Gage County supervisors hear ISI Solar pitch for sub‑1 MW array; vegetative plan, interconnection discussed

GAGE COUNTY, Neb. — Representatives from ISI Solar and local power utilities introduced a proposal for a solar array just under one megawatt at a Gage County Board of Supervisors meeting Wednesday, describing equipment choices, a vegetation plan and how the array would connect to the local grid.

Aaron Brown, engineering development vice president for ISI, told supervisors the project uses the same racking that was previously procured for the site, but different inverters and modules: “the racking material was obtained by Norris … the inverters are a brand called Chint CPS and the modules are called Heliene,” Brown said. He described the project as roughly 999 kilowatts (under 1 megawatt) and said the arrangement keeps a fixed price for the host for the next 25 years, with an option to repower the site if an extension is chosen.

The presentation emphasized site restoration and pollinator‑friendly planting. Brown said ISI coordinates with the U.S. Department of Agriculture to select native prairie grasses and flowers and that the company will seed early to limit erosion: “we have a comprehensive vegetation plan … we throw seed down” as part of initial site work, he said.

Why it matters: the array is intended to reduce local demand peaks and provide a long‑term, fixed rate for the buyer under a power purchase arrangement. Supervisors asked about local impacts, construction timing and regulatory issues; the project introduction did not include a final approval vote.

Details and questions

Brown said the project follows an existing memorandum of understanding among the developer, Norris and Gage County, with ISI substituted in as the engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractor. He said the site was originally expected to start earlier but the prior installer withdrew. Brown described an option to repower the site at the end of an initial term: “There is a five to 10 year extension, if they would like to do it. … the site will just be repowered,” he said.

On procurement rules, Brown said Buy American requirements apply when grant money is used; because the project is not using federal grant funds, modules are not subject to Buy American restrictions in this case. He stated, “We are not [using grant money]. So there is no Buy American requirement here. … The racking that they have obtained is a 100% Buy American.”

Supervisors pressed for specificity about vegetation and siting. One supervisor said the county had previously seen a permit application that simply said it would “vegetate” and that was insufficient; Brown responded the ISI plan contains a detailed seed mix and an approach to establish vegetation quickly to reduce runoff. Another supervisor asked about proximity to the grid and interconnection: Jerry (representing the local utility) said the site will connect to a 12,500‑volt, three‑phase under‑built line near the site and that the new line will serve nearby residences and farms.

Unresolved or not specified

The presentation did not include a final construction schedule, a detailed map posted to the public record, or a complete accounting of projected annual generation in standard units. During Q&A a figure described as “close to 200,000” was mentioned without units or a clear attribution to annual kilowatt‑hours; the project team did not provide a detailed annual energy projection in the public portion of the meeting. The board did not take a formal vote on the project during the session.

Next steps and context

Brown said ISI will continue negotiations on a second potential site in the county and that some equipment choices are driven by regional utility practices to secure transmission benefits. The board did not schedule a vote; supervisors asked staff to keep the county informed as the developer finalizes plans.

Ending note

Supervisors thanked the presenters and welcomed ISI to the county, with Brown saying, “this county is just very easy to work with,” in closing remarks.