Brook Hollow Solar
This is a fictional demonstration project in which every organisation, person, parcel and finding is invented.
State Jurisdiction
PE-02 · Matrix · Additional Permitting
Rating
Impacts likely but may be easily resolved
- The rule
Code computed the rating from the assessor's inputs:
impact_likely=yes -> 2
Set by the rule
- Decision
- Released with flags
- The engine's reasons
- Agencies not in the register or the evidence: IURC (conditional)
- Category 2 is plausible from the applies-level NPDES requirement. The assessment is weakened by inconsistent handling of S-02 (labeled data-room evidenced but described as having no quote), an avoidability call made without delineation evidence, and an extent call that rests on professional judgment.
- Evidence state
- Inferred · reasoned from several records
Revision
- First verdict
- weakened
- First critique
Category 2 is plausible given the NPDES stormwater requirement. Weaknesses: Sugar Run is cited without any quote, the agency list is loose (EPA, IURC), the 'merchant' assumption is unsupported, and the floodway step is missing.
Revised once after the first critique. Rating unchanged.
The five inputs
Present: yes
No data-room claims exist for this row. Candidate requirement F-CWA402 (NPDES construction stormwater coverage and SWPPP, applies, PACK_PENDING_QUALIFIED_REVIEW) supports state approvals being required; in Indiana IDEM administers it. S-02 (IDEM 401 WQC/isolated wetland permit, likely, DATA_ROOM_EVIDENCED) is also listed as a candidate requirement, but no quote is provided to support the Sugar Run reference. S-03 is model knowledge only and is not relied on alone.
Cites no claim.
Extent: core
Construction stormwater coverage applies to every utility-scale project and governs the project as a whole. The disturbed acreage is not documented (1,356 acres is total project area), but the permit still covers the whole project under the common plan of development. This is a professional judgment.
Cites no claim.
Avoidable: yes
Construction stormwater coverage is a general permit and is routinely obtainable. Any S-02 permit is triggered only by fill or discharge, and siting can avoid that. Ownership and offtake structure are not documented, so IURC CPCN applicability (S-01, unverified, conditional) is unknown and not assumed either way.
Cites no claim.
Pathway: standard
The established requirement is a general permit (NPDES construction stormwater) with routine IDEM review. No evidence shows a full siting certificate proceeding or a statutory bar. The CPCN question is open and is handled as a next step.
Cites no claim.
Impact likely: yes
State approvals are required. Stormwater NOI/SWPPP preparation and possible IDEM water quality review add cost and schedule for a typical utility-scale build.
Cites no claim.
Critique
- Verdict
- weakened
- Suggested direction for the rating
- same
- Summary
Category 2 is plausible from the applies-level NPDES requirement. The assessment is weakened by inconsistent handling of S-02 (labeled data-room evidenced but described as having no quote), an avoidability call made without delineation evidence, and an extent call that rests on professional judgment.
- Critic model
- Luminol
Issues
Severity major · Kind unsupported_statement
Rationale cites 'no quote is provided to support the Sugar Run reference' yet S-02 is labeled DATA_ROOM_EVIDENCED. Comments say 401/isolated wetland permit is 'likely' while no claims exist. The assessment hedges inconsistently: it treats S-02 as both evidenced and unsupported. Data-room support for Sugar Run should be located, or the likelihood downgraded.
Severity minor · Kind overstatement
Extent 'core' rests on a general permit covering the whole project, but disturbed acreage is undocumented. This is a judgment call; a site-wide NPDES/SWPPP is plausibly core, but disturbed-acreage or layout evidence would settle it.
Severity minor · Kind wrong_pathway
Rationale says 'in Indiana IDEM administers it'. For Indiana's construction stormwater general permit (Rule 5), the typical process is NOI to IDEM. This is consistent with the candidate, but it is not supported by a quote. Also, state-level rule coverage is attributed to PACK_PENDING review and is not verified.
Severity minor · Kind missing_next_step
Evidence state INFERRED with no claims. The assessment should recommend that the data room be checked for wetland and stream delineation, floodplain mapping, and USFWS/DNR species screening (Indiana bat tree clearing) before relying on avoidability. The 'avoidable: yes' call for fill is asserted without delineation evidence.
