Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS. Intertie Envriomental 4-15 1996QE LOU 43% DAMES & MooRE ERE SSE SUNT SEN EPCS SCTE 7 | CHUGACH ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC. Proposal for the SOUTHERN INTERTIE Environmental Impact Statement and Preliminary Engineering APRIL 15, 1996 FOR INFORMATION CONTACT: = Randy Pollock, P.E. =» Tim R. Tetherow, ASLA = Niklas O. Ranta = Tim Ostermeier, P.E. POWER ENGINEERS, INC. @ P.O. BOX 1066 @ HAILEY, IDAHO 83333 (208) 788-3456 @ FAX (208) 788-2082 DAMES & MOORE @ 5600 B STREET @ ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99518 - 1641 (907) 562-3366 @ FAX (907) 562-1297 #) VIER April 15, 1996 IENGINEERS Ms. Dora Gropp Chugach Electric Association, Inc. 5601 Minnesota Drive Anchorage, AK 99502 Subject: Southern Intertie Project EIS and Preliminary Engineering Dear Ms. Gropp, As you requested, we have prepared a comprehensive proposal for environmental and preliminary engineering work through the EIS process. The scope of work we propose is based on our extensive experience with transmission line siting and licensing projects, and the information we reviewed with you during our telephone conference of April 12, 1996. The Project Approach section of the proposal summarizes the scope of work we are proposing. The Southern Intertie Route Selection Study has identified potentially feasible alternative routes between the Kenai Peninsula and Anchorage. The combined results of the system, design, land and regulatory, economic and environmental studies provide the basis to initiate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. It is assumed that project alternatives will be analyzed in greater detail through an environmental impact statement (EIS) with the Rural Utility Service (RUS) as the lead federal agency. The assumption that the Southern Intertie Project will require an EIS is based on the potential for significant environmental impacts to occur on federal lands managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USF&WS) and U.S. Forest Service. Through informal discussions, the agencies have indicated that the project would require an EIS based on the alternatives identified in the Route Selection Study. This was also documented ina . letter from the USF&WS, 1993. The Enstar Pipeline corridor alternative through the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge is located within a minimal management area with wilderness values, where the Trumpeter Swan nesting near Trapper Joe Lake, and migrating waterfowl concentrations in the Chickaloon Bay area represent issues of significant concern. The existing Quartz Creek transmission line corridor through Chugach National Forest is a concern due to views from the Seward Highway and nearby recreation areas, and the Six Mile Creek corridor. As discussed, we have included hydrographic surveys of the route links across Turnagain Arm to provide the additional data needed to more accurately define submarine cable HLY 50-05-00-120376 POWER Engineers, Incorporated eS 3940 Glenbrook Dr. * P.O. Box 1066 Phone (208) 788-3456 Hailey, Idaho 83333 Fax (208) 788-2082 Chugach Electric Association, Inc. April 15, 1996 Page 2 parameters, routing and installation. Since the submarine cable costs comprise a large percentage of the installed project costs, further definition of the submarine cable portion of the project is considered critical. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal, and we look forward to discussing it with you. Sincerely, Mok Randy Pollock Senior Vice President Enclosures: 15 copies Proposal RP/al cc: BD File Tim Ostermeier Tim Tetherow (Dames & Moore) power Hetero ie op) eee |. PROJECT APPROACH INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to describe our approach and specific work plan for completing the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Preliminary Engineering for the Southern Intertie Project. It is organized as follows: e Project Approach: A general overview, with emphasis on specific important points, describing our approach to completing the EIS and preliminary engineering. The approach includes a summary of our project management approach, which has proven very successful in managing the short and aggressive schedule for the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study. - @ Work Plan: A detailed description of the work to be accomplished. It lists specific responsibilities, and describes the work as well as the deliverables to be produced as a result of each task. The work plan is organized into distinct tasks and subtasks to allow effective management of the work. The work plan is intended to serve as acommon basis of understanding in the management and execution of the project. e Budget: A breakdown of the proposed budget by task, along with pertinent assumptions regarding the work. The proposed budget is a “not to exceed” budget based on the work scope described in the work plan. e Schedule: The proposed project schedule, along with a discussion of relevant schedule assumptions and important milestones. e Appendix: An explanation of the biology, earth resource, land use, socioeconomic, recreation, visual and cultural resource studies. