UnknownEvidence insufficient to rate; an information request is listed
Why
Presence unknown
Worst case
Up to3Resource is present, likely difficult to address
Evidence
Missing
Cited claims
3
Requirements
2
Requests
2
Rating
UnknownEvidence insufficient to rate; an information request is listed
up to3Resource is present, likely difficult to address
The engine shows this rating as Unknown (up to 3)
The rule
Code computed the rating from the assessor's inputs:
present=unknown -> Unknown (abstain)
Set by the rule
Decision
Abstained (information request)
The engine's reasons
Agencies not in the register or the evidence: OHPO
Evidence state
Missing · no evidence in hand
Conclusion withheld
Question
Are there NRHP-listed or eligible architectural resources in or near the Tamsin Ridge site?
Missing evidence
Historic architecture survey or NRHP review; the Phase I study excluded above-ground resources.
Consequence
Rating cannot be set; potential visual or physical effects and any Section 106 or OPSB mitigation are unquantified.
Information request
Provide the separate above-ground resources study, or commission a history/architecture survey to SHPO standards.
Blocks the decision
No
Worst case
If what is pending at the cut-off went badly, the same rule gives a higher rating.
Scenario
Survey finds NRHP-eligible farmsteads or nearby historic properties within or adjoining the site, requiring layout changes, screening and OPSB/SHPO mitigation.
Step still pending
Historic architecture survey and NRHP/Ohio Historic Inventory review
No historic architecture survey or NRHP review is in the data room. The Phase I cultural resources study expressly excluded above-ground resources (C-5c04b9f1c5). Farmsteads exist on site (C-87870b48da) but their historic status is not documented.
No historic architecture survey or NRHP review is included in the data room. The Phase I cultural resources study excluded above-ground resources such as standing buildings and structures, which a separate study is to address. Four farmsteads are reported on site; their historic status is unknown.
Critique
Verdict
upheld
Suggested direction for the rating
unknown
Summary
Abstention is correct because the above-ground survey is outside the Phase I scope and nothing documents historic status. The statements are supported and the worst case names a real pending survey. Only minor wording and next-step gaps remain, such as the SHPO name and the Section 106 nexus check.
Critic model
Luminol
Issues
Severity minor · Kind other
The agency is listed as 'OHPO'. The requirements name Ohio History Connection, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Use the SHPO name for consistency.
The next steps don't say whether a federal nexus exists, such as a Section 404 permit. That would trigger NHPA Section 106 (F-NHPA106, conditional). They also don't say that the OPSB application must map landmarks within ten miles under OAC 4906-4-08(D). The ten-mile review is mentioned but not tied to that rule.
The worst case assumes 'NRHP-eligible farmsteads' and 'core' extent. The only support is that four farmsteads exist and the survey is pending. This is plausible, but the survey would settle it.
Cultural resources surveys to SHPO standards must be submitted to the SHPO.
Quote check Exact · Placed verbatim · The quote occurs on the page exactly as written. · Read as native
Whitlock Ames LLP
Energy, siting and regulatory counsel | Columbus, Ohio
Ohio Power Siting Board Pre-Application Conference
Memorandum to Northfold Energy Partners, LLC. March 28, 2023.
Conference held March 21, 2023 at the OPSB offices, Columbus, with OPSB staff.
1. Jurisdiction
Staff agreed that the Tamsin Ridge Solar and Storage Project, 120 MW of solar generation with a 60 MW / 240
MWh battery system, is a major utility facility that needs a certificate of environmental compatibility and public
need from the OPSB before construction, under the standard certificate process. Staff will treat the battery
system as part of the generating facility. A case number will be assigned when the pre-application notification
letter is filed.
2. SB 52
Staff noted that Sub. S.B. 52 applies. The Section 4 exemption for projects already in PJM's new services queue
does not appear to be available, because no PJM system impact study had been completed for AH1-931 as of
October 11, 2021, the act's effective date, and no facilities study fee had been paid. Therefore: (a) the applicant
must hold a public meeting in Carroll County at least 90 and not more than 300 days before filing the application
(ORC 303.61); (b) within 90 days after that meeting the Board of County Commissioners may adopt a resolution
prohibiting the facility or limiting its boundaries (ORC 303.62); (c) two ad hoc members, one for the county
commissioners and one for the township trustees, will sit on the Board for this case; and (d) the
decommissioning plan and performance bond requirements of ORC 4906.21 to 4906.222 apply.
Staff also noted that a resolution designating restricted areas under ORC 303.58 would bar an application for a
facility within them. Counsel's search found no such resolution for Harrison Township on the date of the
conference.
3. Application content highlighted by staff
• A preconstruction background noise study with day and night data, and predicted operating noise at every
residence within one mile.
• A table of distances from equipment to every structure and property line within 1,500 feet, with the lease status
of each property.
