Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves amended Hunter battery CUP letter pending county attorney review
Summary
Desiree Renewables sought minor administrative edits to the Hunter battery storage conditional‑use permit letter; the commission approved the amended language contingent on review by county counsel to ensure it did not change incentives or project commitments.
The Emery County Commission on Sept. 2 approved proposed administrative edits to the conditional‑use permit (CUP) approval letter for the Hunter battery storage project, with the caveat that final approval is contingent on county attorney review.
Why it matters: Applicants sought administrative changes so the approval letter’s entity name and some clerical language align with financing documents and project‑company structure. Commissioners and the project representatives emphasized the edits are clerical and do not alter the commission’s previous direction that the battery facility not be tied to incentives granted to the separate solar project.
What was proposed: Joel Puritz and Emma Cripps of Desiree Renewables explained the edits were administrative, including matching the CUP letter to the project company name (Hunter Utah Storage Acquisitions LLC) and clarifying timelines and compliance language. Puritz said the battery project is a separate entity from the Hunter solar project and explicitly “is not part of the CRA for the solar.”
Commission discussion and vote: Commissioners asked whether the changes effectively altered the substance of earlier approval. County legal counsel said he had not yet reviewed the specific edits. The commission moved and voted to approve the amended letter pending review by county counsel; the motion passed unanimously.
Project details cited at the meeting: Desiree Renewables described the battery facility as approximately 80 megawatts of storage with a four‑hour discharge duration (designed for grid peak‑shifting), a smaller acreage footprint than the existing Hunter solar installation, and estimated construction capital costs in the tens of millions of dollars. The company said construction employment would peak in the tens of workers and that operating staff needs are expected to be limited (a few full‑time positions) after commissioning.
Next steps: County counsel will review the amended CUP letter text; staff will return the signed letter if counsel confirms the edits do not change prior commitments or incentives.