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH - 1 To keep this proposal to the point, we have not included sections addressing our project team and qualifications. Rather, we refer you to our September 1995 proposal for the Route Selection Study, Phase I. In that document we described our extensive experience with transmission line routing and siting projects, and included detailed descriptions of specific projects and resumes of our project team. As requested at that time, we proposed a project team including all the personnel required to complete the EA/EIS process and supporting engineering. We want to emphasize that the approach we are proposing for completion of the EIS and preliminary engineering for the Southern Intertie Project is based on our team’s successful experience with over 100 transmission line routing and siting projects. We know what it takes to successfully complete routing, siting, and licensing for transmission line projects. PROJECT MANAGEMENT / PROJECT TEAM We propose the same project team We propose to use the same project team that has guided the Route Selection Study, allowing us to take full advantage of the information and experience gained to date. This knowledge and experience will be critical in order to complete the necessary environmental field inventories and hydrographic surveys during the 1996 summer season and prevent the project from being delayed another year. For POWER Engineers, Randy Pollock, P.E., would continue to serve as project manager, with overall responsibility for management of the EIS and preliminary engineering. Tim Ostermeier, P.E., would continue to serve as the contract manager, coordinating the efforts of the project team and subcontractors. The EIS project team would be led by Dames & Moore, with Garlyn Bergdale continuing to serve as EIS director and Tim Tetherow as EIS project manager. The same hands-on approach used during the Route Selection Study would continue throughout the EIS process. As on the Route Selection Study, the environmental work would be conducted from Dames & Moore’s local Anchorage office. Del LaRue of Dryden and LaRue would continue to provide local engineering support throughout the EIS process. Organization charts showing the overall project team (Figure 1) and the environmental study team (Figure 2) are included on the following pages. 2- APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al OVERALL PROJECT TEAM Southern Intertie Project Environmental Impact Statement and Preliminary Engineering CHUGACH ELECTRIC April 15, 1996 ASSOCIATION DORA GROPP scan SENIOR PROJECT ADVISOR PETE VAN DER MEULEN RY PROJECT MANAGER = - MMENGINEERS RANDY POLLOCK, PE. CONTRACT MANAGER TIM OSTERMEIER, P.E. RERGLSae ‘| ENVIRONMENTAL OVERHEAD SUBMARINE SUBSTATION i SYSTEM STUDIES IMPACT STATEMENT TRANSMISSION TRANSMISSION STAN SOSTROM ! RON BEAZER, P.E. (EIS) LARRY HENRIKSEN, P.E. JACK HAND TIM OSTERMEIER, P.E. i DON ANGELL, P.E. DAMES & MOORE DRYDEN & LARUE BILL RIALL, PE. LAN ALDER i HEATHER CADIENTE PETER CATCHPOLE, P.ENG. ALAN JACOBSON JEFF JOHNSON, P.E. | MIKE WALBERT, P.E. (Please see chart on next page RON CARRINGTON, P.E. TORBEN AABO : JIM COTE, Ph.D., PE. for detail.) PDC i DAMES & MOORE i BC HYDRO i Ts rae rea ar ae eed ee J) mr EMF ISSUES | MIKE SILVA FRANK ROWLAND / PJ, SULLIVAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al FIGURE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY TEAM Southern Intertie Project Environmental Impact Statement April 15, 1996 233 DAMES & MOORE POWER ENGINEERS PROJECT MANAGER RANDY POLLOCK, P.E. DAMES & MOORE PROJECT MANAGEMENT GARLYN BERGDALE - DIRECTOR TIM TETHEROW — MANAGER NIKLAS RANTA — PROJECT COORDINATOR } HUMAN RESOURCES NATURAL RESOURCES LAND USE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MARY ELLEN TUTLE DAVID ERIKSON NIKLAS RANTA MARINE RESOURCES ! WILDLIFE, FISHERIES, AVIFAUNA | RECREATION MANAGEMENT ; AREAS AND FACILITIES LOREN HETTINGER LESLIE HOWELL BOTANY, WETLANDS, NIKLAS RANTA SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES VISUAL RESOURCES EARTH RESOURCES AND SIMULATIONS GARY ROGERS RANDALL PALMER GEOTECHNICAL RANDY SIMPSON INVESTIGATION REVIEW JOE MERKEL TERESA SUTER NANCY DARIGO SOILS, GEOLOGY PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT JAN ISAACS ART MEANS LORI MAGYAR AVALANCHE HAZARD HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al FIGURE 2 CULTURAL RESOURCES ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORY, NATIVE AMERICAN RESOURCES GENE ROGGE, Ph.D. MIKE YARBOROUGH CULTURAL RESOURCES CONSULTANTS STEPHEN BRAUND SUBSISTENCE, NATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION |) SYSTEM, MAPPING | LUKE HEYERDAHL SCOTT WOODS GRAPHICS MITCH MEEK EARL KUBASKIE EDITING SHIRLEY WILEY A hands-on approach The Southern Intertie Project will be sited in an environmentally and politically sensitive area of Alaska. We have assembled our most experienced staff and specialized subcontractors, all recognized experts in their fields. To recognize the benefits from these leading experts, a hands-on project management approach is