Download information on nighttime lighting mitigation PDF

Titleinformation on nighttime lighting mitigation
LanguageEnglish
File Size3.5 MB
Total Pages83
Table of Contents
                            CHAPTER 1.  ADMINISTRATIVE AND GENERAL PROCEDURES
		
		1.  REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
		2. PRECONSTRUCTION NOTICE
		3. FAA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
		4.  SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE REQUIREMENT
		5.  MODIFICATIONS AND DEVIATIONS
		6.  ADDITIONAL NOTIFICATION
		7. METRIC UNITS
	
	
	CHAPTER 2. GENERAL
		20.  STRUCTURES TO BE MARKED AND LIGHTED
		21.   GUYED STRUCTURES
		22.  MARKING AND LIGHTING EQUIPMENT
		23.  LIGHT FAILURE NOTIFICATION
		24.  NOTIFICATION OF RESTORATION
		25. FCC REQUIREMENT
	
	
	CHAPTER 3. MARKING GUIDLINES
	
		30. PURPOSE
		31.  PAINT COLORS
		32.  PAINT STANDARDS
		33.  PAINT PATTERNS
		34. MARKERS
		35. UNUSUAL COMPLEXITIES
		36. OMISSION OR ALTERNATIVES TO MARKING
	
	
	CHAPTER 4. LIGHTING GUIDELINE
		40.  PURPOSE
		41. STANDARDS
		42. LIGHTING SYSTEMS
		43. CATENARY LIGHTING
		44.  INSPECTION, REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE
		45.  NONSTANDARD LIGHTS
		46.  PLACEMENT FACTORS
		47.   MONITORING OBSTRUCTION LIGHTS
		48.  ICE SHIELDS
		49.  DISTRACTION
	
	
	CHAPTER 5. RED OBSTRUCTION LIGHT SYSTEM
	
		50.  PURPOSE
		51.  STANDARDS
		52.  CONTROL DEVICE
		53.  POLES, TOWERS, AND SIMILAR SKELETAL STRUCTURES
		54.  CHIMNEYS, FLARE STACKS, AND SIMILAR SOLID STRUCTURES
		55.  GROUP OF OBSTRUCTIONS
		56.  ALTERNATE METHOD OF DISPLAYING OBSTRUCTION LIGHTS
		57.  PROMINENT BUILDINGS, BRIDGES, AND SIMILAR EXTENSIVE OBSTRUCTIONS
	
	
	CHAPTER 6. MEDIUM INTENSITY FLASHING WHITE OBSTRUCTION LIGHT SYSTEMS
		
		60. PURPOSE
		61.  STANDARDS
		62.  RADIO AND TELEVISION TOWERS AND SIMILAR SKELETAL STRUCTURES
		63.  CONTROL DEVICE
		64.  CHIMNEYS, FLARE STACKS, AND SIMILAR SOLID STRUCTURES
		65.  GROUP OF OBSTRUCTIONS
		66.  SPECIAL CASES
		67.  PROMINENT BUILDINGS AND SIMILAR EXTENSIVE OBSTRUCTIONS
	
	CHAPTER 7. HIGH INTENSITY FLASHING WHITE OBSTRUCTION LIGHT SYSTEMS
	
		70.  PURPOSE
		71. STANDARDS
		72.  CONTROL DEVICE
		73.  UNITS PER LEVEL
		74.  INSTALLATION GUIDANCE
		75.  ANTENNA OR SIMILAR APPURTENANCE LIGHT
		76.  CHIMNEYS, FLARE STACKS, AND SIMILAR SOLID STRUCTURES
		77.  RADIO AND TELEVISION TOWERS AND SIMILAR SKELETAL STRUCTURES
		78.  HYPERBOLIC COOLING TOWERS
		79.  PROMINENT BUILDINGS AND SIMILAR EXTENSIVE OBSTRUCTIONS
	
	
	CHAPTER 8. DUAL LIGHTING WITH RED/MEDIUM INTENSITY FLASHING WHITE SYSTEMS
	
		80.  PURPOSE
		81.  INSTALLATION
		82.  OPERATION
		83.  CONTROL DEVICE
		84.  ANTENNA OR SIMILAR APPURTENANCE LIGHT
		85.  OMISSION OF MARKING
	
	
	CHAPTER 9. DUAL LIGHTING WITH RED/HIGH INTENSITY FLASHING WHITE SYSTEMS
	
		90.  PURPOSE
		91.  INSTALLATION
		92.  OPERATION
		93.  CONTROL DEVICE
		94.  ANTENNA OR SIMILAR APPURTENANCE LIGHT
		95.  OMISSION OF MARKING
	