Checks
Passed
rating_has_evidence · blocking
Passed
presence_is_evidenced · not blocking
Passed
counter_evidence_considered · not blocking
Passed
numbers_grounded · not blocking
Failed
agencies_grounded · not blocking
Agencies not in the register or the evidence: IURC (conditional)
Passed
cutoff_respected · blocking
Passed
critic_not_refuted · blocking
Failed
critic_weakened · not blocking
Category 2 is plausible from the applies-level NPDES requirement. The assessment is weakened by inconsistent handling of S-02 (labeled data-room evidenced but described as having no quote), an avoidability call made without delineation evidence, and an extent call that rests on professional judgment.
Evidence (0)
Each claim the row cites: the statement in the assessor's words, then the quote the engine found on the page.
The row cites no claim.
Requirements and permits
The requirements the assessor tied to this row, by level. Each quote from dated law is shown with its source.
Engine 0.1.0, which made this run, wrote no timelines or citations of law.
Federal
NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit coverage and SWPPP
F-CWA402 · State NPDES permitting authority (EPA where not delegated)
- Applicability
- Required
- Instrument
- Clean Water Act Section 402 (33 U.S.C. 1342); 40 CFR 122.26
- Trigger
- Construction disturbing one acre or more, or part of a larger common plan of development.
- Description
Coverage under the construction stormwater general permit with a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for land disturbance of one acre or more.
- Verification
- PACK_PENDING_QUALIFIED_REVIEW
- Source
- pack:federal
- In the permit matrix
- F-CWA402
State
401 WQC and isolated wetland permit
S-02 · Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM)
- Applicability
- Likely
- Instrument
- Section 401 Water Quality Certification / State Isolated Wetland permit (IC 13-18-22)
- Trigger
- Fill or discharge in Sugar Run/tributaries or isolated wetlands
- Description
Sugar Run and tributaries are likely jurisdictional waters, so a 401 WQC is required with any federal Section 404 permit. Isolated state-regulated wetlands and waters not covered federally need an IDEM isolated wetland permit if impacted.
- As of the cut-off
As of 2023-08-15, after Sackett v. EPA (May 2023), federal jurisdiction narrowed, making state isolated wetland permitting more important. Indiana SEA 389 (2021) deregulated Class I and some Class II isolated wetlands.
- Verification
- DATA_ROOM_EVIDENCED
- Source
- model:jurisdiction
- Basis
- C-c601777a50
- In the permit matrix
- S-02
Also in the permit matrix for this row: S-01, S-03, S-04, S-05, S-06, S-07, S-09
Information requests
IR-ee6010c685 · Medium priority
Provide the state siting application, docket record or agency correspondence for the project area, or confirm none exists.
- Missing evidence
- State siting application, docket record or agency correspondence
- Consequence
- State Jurisdiction is rated on partial evidence without it.
- Blocks the decision
- No
- Raised by
- completeness
IR-1a7896d177 · Medium priority
Provide the stormwater permit / swppp for the project area, or confirm none exists.
- Missing evidence
- Stormwater permit / SWPPP
- Consequence
- State Jurisdiction is rated on partial evidence without it.
- Blocks the decision
- No
- Raised by
- completeness
Next steps
- Confirm with IURC whether a CPCN is needed given ownership and offtake structure.
- Plan IDEM stormwater NOI and SWPPP; 401/isolated wetland permit if fill is unavoidable.
- Check mapped floodways and drainage areas for DNR floodway permit; submit DNR species screening; review INDOT access/hauling triggers.
Agencies
- IDEM
- Indiana DNR
- IURC (conditional)
Cost and impact
- Impact
- C, S
- Potential cost level
- L-M
- Why
General permit coverage, SWPPP preparation and possible IDEM 401 review. No full certificate proceeding is evidenced.
Impact: C = cost, S = schedule. Potential cost level: L, L-M, M, M-H, H (relative to a utility-scale solar budget).
Comments
No state siting application, agency correspondence, or stormwater permit/SWPPP is included in the data room. Construction stormwater general permit coverage applies. An IDEM 401 WQC/isolated wetland permit is likely if fill or discharge occurs in waters or isolated wetlands. IURC CPCN applicability is unconfirmed.