required. Keeping the whole project team moving in the right direction in a timely fashion will require daily and weekly attention to project details. Our project management approach would continue in the same manner as for the current Route Selection Study. Important elements of our project management approach include: e Frequent communication with Chugach regarding all aspects of the project e Preparation and use of a project procedures manual! Preparation of a detailed work plan that identifies each task, subtask and deliverable required to accomplish the work Preparation and tracking of a detailed project schedule and list of deliverables Weekly monitoring of progress for each project task and subtask Monthly reporting of project progress to Chugach Quarterly project review meetings Projects succeed when all of the project team members understand what they are responsible for and when those tasks are to be completed. During the course of the project, we will follow up on a regular basis to make sure the team members are reminded of their responsibilities and notified promptly of changing requirements. In addition, our project management team will keep a constant watch on the budget. This approach will result in a successful EIS and preliminary engineering "process for the Southern Intertie Project. ' The Project Procedures Manual already prepared for the Route Selection Study would be used. Preparation of a new procedures manual is not required. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH — 3 EIS AND THE NEPA PROCESS The Southern Intertie Route Selection Study has identified potentially feasible alternative routes between the Kenai Peninsula and Anchorage. The combined results of the system, design, land and regulatory, economic and environmental studies provide the basis to initiate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. It is assumed that project alternatives will be analyzed in greater detail through an environmental impact statement (EIS) with the Rural Utility Service (RUS) as the lead federal agency. The need for an EIS The assumption that the Southern Intertie Project will require an EIS is based on the potential for significant environmental impacts to occur on federal lands managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USF&WS) and U.S. Forest Service. Through informal discussions, the agencies have indicated that the project would require an EIS, based on the alternatives identified in the Route Selection Study. This was also documented in a letter from the USF&WS, 1993. The Enstar Pipeline corridor alternative through the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge is located within a minimal management area with wilderness values, where Trumpeter Swan nesting near Trapper Joe Lake, and migrating waterfowl concentrations in the Chickaloon Bay area represent issues of significant concern. The existing Quartz Creek transmission line corridor through Chugach National Forest is a concern due to views from the Seward Highway and associated recreation areas, and the Six Mile Creek corridor. EIS issues The approach and scope of work for the EIS must account for several issues, including the following: e Significant environmental issues and constraints were identified throughout the project study area e Diversity of federal, state, borough, and private land jurisdictions, and potential land management conflicts e Lack of uniform environmental data across the study area 4- APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al e Feasibility of the submarine cable crossings of the Turnagain Arm e Sensitive locations for submarine transition facilities (i.e., Possession Point, Chickaloon Bay, Potter, Bird Point, and Six Mile Creek) e Nationally and internationally significant scenery, tourism, and recreation use Key Components The purpose of this section is to describe the approach to preparing the Southern Intertie EIS. Key components of the approach include: e Integrating engineering, environmental, and public involvement activities as well as project costs e Providing a range of public involvement opportunities - public scoping meetings (NEPA requirement) - public open houses - community working group (CWG) in Anchorage urban area - public hearings (NEPA requirement) - newsletters e¢ Conducting local siting studies that focus on - urban Anchorage alternatives - submarine crossings of Turnagain Arm - transition facilities for submarine cable crossings - alternative routes on the Kenai Peninsula and in Chugach State Park e Perform hydrographic surveys to determine a more definitive assessment of cable embedment options, installation techniques and armoring requirements e Refining the environmental resource inventory from the route selection study to assist in local facility siting and impact assessment e Assessing environmental impacts e Establishing effective mitigation measures e¢ Comparing alternatives to select an environmentally preferred alternative HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH —- 5 The initial step in the EIS process is public scoping. The results of the route selection study provide the