	
	CHAPTER 10. MARKING AND LIGHTING OF CATENARY AND CATENARY SUPPORT STRUCTURES
	
		100. PURPOSE
		101.  CATENARY MARKING STANDARDS
		102.  CATENARY LIGHTING STANDARDS
		103.  CONTROL DEVICE
		104.  AREA SURROUNDING CATENARY SUPPORT STRUCTURES
		105.  THREE OR MORE CATENARY SUPPORT STRUCTURES
	
	
	CHAPTER 11. MARKING AND LIGHTING MOORED BALLOONS AND KITES
	
		110.  PURPOSE
		111.  STANDARDS
		112.  MARKING
		113.  PURPOSE
		114. OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
	CHAPTER 12. MARKING AND LIGHTING EQUIPMENT AND INFORMATION
		
		120.  PURPOSE
		121.  PAINT STANDARD
		122.  AVAILABILITY OF SPECIFICATIONS
		123.  LIGHTS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT
		124.  AVAILABILITY
	
	CHAPTER 13. MARKING AND LIGHTING WIND TURBINE FARMS
		
	APPENDIX 1:  Specifications for Obstruction Lighting Equipment Classification
		APPENDIX
	APPENDIX 2. Miscellaneous
		1. RATIONALE FOR OBSTRUCTION LIGHT INTENSITIES.
		2. DISTANCE VERSUS INTENSITIES.
		3. CONCLUSION.
		4. DEFINITIONS.
		5. LIGHTING SYSTEM CONFIGURATION.
	data sheet L350-864G.pdf
	L350-864G Installation drawing
	L350-G light Distr 100815_pdf
                        
Document Text Contents
Page 1

INFORMATION ON NIGHTTIME LIGHTING MITIGATION TECHNOLOGY

The following information is provided in response to questions raised by the Commission
regarding Champlain Wind’s investigation of nighttime lighting mitigation options and
willingness to consider implementation of mitigation measures when they are approved by the
Federal Aviation Authority (“FAA”) and if they are otherwise feasible.



Background

FAA safety regulations require that wind turbines be lit at night. Specifically, FAA advisory
circular 70/7460-1K provides: Obstruction Marking and Lighting (See Exhibit C-1), any
structures greater than 200 feet (61 m) in height above ground level that may affect the National
Airspace System (NAS) must be marked and/or lighted. In chapter 13 of the circular FAA has
established standards for marking wind turbines and will only approve the use of marking and
lighting systems that meet their established technical standards.



Turbine Lighting at Wind Projects in Maine

To ensure compliance with chapter 13 of circular 70/7460-1K, FAA approved the lighting plan
submitted by Aviation Systems, Inc, a consultant to Champlain Wind. The plan uses the white
paint on the turbine towers for daytime marking. For nighttime lighting, appropriately spaced
red, synchronized flashing lights are used. The particular model of light proposed by Champlain
Wind utilizes innovative technology to help mitigate night sky impacts (See Exhibit C-2). The
Orga L350-864G has a 3
Technology with high performance LEDs. The main beam pattern is from 0
peak effective intensity of 2,000 Candela. The beam pattern meets FAA’s required technical
standard for this type of light. The Proprietary Optical Technology incorporates the sharpest
cutoff angles allowed by the FAA to minimize ground scatter. This system has proven to be the
most community friendly available with over 12,000 installed globally and over 3,500 installed
domestically. In other words, this is the preferred lighting system of many Large Turbine
Manufactures, Utility Companies, Developers, Owners and Operators.

This lighting system is used on the Stetson and Rollins wind projects. It is the same system that
has been approved for other wind energy developments that have been permitted or constructed
in Maine. Use of the red, synchronized flashing lights is an improvement over earlier generation
lighting systems that did not have sharp cutoff angles or LED bulbs.



Mitigation Devices

The existing lighting system maintains the sharpest cutoff angles allowed by FAA and therefore
represents the current state-of-the art lighting with respect to minimizing visual impacts to
observers on the ground. In response to concerns about nighttime lighting, Champlain Wind
previously researched potential “after-market” devices that reduce the night sky impacts, such as
shielding. For example, TowerShade TM markets a deflector that works with most FAA-
approved obstruction lighting (See Exhibit C-3). The after-market shield was developed to
reduce 97% of the light within a 2-mile diameter (based on 250’ towers). This product, however,

Page 2

2


is only compatible with the low intensity, steady burning red lights, not the medium intensity,
synchronized flashing red lights proposed here and which already utilize the sharpest cutoff
angles approved by FAA. Champlain Wind evaluated the potential use of the shield with an
alternative lighting system, but determined that such a system would have greater visual impacts
to ground observers at distances beyond two miles. More importantly, the shield would collect
snow and ice and be potential nest attractors for raptors such as Osprey. For these reasons,
Champlain Wind concluded that the shield would not reduce visual impacts and was not
otherwise appropriate for obstruction lighting at Bowers Mountain.



