Painting the wind turbines tan or beige or camouflage is required by code


The Navajo County planning and zoning ordinance on utility scale wind projects of which the Chevelon Butte wind farm proposal applies states that towers shall be painted an unobtrusive color that compliments the surrounding landscape. That would be a tan or beige color but I have never seen any wind turbine painted this color.

image snapshot found at the Navajo county website for the wind ordinance page it looks like this was created in 2010

If they are approved in spite of much public opposition they should be painted camouflage using the desert type cammo mostly tan with a little dull green to match the brush green leaves.

White stands out too much. Take a look here at this mountain top wrecked with a wind farm in white in West Virginia.

How can we make the annoying red flashing lights blend in? They make the entire thing stand out at night on purpose. That is not blending in to the existing environment.

FAA requires white or light grey so that cancels that out as referenced in rule book AC 70/7460-1L section 13.4.1.

The entire project must be thrown into the recycle bin. There is no greater public good provided by this proposed wind farm as I have and many others have tirelessly pointed out on how they waste energy, draw energy from the grid, destroy landscapes and views, harm birds and bats, are basically energy transfer systems that send your tax dollars to giant corporations, in this case AES which has ties to Enron, and they conflict terribly with the greater land use goals established by those who live in Navajo and Coconino counties which revere their open space vistas free of annoyance and blight generated incessantly by industrail wind energy manufacturing facilities that are inefficient and waste energy.

sPower submission of special use permit does state they are aware of this section of FAA rules but does a sneaky thing not stating they would be in white, instead saying they would be an unobtrusive color to minimize visibility.


Currently in this SUP they propose 156 turbines down from 175 which seems to indicate they are planning larger ones. Notice the very last line below "if larger machines are deployed, less turbines will be required".

In August I wrote Mr. Unrein asking what Native American tribes were contacted as it was stated 9 tribes were contated by sPower on their website. I received a response that DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION. I found that disingenuous. Now I see on today's date of 11/18/2019 as I am looking over a recent Special Use Permit request it's presented as a comment response. I never received any follow up as to what tribes were contacted yet contact with the Hopi tribe is readily apparent on this SUP dating back to July 15th, 2019. This "comment response" list matches many of the comments I asked and it appears to present as though my question was answered which it was NEVER ANSWERED IN THIS DETAIL by Mr. Unrein or any sPower representative. I am now contacting the list of attendees of the Hopi tribe listed in Appendix E along with Sandra Phillips <> of Navajo County and others in Coconino County to bring awareness to this disingenuous behavior that purposly kept me in the dark while they try to push this project through, one that DOES NOT SERVE THE GREATER PUBLIC INTEREST, harms many who live in that area, serves primarily those feeding off tax subsidies for these wasteful projects, and does not serve the familes of many who fly through these blight farms and get chopped up by massive turbine blades.

copyright 2019 Kenneth Wegorowski