basis to begin formal scoping activities through RUS as the lead federal agency, and Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as cooperating agencies. In order to focus the studies on local issues, there will be an urban community working group (CWG) established to assist in the siting and assessment of routes in the Anchorage area. An interdisciplinary (ID) team associated with the Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and state parks will assist in the assessment of alternatives on federal and state lands outside of Anchorage. The following sections describe the general approach for the Southern Intertie EIS study tasks, as illustrated on Figure 3, Preliminary Scope of Work. Scoping The first step of the NEPA environmental process is “scoping,” which is a process, open to the public, conducted early in the project to identify the range, or scope, of issues to be addressed during the environmental studies and in the EIS (40 CFR 1501.7). Scoping is the initial activity of the public participation program for NEPA and is required for an EIS. In scoping, comments will be solicited from relevant agencies and the public, organized and analyzed, and identified and summarized as the issues and concerns. A scoping report will be prepared to document the results of the scoping process. The NEPA environmental process for the Southern Intertie EIS will formally begin with the publication in the Federal Register of a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS and conduct public scoping meetings. A series of three public scoping meetings will be conducted at various locations within the project area including Anchorage, Cooper Landing, and Soldotna. At each meeting, a presentation of project information will be given and then the meeting will be opened for comments and questions from the audience. All comments and questions will be recorded and summarized for each meeting. Alternatives may be added or eliminated as a result of comments received from scoping and agency review. Each alternative will be examined for environmental issues, public acceptability, and engineering limitations. The issues identified during scoping will be addressed in the EIS. 6 - APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al LEAD AND _COOPERATING __ AGENCIES POWER NGINEERS DAMES & MOORE _ PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT) AGENCY CONTACT PROGRAM 23 DAMES & MOORE April 15, 1996 TASK 1: SCOPING Kick-off meeting (agencies) e Review preparation plan © Notice of Intent © Conduct agency scoping © Develop interdisciplinary agency ID team) and CWG meetings Conduct public scoping Field review of alternatives © Agency meeting to finalize alternatives © Review and approve fact sheet/newsletter © Provide mailing list @ Review alternatives © Determine system requirements © Develop project description @ Attend scoping meeting e Develop base map Order photography @ Attend public/agency scoping meetings - prepare materials/develop mailing list - prepare issues report documentation) Prepare scoping report Finalize alternatives - field review (as required) - finalize alternatives and interagency meeting © Develop preparation plan @ Key informant interviews Develop mailing list © Prepare fact sheet/newsletter Establish ID team/meeting © Coordinate public/ agency scoping meetings © Agency contacts © Establish CWG (Anchorage) © Scoping meetings CORRIDOR STUDIES TASK 2: INVENTORY @ Attend agency presentation, ID team, and CWG meetings @ Provide data @ Review and approve technical report Review and approve © mailing list(newsletter(s) Attend ID team and CWG meetings © Develop constraint data for alternatives @ Inventory of altematives Conduct field review/agency contacts for verification © Data management © Documentation e Newsletter e Agency contacts e ID team meeting © CWG meeting TASK 3: IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION PLANNING e Review and approve IA/MP criteria @ Review and approve preliminary results Attend ID team and CWG meetings © Review and approve newsletter(s) © Review and approve technical report Finalize project description @ Estimate project cost © Determine construction/operation maintenance requirements © Review preliminary mitigation criteria © Review preliminary assessment and mitigation plan ® Attend ID team and CWG meetings TASK 4: ALTERNATIVE SELECTION e Review and approve selection criteria Select agency preferred route Review and approve newsletter Develop overall selection criteria © Select preferred alternative © Attend ID team and CWG meetings @ Identify preliminary preferred route e Review criteria and results Attend public open houses, and ID team and CWG meetings EIS PREPARATION TASK 5: DEIS » Respond to comments @ Review preliminary DEIS e Attend i team meetings Review and approve DEIS @ Provide lead agency signature © File with EPA © Conduct public hearings © Review and approve newsletters Attend ID team meetings Attend public hearings © Review DEIS e Develop project description/ location © Develop methodology and criteria © Conduct preliminary assessment and mitigation planning Finalize results © Documentation @ Newsletter @ ID team meetings © CWG meeting @ Agency contacts FIGURE 1 @ Develop environmental selection criteria @ Select environmentally poet alternative e mentation e Newsletter e ID team meetings @ CWG meeting © Open houses Develop purpose and need @ Prepare ios iminary DEIS @ Finalize DEIS @ Print DEIS © Distribute DEIS © Attend federal hearings @ ID team meetings e Newsletter @ Federal hearings Public/agency review of DEIS TASK 6: FINAL EIS e Attend ID team meeting @ Respond tocomments @ Review preliminary FEIS @ Review and approve FEIS © Provide lead agency signature © File with EPA © Record of Decision Notice e Respond to comments e Attend ID team meetings e Respond to comments @ Prepare preliminary FEIS @ Prepare FEIS @ Print FEIS © Distribute FEIS @ |D team meetings @ Newsletter @ Public/agency review of FEIS PRELIMINARY SCOPE OF WORK SOUTHERN INTERTIE PROJECT EIS Proposed Anchorage to Kenai PeninsulaTransmission Line Inventory The objective of the resource inventories is to develop a database of environmental resources within the alternative routes in sufficient detail to assess the potential impacts that may result from the construction, operation, maintenance, and abandonment of the proposed transmission line. The route selection environmental study will provide the basis for an overview of corridor- level mapping. Information gathered during the route selection study will be incorporated into the inventory and refined through field verification (as appropriate), additional research and agency contact. The major natural, human, and cultural resource areas to be studied are listed below and include all resources considered in the route selection study. e Natural Environment - biology - marine environment - geologic hazards e Human Environment - land use - recreation management areas and facilities - visual resources - socioeconomics e Cultural Environment - history - archaeology - Native American The results of the inventory of resources studied within the alternative study corridors will be documented in the affected environment section of the EIS. The EIS sections and inventory maps will be distributed to the ID team for review and comment prior to proceeding with impact assessment and mitigation planning. Impact Assessment and Mitigation Planning The first step will involve a detailed field review of all alternative facilities listed on Table 1 to determine on-site conditions and locations. This will be accomplished through a combination of fixed-wing and helicopter trips and on- the-ground reconnaissance, as summarized on Table 2. Aerial photography and study team consultation will also assist in determining facility locations. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH — 7 TABLE 1 PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE FACILITIES OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE STRUCTURES 230kV X-Frame structures Tesoro Route Links: TE.D.40, Fire Island TE.G-H.80, Kenai Peninsula TE.G-H.90, north of Captain Cook SRA TE.1.130, east of Captain Cook SRA TE.J-K.110, south of Captain Cook SRA TE.J-K.120, entrance to Bernice Lake Substation Enstar Route Links: EN.E.110, through the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Enstar and Quartz Creek Links: QC.M.110, Naptowne, new route QC.M.120, adjacent to Enstar pipeline, Soldotna QC.M.130, adjacent and south of KNWR, Soldotna QC.M.140, adjacent to Enstar pipeline, Soldotna QC.M.150, adjacent to road, Soldotna QC.M.160, adjacent to Enstar pipeline, Soldotna QC.M.170, adjacent to roads and pipelines, Soldotna QC.M.180, adjacent to existing transmission lines Soldotna QC.M.2.05, adjacent to existing transmission line, Soldotna QC.M.2.10, adjacent to existing transmission line, Soldotna 230kV H-Frame Structures Quartz Creek Links: QC.A.10, east of Anchorage QC.B.20, Powerline Pass QC.C.30, Indian to Bird QC.D.40, Bird to Girdwood QC.E.50, Girdwood to Portage QC.F.60, Portage to Turnagain Pass QC.G.70, Turnagain Pass QC.H.80, Turnagain Pass QC.1.90, Granite Creek QC.J.100, Hope Cutoff to Kenai Lake QC.K.110, Kenai Lake to Hideout Hill QC.L.120, Hideout Hill to Naptowne 230kV Aerial Crossong of Turnagain Arm Bird Point Alternative: QC.D.1.A.10 230kV Single Pole Structures Enstar Route Links: EN.A.10, Anchorage EN.A.20, Anchorage EN.A.30, Anchorage EN.A.40, Anchorage 230kV Single Pole Structures (continued) EN.A.50, Anchorage EN.A.60, Anchorage 8 - APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al AN.10, Anchorage AN.20, Anchorage AN.30, Anchorage AN.40, Anchorage AN.50, Anchorage AN.60, Anchorage Quartz Creek Links: Portion of link QC.A.10 along Tudor Road UNDERGROUND TRANSMISSION LINE 138kV buried transmission line Tesoro Route: EN.D.100, from landfall near Chickaloon Bay to Big Indian Creek TE.B.15, through Kincaid Park and the International Airport TE.I.100, through Captain Cook State Recreation Area Enstar Route: EN.B.70, along old Seward Highway EN.B.80, along New Seward Highway adjacent to Potter Marsh OVERHEAD TO UNDERGROUND TRANSITION FACILITY 230kV overhead to 138kV underground transition facility Tesoro Route: TE.G-H.90 - TE.I.100, north of Captain Cook SRA