A state administrative law judge ruled this week that the company is eligible to receive a permit to fill wetlands and the Lake Michigan lakebed. It is one of several permits that the utility needs before it can build the plant.

The plan calls for filling 23.5 acres of wetlands on the Oak Creek power plant site, which has more than 100 acres of wetlands.

"The initial proposal involved a plan to fill up to 60 acres of Lake Michigan lakebed and adjacent wetland areas," Judge Jeffrey Boldt of the state Division of Hearings and Appeals wrote in a decision dated Monday. "Many of the most valuable wetland areas have been preserved."

Wisconsin Energy praised the decision and said it looked forward to obtaining other permits late this year or early next year so that it can begin construction of the $2.15 billion project before the end of March.

"It's another step forward," company spokesman Thad Nation said.

Opponents have 30 days to decide whether to appeal the decision in court.

"We're still assessing" whether to file an appeal, said Eric Uram of the Sierra Club, one of the opponents of the project.

Though the utility was challenged by Sierra Club and S.C. Johnson & Son Inc. of Racine on the permit, the wetlands issue was less controversial than other matters in the coal plant case.

A key issue still pending is whether the utility can build a water intake and discharge system into Lake Michigan. That needs state Department of Natural Resources approval. In addition, the project also needs approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Environmental groups opposed to construction of the plant object to a plan to draw billions of gallons of water from the lake and return it at warmer temperatures.

Two other judges still need to weigh in on the plant as well, one concerning an air emission permit and another concerning the state Public Service Commission's approval of the plant last fall.

Opponents also want the Army Corps to undertake a more rigorous environmental review of the plant. In a letter to the corps last month, the state of Illinois sided with plant opponents in calling for a more detailed review.

"We are concerned with the potential significant impact of the proposed project on Lake Michigan," wrote Ann Alexander, environmental counsel to Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan.

The utility says the water discharge system, which it redesigned last year in response to concerns raised by the state Department of Natural Resources, will use modern technology that will minimize the impact to the lake.

But opponents including Illinois are still raising concerns about the impact on Lake Michigan fish and the environmental impact of releasing mercury into the lake.

A state administrative law judge ruled this week that the company is eligible to receive a permit to fill wetlands and the Lake Michigan lakebed. It is one of several permits that the utility needs before it can build the plant.

The plan calls for filling 23.5 acres of wetlands on the Oak Creek power plant site, which has more than 100 acres of wetlands.

"The initial proposal involved a plan to fill up to 60 acres of Lake Michigan lakebed and adjacent wetland areas," Judge Jeffrey Boldt of the state Division of Hearings and Appeals wrote in a decision dated Monday. "Many of the most valuable wetland areas have been preserved."

Wisconsin Energy praised the decision and said it looked forward to obtaining other permits late this year or early next year so that it can begin construction of the $2.15 billion project before the end of March.

"It's another step forward," company spokesman Thad Nation said.

Opponents have 30 days to decide whether to appeal the decision in court.

"We're still assessing" whether to file an appeal, said Eric Uram of the Sierra Club, one of the opponents of the project.

Though the utility was challenged by Sierra Club and S.C. Johnson & Son Inc. of Racine on the permit, the wetlands issue was less controversial than other matters in the coal plant case.

A key issue still pending is whether the utility can build a water intake and discharge system into Lake Michigan. That needs state Department of Natural Resources approval. In addition, the project also needs approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Environmental groups opposed to construction of the plant object to a plan to draw billions of gallons of water from the lake and return it at warmer temperatures.

Two other judges still need to weigh in on the plant as well, one concerning an air emission permit and another concerning the state Public Service Commission's approval of the plant last fall.

Opponents also want the Army Corps to undertake a more rigorous environmental review of the plant. In a letter to the corps last month, the state of Illinois sided with plant opponents in calling for a more detailed review.

"We are concerned with the potential significant impact of the proposed project on Lake Michigan," wrote Ann Alexander, environmental counsel to Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan.

The utility says the water discharge system, which it redesigned last year in response to concerns raised by the state Department of Natural Resources, will use modern technology that will minimize the impact to the lake.

But opponents including Illinois are still raising concerns about the impact on Lake Michigan fish and the environmental impact of releasing mercury into the lake.

A state administrative law judge ruled this week that the company is eligible to receive a permit to fill wetlands and the Lake Michigan lakebed. It is one of several permits that the utility needs before it can build the plant.

The plan calls for filling 23.5 acres of wetlands on the Oak Creek power plant site, which has more than 100 acres of wetlands.

"The initial proposal involved a plan to fill up to 60 acres of Lake Michigan lakebed and adjacent wetland areas," Judge Jeffrey Boldt of the state Division of Hearings and Appeals wrote in a decision dated Monday. "Many of the most valuable wetland areas have been preserved."

Wisconsin Energy praised the decision and said it looked forward to obtaining other permits late this year or early next year so that it can begin construction of the $2.15 billion project before the end of March.

"It's another step forward," company spokesman Thad Nation said.

Opponents have 30 days to decide whether to appeal the decision in court.

"We're still assessing" whether to file an appeal, said Eric Uram of the Sierra Club, one of the opponents of the project.

Though the utility was challenged by Sierra Club and S.C. Johnson & Son Inc. of Racine on the permit, the wetlands issue was less controversial than other matters in the coal plant case.

A key issue still pending is whether the utility can build a water intake and discharge system into Lake Michigan. That needs state Department of Natural Resources approval. In addition, the project also needs approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Environmental groups opposed to construction of the plant object to a plan to draw billions of gallons of water from the lake and return it at warmer temperatures.

Two other judges still need to weigh in on the plant as well, one concerning an air emission permit and another concerning the state Public Service Commission's approval of the plant last fall.

Opponents also want the Army Corps to undertake a more rigorous environmental review of the plant. In a letter to the corps last month, the state of Illinois sided with plant opponents in calling for a more detailed review.

"We are concerned with the potential significant impact of the proposed project on Lake Michigan," wrote Ann Alexander, environmental counsel to Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan.

The utility says the water discharge system, which it redesigned last year in response to concerns raised by the state Department of Natural Resources, will use modern technology that will minimize the impact to the lake.

But opponents including Illinois are still raising concerns about the impact on Lake Michigan fish and the environmental impact of releasing mercury into the lake.