• Ecological surveys coordinated with ODNR and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, wetland delineation before
filing, and the ODNR buffers for Category 3 wetlands.
• Quote starts. Cultural resources surveys to SHPO standards, submitted to the SHPO. Quote ends.
• A fire protection, safety and medical emergency plan prepared with local responders, including the battery
system.
• Mapping of agricultural district land and a drain tile repair plan.
• A geotechnical report addressing the abandoned underground mine in the East Block.
Whitlock Ames LLP - privileged Page 1 of 2
The outline marks where the quote begins on the page.
C-4892410817
Cultural resources surveys to SHPO standards must be submitted to the SHPO.
Quoted from page 1
Cultural resources surveys to SHPO standards, submitted to the SHPO.
The requirements the assessor tied to this row, by level. Each quote from dated law is shown with its source.
Federal
Section 106 consultation
F-NHPA106 · Lead federal agency with the State Historic Preservation Office (and THPOs)
Applicability
Conditional
Instrument
National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 (54 U.S.C. 306108); 36 CFR Part 800
Trigger
Federal nexus, for example an individual Section 404 permit or federal funding.
Description
A federal undertaking (federal permit, funding, license or land) must take into account effects on historic properties.
Typical timeline
SHPO/THPO review: if it does not respond within 30 days of receiving a request for review of a finding or determination, the agency official may proceed to the next step or consult the Advisory Council (36 CFR 800.3(c)(4)). Under a Corps nationwide permit, an activity that may have the potential to cause effects to listed or eligible historic properties is not authorized until the Section 106 requirements have been satisfied (general condition 20(a)). Typical: 2 to 4 months for a no-adverse-effect finding once surveys are complete and 6 to 12 months or more if an adverse effect needs a memorandum of agreement (basis: practice, not stated in the sources).
Undertaking means a project, activity, or program funded in whole or in part under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of a Federal agency, including those carried out by or on behalf of a Federal agency; those carried out with Federal financial assistance; and those requiring a Federal permit, license or approval.
Source 36CFR800 · page 1 · version 2023-08-01
Cited for requirement and trigger (federal nexus)
In force from 2016-12-13 to 2026-10-07
eCFR versioner: 36 CFR part 800, same text on 2021-10-15, 2022-05-20, 2022-09-12, 2023-04-22, 2023-08-01 and on every amendment date between them; amendment dates 2016-12-13
May be cited on the cut-off date.
Quoted from the law, page 126
No activity is authorized under any NWP which may have the potential to cause effects to properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places until the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) have been satisfied.
Source 86FR2744 · page 126 · version 2021-01-13
Cited for trigger and timeline: Corps nationwide permit waits for Section 106
May be cited on the cut-off date.
Quoted from the law, page 1
If the SHPO/THPO fails to respond within 30 days of receipt of a request for review of a finding or determination, the agency official may either proceed to the next step in the process based on the finding or determination or consult with the Council in lieu of the SHPO/THPO.
Source 36CFR800 · page 1 · version 2023-08-01
Cited for timeline: SHPO/THPO response period
In force from 2016-12-13 to 2026-10-07
eCFR versioner: 36 CFR part 800, same text on 2021-10-15, 2022-05-20, 2022-09-12, 2023-04-22, 2023-08-01 and on every amendment date between them; amendment dates 2016-12-13
May be cited on the cut-off date.
State
Cultural and archaeological resources information in the OPSB application, supported by SHPO-standard archaeology and history/architecture surveys and SHPO review
OH-HIST · Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB) for the application content; Ohio History Connection, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), for survey standards and review
Applicability
Required
Instrument
OAC 4906-4-08(D) (effective 2018-04-26); ORC 149.53; SHPO Archaeology Guidelines (2022) and Guidelines for Conducting History/Architecture Surveys in Ohio (2014); National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 where a federal permit or approval applies
Trigger
An OPSB certificate application for a generating facility under OAC Chapter 4906-4 must include cultural and archaeological resources information, and SHPO review follows where a federal permit or approval (Section 106) or a state agency (ORC 149.53) is involved.
Description
An OPSB certificate application for a generating facility must map registered landmarks of historic, religious, archaeological or other cultural significance within ten miles of the project area, evaluate the facility's impact on them and describe plans to avoid or mitigate adverse impact (OAC 4906-4-08(D)). SHPO sets the survey standards it reviews: its archaeology guidelines prescribe report formats, and its history/architecture guidelines require a qualified principal investigator for compliance surveys. Section 106 review, in which SHPO takes part, is a routine part of planning for projects with federal funding, permits, licenses or approvals. ORC 149.53 provides, whenever practical, for archaeological and historic survey in planning, including before work on a public improvement begins; SHPO says there is no formal consultation process under it, though its phased approach is typically followed, and the sources do not say whether it reaches a private facility certificated by the OPSB.