TE.I.100 - TE.J-K.110, south of Captain Cook SRA Enstar Route EN.B.70 - EN.A.5SO, near the Rabbit Creek Road EN.B.70 - EN.A.40, near Rabbit Creek Road EN.B.80 - AN.A.60, near Rabbit Creek Road EN.B.80 - EN.A.50, near Rabbit Creek Road SUBMARINE TO UNDERGROUND TRANSITION FACILITY 138kV - 138kV submarine to underground transition facility Tesoro Route: TE.B.15 - TE.F.60, Point Campbell TE.B.15 - TE.C.30, Point Campbell Enstar Route: EN.B.80 - EN.C.90, Potter EN.B.70 - EN.C.90, Potter AN.30 - AN.80, Klatt AN.30 - AN.70, Klatt EN.C.90 - EN.D.100, Chickaloon Bay AN.80 - EN.D.100, Chickaloon SUBMARINE TO OVERHEAD TRANSITION STATION 138kV submarine to 230kV overhead transition facility Tesoro Route: TE.A.10 - TE.D.40, north end of Fire Island TE.A.20 - TE.D.40, north end of Fire Island TE.D.40 - TE.E.50, south end of Fire Island SUBMARINE TO OVERHEAD TRANSITION STATION (continued) TE.F.70 - TE.G-H.80, Point Possession TE.E.50 - TE.G-H,80, Point Possession Quartz Creek: QC.C.30 - QC.D.1.B.10, Bird Point QC.D.1.B.10 - QC.D.2.10, Sniper Point Reactive Compensation Stations: Required for all routes. The reactive compensation station will be located in the vicinity of Portage at the head of the Turnagain Arm. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH — 9 TABLE 2 SOUTHERN INTERTIE PROJECT EIS PROPOSAL FIELD INVESTIGATION EFFORT SUMMARY DESCRIPTION ACCESS LOCATION ROUTE Fixed wing overflight ALL Anchorage landfalls 2 GD A ALL Anchorage Overhead 1 GD A ALL Anchorage to Turnagain Arm 1 GD A,T Qc Sixmile Creek and Snipers Point 1 GD K Qc Girdwood to Sixmile Creek 0.5 GD K Qc Soldotna 1 GD K QC, EN Bernice Lake on the ground 1 GD K TE Captain Cook State Park on the Ground 1 GD K TE Bird Point 0.5 GD i Qc Bird Point to Girdwood 1 GD Te | 10 Enstar Route 1 HC K EN Quartz Creek Line 0.5 HC K Qc Soldotna and Coopers Landing 0.5 HC. K Qc | Point Possession, Fire Island 1 HC K,A TE 3 : ACCESS ABBREVIATIONS: GD Ground HC Helicopter Fw Fixed Wing LOCATION ABBREVIATIONS: A Anchorage K Kenai Peninsula ij Turnagain Arm ROUTE ABBREVIATIONS: TE Tesoro EN Enstar Qc Quartz Creek 10 - APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al The objective of the impact assessment and mitigation planning process is to conduct a systematic analysis to determine the potential impacts of the project on the environment, and how the impacts could be mitigated most effectively. Impact Assessment Impacts can be beneficial (positive) or adverse (negative), and can result from the project action directly or indirectly. Impacts can be permanent, long lasting (long term) or temporary (short term). Long-term impacts are defined as those that would substantially remain for the life of the project or beyond. Short-term impacts are defined as those changes to the environment during construction that generally would revert to pre-construction condition at or within a few years of the end of construction. Impacts can vary in significance from no change or only slightly discernible change, to a full modification of the environment. Impact assessment and mitigation planning will require a complete understanding of the proposed action to determine the types of disturbance that could occur; that is, the design and typical specifications of the project facilities, construction techniques and equipment used, extent of construction, requirements for operation of the transmission line, activities associated with routine maintenance, and activities associated with abandonment if or when the facilities are no longer needed. Qualitative and quantitative variables of resource sensitivity, resource quantity, and estimated ground disturbance will be considered in predicting the magnitude of impacts, which are described in three levels: low, moderate, and high. A low impact results when the proposed action is expected to cause slight or insignificant adverse change to the resource..A moderate impact results when the . proposed project action is expected to cause some adverse change that may be substantial and selective mitigation may be warranted. A high impact results when the proposed action is expected to result in substantial or significant change to the resources and selective mitigation is warranted in most cases. Mitigation Once these “initial” impacts are identified for each resource along the reference centerline of the alternative study corridors, specific (or selective) measures to mitigate moderate or high impacts to the extent practicable will be recommended where warranted. The impacts remaining after assigning mitigation are referred to as “residual” impacts. Two types of mitigation are used — generic and selective. Generic mitigation includes those measures that the project proponent commits to undertake on a “generic” or nonspecific basis as part of the project plan. The effectiveness of these measures will be incorporated into the initial impact levels. Selective mitigation, following generic mitigation, includes those measures or techniques to HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH — 11 which the project proponent commits on a case-by-case, or “selective” basis after impacts are identified and