Local wind energy developer Allan Kettles failed to get any further with his application for a small windfarm north of Pincher Creek earlier this week.

Kettles appealed a decision by the Municipal District of Pincher Creek Planning Commission, made early last month, to refuse to consider his application for Four Corners Wind Farm until it was completed.

MD Councillor Rod Zielinski pointed to a series of typographical errors in Kettles application for a six-turbine windfarm last month. Planning commission members also expressed concern that some information was missing from the application, which would help them to make a decision on the merit of the project. As a result they requested Kettles fill in the blanks and make the necessary corrections before they reviewed it again.

However Kettles and his counsel deemed the MD's decision a refusal and applied for a hearing.

Ron Hansford, Kettles legal counsel, described the MPC's concerns as "small" and that they "should not render the application incomplete."

However MD development officer Roland Milligan raised a few more serious concerns about Kettles application that the MPC had only touched on at its March 3 meeting.

Milligan said that the project had not received approval from Alberta Environment, a prerequisite to a completed application and more importantly the project did not have the consent of the landowner (on whose land it was proposed).

"The only landowner consent provided was May 2007," said Milligan, adding that the MD had received a subsequent letter from the landowner this year objecting to the project. "The MD's position is it does not have the current landowner consent."

Craig Simmons, spokesperson for the landowner said that the objection to the application this year was effectively a withdrawal of the landowner's earlier support in 2007.

Town of Pincher Creek lawyer Doug Evans also spoke at the hearing, adding that Kettles did not have consent from Alberta Transportation for the windfarm. Because the town had opposed the development, he said that Alberta Transportation had not given it support.

Nevertheless Hansford disputed the fact there was a need for Alberta Transport's input in the application and claimed that the landowner object ion was centered on "A challenge on the lease," which "relates to the lack of development, not the validity of the lease."

Nevertheless Jim Lynch Staunton, who chaired the appeal board agreed with the MPC citing Kettles application as incomplete because it did not have landowner approval, nor did it have comments from Alberta environment.

"This application is deficient and should be heard by the MPC on its completion," said Lynch Staunton.