Audio and Visual Warning Systems

Audio and visual warning systems are the next generation of obstruction lighting and marking.
Instead of utilizing a light (either steady burning or synchronized flashing) that is always ON,
these systems utilize alternative means for warning aircraft that there is an obstruction present.
OCAS is one early developer of this technology with their radar assisted lighting systems that
utilize the existing approved-FAA lights. Its main feature permits wind turbine obstruction
lights to remain OFF at all times unless an aircraft is operating in the vicinity of the wind farm.
Radars mounted on select turbine towers detect aircraft and activates all turbine lights ON when
an aircraft approaches. A secondary audio warning is broadcast via VHF radio to all pilots in
proximity if the aircraft does not alter course away from the wind farm. The system is monitored
24/7/365 by OCAS and is represented by OCAS as a fully redundant system as safety is
paramount.

The OCAS systems are currently being used on communications towers and transmission lines in
Denmark and U.S. They have not been approved by FAA for use on wind turbines. Transport
Canada, the Canadian equivalent to the FAA, has approved this technology at the Talbot wind
farm in Ontario. The specific manufacturer in that case is OCAS. As part of our due diligence
on the feasibility of using an audio and visual warning system Champlain Wind contacted the
FAA. The FAA confirmed that this technology has not yet been approved for deployment on
wind turbines, although the FAA is in the process of developing the technical standards for use
of this technology. It’s important to note that OCAS is not the technology, but the company that
owns and operates a particular radar system. There are other companies developing products for
audio and visual warning systems. Detect, Inc, for example, specializes in remote sensing
technologies and systems for aviation safety, security surveillance, environmental management
and wind measurement supporting projects worldwide. DeTect is the world leader in
development, deployment and support of bird radars for aircraft birdstrike avoidance, avian risk
assessment and environmental protection with over 70 systems installed worldwide to date.
They are working on a product that will most likely be ready when FAA publishes the technical
standards for the audio and visual warning systems. FAA did not state when the technical
standards would be published, although it is widely believed that standards will come out later
this year. FAA is apparently in the process of scheduling a test of the system that is in place in
Ontario, which should help inform their development of standards.

Because it is at the forefront of audio and visual warning systems for wind turbines, Champlain
Wind has also contacted OCAS to determine the technical feasibility of using the OCAS system
on the Bowers Project. To evaluate site suitability, OCAS must conduct an engineering review

Page 41

03/1/00 AC 70/7460-1K

2/1/07 AC 70/7460-1K CHG 2

CHAPTER 11. MARKING AND LIGHTING MOORED BALLOONS AND KITES

110. PURPOSE
The purpose of marking and lighting moored balloons,
kites, and their cables or mooring lines is to indicate
the presence and general definition of these objects to
pilots when converging from any normal angle of
approach.
111. STANDARDS
These marking and lighting standards pertain to all
moored balloons and kites that require marking and
lighting under 14 CFR, part 101.
112. MARKING
Flag markers should be used on mooring lines to warn
pilots of their presence during daylight hours.

a. Display. Markers should be displayed at no more
than 50-foot (15m) intervals and should be visible for
at least 1 statute mile.

b. Shape. Markers should be rectangular in shape
and not less than 2 feet (0.6m) on a side. Stiffeners
should be used in the borders so as to expose a large
area, prevent drooping in calm wind, or wrapping
around the cable.

c. Color Patterns. One of the following color
patterns should be used:

1. Solid Color. Aviation orange.
2. Orange and White. Two triangular sections,

one of aviation orange and the other white, combined
to form a rectangle.



113. PURPOSE
Flashing obstruction lights should be used on moored
balloons or kites and their mooring lines to warn pilots
of their presence during the hours between sunset and
sunrise and during periods of reduced visibility. These
lights may be operated 24 hours a day.

a. Systems. Flashing red (L-864) or white beacons
(L-865) may be used to light moored balloons or kites.
High intensity lights (L-856) are not recommended.

b. Display. Flashing lights should be displayed on
the top, nose section, tail section, and on the tether
cable approximately 15 feet (4.6m) below the craft so
as to define the extremes of size and shape. Additional
lights should be equally spaced along the cable’s
overall length for each 350 feet (107m) or fraction
thereof.

c. Exceptions. When the requirements of this
paragraph cannot be met, floodlighting may be used.
114. OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
The light intensity is controlled by a device that
changes the intensity when the ambient light changes.
The system should automatically turn the lights on and
change intensities as ambient light condition change.
The reverse order should apply in changing from
nighttime to daytime operation. The lights should
flash simultaneously.

Chap 11 29

Page 42

03/1/00 AC 70/7460-1K



Chap 11 30

Page 82

8


Chris and Lindsay Wheaton, Lodge Owners; 7) Lance Wheaton, Guide; 8) James Mabee,
Guide; 9) Lee Whitely, Guide.