assessed. Site-specific models Impact assessment and mitigation planning, site-specific models will be developed to (1) estimate the level of disturbance that could result from construction activities and (2) assess the impacts of construction on resources. The results will be reported through impact maps that specifically illustrate the locations and magnitudes of potential resource impacts, and tables identifying specific location and magnitude of the potential impacts along the reference centerline. The results of the impact assessment and mitigation planning will be summarized by resource for each alternative route. Alternative Selection In response to NEPA, the environmental impacts of the alternatives will be presented in a comparative format that defines the issues and provides a clear basis for choice among options. The comparison of alternatives is centered around a screening approach designed to assist in narrowing options and making choices. Screening establishes a systematic approach for the ranking of alternative routes. Results of the screening process will establish the basis for (1) characterizing the impacts of alternative routes, (2) comparing and ranking alternative routes, and (3) identifying the environmentally preferred alternative route(s). In addition, alternatives considered less preferable will be eliminated. The concept of characterizing impacts is central to the comparison of alternatives. Simply stated, the purpose is to assign general impact levels to segments or routes to distinguish the magnitude of potential impacts. The basis for characterizing impacts will include a combination of (1) baseline data (2) levels of residual impacts (after mitigation) assigned to each separate resource theme and (3) key issues identified through scoping, agency comments, and the environmental studies. The combination of these data will be synthesized into general levels of potential impact (low to high), and used to characterize one overall impact level for the entire route segment for each screening area. Impact characterization for each resource is an integral part of the comparison of alternative routes. The comparison process can be implemented through meetings that are conducted with the team of resource specialists representing the natural, human, and cultural resource studies under investigation for the potential Southern Intertie Project. 12 - APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Through the screening and comparison process, the alternative routes will be ranked for preference by the study team. As a result of the comparison of alternatives, the environmentally preferred alternative will be identified. Draft EIS preparation Fifty copies of the preliminary draft EIS (DEIS) will be prepared for review and approval by RUS, cooperating agencies, and the Intertie Participants Group (IPG) before preparation of the DEIS. The format of the preliminary DEIS, and the subsequent DEIS, will be organized in accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality regulations 40 CFR 1502.10. A detailed outline will be reviewed and approved by the RUS. It is important to note that the amount of review time is subject to negotiation between the agency and project proponent and will be determined during the preparation of the memorandum of understanding. The comments received from the reviewers will be incorporated into the DEIS document. The DEIS (250 copies) will be provided to the IPG for distribution. The RUS will file the DEIS with the EPA, publish notices of availability, and distribute copies to interested parties and agencies. Public hearings in Anchorage, Cooper Landing, and Soldotna will be conducted to solicit comments on the DEIS during the public review period. The RUS, with assistance from Dames & Moore, will make arrangements for the hearings, prepare notices and media releases, and conduct the proceedings. A representative of Dames & Moore will attend the public hearings and will participate as appropriate. Preparation of environmental presentation materials will be closely coordinated with POWER Engineers and Dryden & LaRue to provide the technical and engineering support. Final EIS preparation Following the public review period, the comments received from and questions generated by the agency review and public hearings will be reviewed by Dames & Moore, the IPG, and RUS and responsibility for developing responses will be appropriately assigned to each. Presumably, Dames & Moore will prepare responses to most of the comments except those related to the purpose of and need for the project, and engineering design. Following development of the responses, both comments and responses will be incorporated into the preliminary final EIS (FEIS). Fifty copies of the FEIS will be submitted to the IPG and RUS. Based on the comments from IPG on the preliminary FEIS, Dames & Moore will HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH - 13 prepare and submit 250 copies of the FEIS to the IPG for distribution. The FEIS will be filed with EPA, followed by public review and comment. Following FEIS preparation, the RUS will analyze FEIS information