Typical timeline
Under Section 106 the regulations give SHPO thirty days to respond to submissions that meet 36 CFR 800.11, and incomplete submissions may need further information and analysis (SHPO form instructions). The sources state no period for comment under ORC 149.53, for which SHPO says there is no formal process.
(1) Landmark mapping. The applicant shall indicate, on a map of at least 1:24,000 scale, any formally adopted land and water recreation areas, recreational trails, scenic rivers, scenic routes or byways, and registered landmarks of historic, religious, archaeological, scenic, natural, or other cultural significance within ten miles of the project area.
In force from 2018-04-26 to 2024-05-29, section 4906-4-08
4906-4-08: version effective 2018-04-26; first change after it 2024-05-30 (OPSB Case 21-902-GE-BRO (determination 2023-07-20)), from codes.ohio.gov version history in archive captures (confirmed_two_sources)
May be cited on the cut-off date.
Quoted from the law, page 29
(2) Impacts on landmarks. The applicant shall provide an evaluation of the impact of the proposed facility on the preservation and continued meaningfulness of these landmarks and describe plans to avoid or mitigate any adverse impact.
In force from 2018-04-26 to 2024-05-29, section 4906-4-08
4906-4-08: version effective 2018-04-26; first change after it 2024-05-30 (OPSB Case 21-902-GE-BRO (determination 2023-07-20)), from codes.ohio.gov version history in archive captures (confirmed_two_sources)
May be cited on the cut-off date.
Quoted from the law, page 3
and for such purposes shall, whenever practical, by contract or otherwise provide for archaeological and historic survey and salvage work during the planning phases, before work on a public improvement begins or at other appropriate times;
Source ORC 149.51 to 149.55 historic preservation · page 3 · version 2023-08-01
In force from 2015-09-29 to 2026-10-03, section 149.53
149.53: version effective 2015-09-29, still the current version when the page map was checked (2026-10-03)
May be cited on the cut-off date.
Quoted from the law, page 5
There is no formal process for consulting with SHPO under Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 149.53. However, the phased approach indicated above is typically followed.
The following report formats are required for all archaeology undertakings reviewed by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800, regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; and Ohio Revised Code (ORC) section 149.53, Archaeological and Historic Survey and Salvage Work.
All surveys under taken for compliance projects and through Certified Local Governments (CLG s) Grants and History Fund Grants must be carried out under the professional direction of a Principal Investigator that meets the established professional qualifications set forth in the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archeology and Historic Preservation for a Historian, Architectural Historian, or Historic Preservationist.
Source OHC SHPO guidelines for conducting history architecture surveys · page 11 · version 2014-11
May be cited on the cut-off date.
Quoted from the law, page 1
Section 106 is a routine part of the planning process for projects that receive federal funding, permits, licenses, or approvals, to ensure that preservation standards are factored into a project before work is authorized to begin.
Source OHC SHPO about section 106 page · page 1 · version 2023-08-01
May be cited on the cut-off date.
Quoted from the law, page 1
Following our review of the Project Summary Form and its associated documentation, SHPO may request additional information to help us understand your assessment of the project’s effect. The regulations give us thirty days to respond to project submissions that meet all the requirements found at 36 CFR 800.11. Incomplete submissions may require the preparation of additional information and analysis.
Source OHC SHPO section 106 project summary form instructions · page 1 · version 2022-06-21
May be cited on the cut-off date.
Information requests
IR-ac5fadd7ce · High priority
Provide the historic architecture survey or nrhp review for the project area, or confirm none exists.
Missing evidence
Historic architecture survey or NRHP review
Consequence
Architectural Resources is rated on no evidence without it.
Blocks the decision
Yes
Raised by
completeness
IR-9698e54821 · Medium priority
Are there NRHP-listed or eligible architectural resources in or near the Tamsin Ridge site?
Missing evidence
Historic architecture survey or NRHP review; the Phase I study excluded above-ground resources.
Consequence
Rating cannot be set; potential visual or physical effects and any Section 106 or OPSB mitigation are unquantified.
Blocks the decision
No
Raised by
abstention
Next steps
Obtain the separate above-ground resources study or commission a SHPO-standard history/architecture survey.
Review Ohio Historic Inventory and NRHP listings within ten miles for the OPSB application.
Agencies
OPSB
OHPO
Cost and impact
Impact
None given.
Potential cost level
N/A
Why
Present is unknown, so no cost level is assigned.
Impact: C = cost, S = schedule. Potential cost level: L, L-M, M, M-H, H (relative to a utility-scale solar budget).
Comments
No historic architecture survey or NRHP review is included in the data room. The Phase I cultural resources study excluded above-ground resources such as standing buildings and structures, which a separate study is to address. Four farmsteads are reported on site; their historic status is unknown.