050

R133

R046

R128

R075

R127

R047

R191

R140

R056

R027

R074

R025

R253

R058

R269

R057

R061

R192

R064

R054R053

R063

R248R244

R189

R083

R066

R065

R052

R059

R067

R071

R031

R146

R080

R082

R081

R044

R178

R078

R077

R072

R124

R055

R084

R073

R180

R188

R195

R193

R051

R103

R089

R218

R039

R241

R115

R090

R160

R186

R168

R212

R229

R161

R187

R100

R190

R197

R112

R211

R085

R198

R101

R092

R141

R177

R170

R176R174

R106

R098

R104

R171R172

R254

R163

R097

R111

R252

R245

R166

R247

R175

R102

R173

R182R179

R162

R096

R093

R185

R157

R125

R118

R169

R107

R155

R154

R148

R151

R105

R117

R183

R145

R184

R120

R142

R122

R150

R153

R143

R138

R164

R147R149

29

170169

29

170

169

Military

Castle

Dairy Hill

Cole

Hard S

crabble

170a

Stahl

Davis

Platform

Parkhurst

Creek

Myers

Kelly

Snyder

Ryan

Teall

Burrell

Thompson

Beaver

Top Notch

Elm Tree

Sandy Lane

Reservoir

Satterlee

Peckville

Mexico

Mang

Comstock

Observatory

West End

Rath

Spruce

Rockwell

Bronner

Warren

Gould

Eatonville

No rway

Arnold

K ilts H

ill

New

port Gray

Yellow Church

Tucker

Cas ler

Frye

Delayton

Snyder

Burrell

Davis

CC ii tt yy BBrr oo oo kk

2,000 0 2,000 Feet

PPM EnergyTop Notch Wind Farm

Figure 3Full Power Conditions

Legend

Proposed Wind Turbine

Residence

Particpating Landowners

* 50 dBA - Town Limit for Non-Participating

File Path: \\rosa\proj\PPMEnergy\337822\GIS\mxds\Figure3_FullPower11x17.mxd, Date: April 25, 2006 10:15:02 AM

40dB

A

40dBA35dB

A

30dB

A

30dBA

30dB

A

30dB

A

30dBA

30dBA

35dB

A

40dBA

35dB

A

40dB

A

35dB

A

40dB

A

40dBA

35dBA

35dBA

35dB

A40

dBA

35dB

A

R275

R257

R250

R265R260

R266

R259

R227

R002

R004

R261

R001

R273

R255

R274

R258

R239

R114R110

R008

R028

R015

R005R032

R026

R014

R251

R249

R228

R119

R010R016R013

R023R012

R246

R136

R242

R144

R019

R268R152

R240

R017

R029

R236

R220

R234R233

R264

R049

R231R232

R159

R022

R020

R230

R011

R018

R209

R226

R021

R156

R204

R165

R225R223

R222

R062

R070

R042

R167

R221

R201

R219

R199

R213

R202

R088

R181

R216

R200

R207R206

R203

R215

R256

R238

R131

R030

R121

R237

R034

R139

R135

R108

R036

R132

R196R194

R134

R041

R126

R113

R130

R043

R129

R243

R076

R235

R050

R133

R046

R128

R075

R127

R047

R191

R140

R056

R027

R074

R025

R253

R058

R269

R057

R061

R192

R064

R054R053

R063

R248R244

R189

R083

R066

R065

R052

R059

R067

R071

R031

R146

R080

R082

R081

R044

R178

R078

R077

R072

R124

R055

R084

R073

R180

R188

R195

R193

R051

R103

R089

R218

R039

R241

R115

R090

R160

R186

R168

R212

R229

R161

R187

R100

R190

R197

R112

R211

R085

R198

R101

R092

R141

R177

R170

R176R174

R106

R098

R104

R171R172

R254

R163

R097

R111

R252

R245

R166

R247

R175

R102

R173

R182R179

R162

R096

R093

R185

R157

R125

R118

R169

R107

R155

R154

R148

R151

R105

R117

R183

R145

R184

R120

R142

R122

R150

R153

R143

R138

R164

R147R149

29

170169

29

170

169

Military

Castle

Dairy Hill

Cole

Hard S

crabble

170a

Stahl

Davis

Platform

Parkhurst

Creek

Myers

Kelly

Snyder

Ryan

Teall

Burrell

Thompson

Beaver

Top Notch

Elm Tree

Sandy Lane

Reservoir

Satterlee

Peckville

Mexico

Mang

Com

sto ck

Observatory

West End

Rath

Spruce

Rockwell

Bronner

Warren

Gould

Eatonville

No rway

Arnold

K ilts H

ill

New

port Gray

Yellow Church

Tucker

Cas ler

Frye

Delayton

Snyder

Burrell

Davis

CCii ttyy BBrr ooookk

2,000 0 2,000 Feet

PPM EnergyTop Notch Wind Farm

Figure 4Low Windspeed Conditions

Legend

Proposed Wind Turbine

Residence

Particpating Landowners

* 50 dBA - Town Limit for Non-Participating

File Path: \\rosa\proj\PPMEnergy\337822\GIS\mxds\Figure4_LowWind11x17.mxd, Date: April 25, 2006 10:48:05 AM