Intervenor PPDLW even opposed construction of a commercial sporting camp, the Wild
Fox Run Commercial Camp on Junior Horseshoe Lake, stating in an appeal to LURC to
reverse approval of the Camp’s permit, “if this project is allowed to go forward, it will be
the turning point when the degradation of the wild and scenic nature of Junior Lake
began, the commercial campground special permitting process will not have prevented
the elimination of another rare wild and scenic resource in Maine. The precedence will
be set for this time for Junior Lake.” Tr. at 265. When asked if the fears associated with
the issuance of the Camp’s permit were warranted, Mr. Gurrall testified that the fear
expressed in PPDLW’s letter to LURC had not come to pass. Id. at 267.

Response to Palmer’s Comments Regarding FAA Lighting

In order to address the expectation of the typical viewer one must first determine who
would be using these lakes at night. Although it is possible that some people could be
boating or fishing on the lake at dusk, very little activity occurs on the water at night. As
Dr. Palmer noted in his memo dated 7/21/11, people on private property, i.e. camp
owners, are not considered public users of the lakes under the Wind Energy Act.
Although not technically on the lakes, people camping on locations with public access
might be considered “public users”, although there are no publicly owned or maintained
campsites within the study area. In terms of their expectations, it depends upon the type
of camping. One could argue that trailer/RV campers, like those at the private
campground at the southeast shore of Pleasant lake, would have lower expectations
regarding night lighting due to the fact that they arrived directly to their campsite in
motorized vehicles and they typically have electricity to power lights, radios, etc. Due to
the likelihood of larger group size, social activity is often the primary focus of the
experience at night, as opposed to the experience of nature.

Tent campers- especially those who arrived by canoe to remote sites- might have a higher
expectation in terms of the night sky.
The only tent camp sites within the 8-mile project radius are located on Junior Lake and
Scraggly Lake, and many of these site would have limited to no visibility of the FAA
lights, due to orientation or tree cover (see detailed descriptions in Exhibit A memo dated
11/20/11, presented as a response to a question in the Ninth Procedural Order). As such,
there are numerous camping options for those wishing to have an unfettered night view.

In terms of duration of public uses, the period of time in which campers would
experience the night lighting is relatively brief- around dusk, which is as late as 9 pm in
the height of summer to the time they retire to their tents/campers, which could be soon
thereafter. There is also a seasonal limitation to this use, as tent and RV camping
typically occurs in the warmer months. Ice fishermen sometimes camp overnight on the
lakes in their shanties, but minimal time is spent outdoors at night due to cold
temperatures, and their structures can easily be oriented away from the lights. During the
warm seasons, fisherman and others may see the lights at dawn and at dusk when they are

Page 83

9


arriving or departing from the lakes, but this would only be for limited duration and users
are typically focused on preparing and launching their boats and gathering their
equipment.

In terms of the effect on continued use and enjoyment, there could be some impact on the
night portion of the recreational experience for people tent camping. We do not believe,
however, that it would sufficiently undermine their experience to prevent campers from
returning, although we know of no published surveys regarding night lighting to
reference in support of this conclusion. Nighttime camping activities are usually focused
around the fire, inward on the camp itself. The campfire would typically be the focus of
attention, brighter than any lights located miles away. In addition, many of the campsite
have limited to no visibility of the FAA lights. Although viewing the FAA lights on the
horizon could be an annoyance to some, stargazing can continue without impact, as there
is no glow from the lights that would diminish the darkness above. The impact to
fishermen on the lake at dawn or dusk would be minimal, as the contrast of the lights to
the dusk sky would not be pronounced. As noted in the LandWorks memo dated
11/20/11 in regards to light reflections, only on very clear, still nights (as experienced by
the Commission when viewing Rollins) will there be substantial reflectivity on the water.
Once the water is disturbed with wind or boat traffic, reflections are disrupted. The
visibility of such reflections are highly dependent on viewer location and orientation,
distance from the project, intervening landscapes, screening vegetation and, as stated,
weather and air quality conditions. Often the viewer’s eye is more focused on the bright
lights and reflections from camps on the water, such as those located along the western
shore of Junior Lake. In fact, this type of lighting can create glare and visual impacts that
are arguably more significant and more visible than distant beacons on
telecommunication towers and wind turbines. In terms of impact on continued use and
enjoyment, the number of affected users should also be considered. Although data on the
number of people using these lakes specifically at night is not available, overall use of
these resources is relatively low and there are only a limited number of campsites.

In terms of the extent of night lighting impact under review, it should be noted that the
Commission has already determined to review the entirety of the project, including met
towers, under the Wind Energy Act scenic standard. See April 21, 2011 Second
Procedural Order.

Similer Documents