and various decision factors in order to make recommendations for the record of decision. Public / Agency Involvement Public involvement will be an integral part of all the activities described above. The following is a list of meetings planned for the interdisciplinary team, community working group, and the public: ID Team Meetings Task 1 - July 1996 Scoping Task 2 - October 1996 Inventory Results Task 3 - Dec. 1996 or Jan 1997 Initial Issues Results and Impact/Mitigation Results Task 4 - May 1997 or June 1997 Environmental Preferred Route and Agency/Proponent Preference Route Task 5 - August 1997 PDEIS Review/Approval Task 5 - October 1997 DEIS Review/Approval Task 5 - January 1998 Pre-hearing Task 6 - March 1998 Review Comments and Assign Responses Task 6 - May 1998 Review PFEIS Community Work Group Meetings - Anchorage Area Only ' Task 1 - July 1996 Scoping/Siting Criteria Task 2 - September/October 1996 Inventory/Assessment Criteria Task 3 - January 1997 Impact Assessment Task 4 - April 1997 Comparison of Alternatives Scoping Meetings Task 1 - July 1996 Three meetings: Anchorage, Cooper Landing, Soldotna Open Houses Task 4 - May 1997 Three meetings: Anchorage, Cooper Landing, Soldotna Public Hearings Task 5 - February 1998 Three meetings: Anchorage, Cooper Landing, Soldotna 14 - APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Newsletters Task 1 - January 1996 Scoping (prior) Task 2 - September 1996 Scoping Results Task 3 - April 1997 Open House Task 4 - July 1997 Open House Results Task 5 - January 1998 Announce public hearings Task 6 - July 1998 Announce FEIS Project team EIS and siting experience In the more than 12 years that Dames & Moore and POWER Engineers have worked together on transmission line and substation projects, we have been successful on every project. Our approach on each of these 12 projects, including the route selection study for the Southern Intertie Project, is to implement a process which identifies and integrates key engineering requirements with critical path environmental planning elements. For example, Dames & Moore and POWER were retained by the Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) to conduct siting studies for the location of a 345kV transmission line approximately 100 miles in length. In addition to both environmental and engineering analyses, the project required an extensive public involvement program and presentations before the Public Service Commission. By adhering to a detailed process which ensured that alternatives carried forward were reasonable and feasible from an engineering, environmental, and public standpoint, NPPD was able to receive the necessary approvals and is now constructing the project. Projects in which Dames & Moore and POWER have worked together are listed below. Kingman-Havasu 230kV Project City of Austin Transmission System Improvement Pauline-Mark Moore 345kV Transmission Line North County 115kV Transmission Line and Switching Stations Philipsburg to Missoula 138kV Transmission Line Patriot-Gwynneville 345kV Transmission Line Tucson-Nogales 115kV Transmission Line New Denver Airport 230kV Transmission Line Iwilei 138kV Substation and 138kV Underground Transmission Feeder Geothermal Public Power 230kV Line Lytton Springs-Trading Post 345kV Transmission Line Arizona Interconnection Project 345kV Transmission Line HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH - 15 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Engineering will support the EIS effort The preliminary engineering effort is required to support the EIS preparation and public/agency presentations, to define the project technically, and to prepare realistic cost estimates. The preliminary engineering task for this project builds upon the preliminary engineering work completed in the Route Selection Study. It focuses upon activities specifically supporting the EIS, along with additional data collection and analysis necessary to confirm and/or refine the conclusions and cost estimates in the Route Selection Study. Technical support provided in Task 9, Preliminary Engineering, is an integral part of the EIS preparation. The purpose and need statement is an especially critical element of the EIS. Properly written, it should answer the why and how questions for the proposed project in very brief, clear, and simple language. Preliminary engineering will provide technical information that, combined with information provided by the IPG, will be used to produce the purpose and need statement. Similarly, technical information needed for the project description and mitigation sections of the EIS, along with technical review of the sections, will be provided as part of preliminary engineering. The project manager and/or senior engineers will attend both public and agency meetings in order to present technical information (such as EMF levels and descriptions of transmission lines or underground cables) as well as to respond to any technical questions. This firsthand exchange of information provides for greater understanding by all parties and increases the likelihood of permitting a practical and cost-effective project. Scoping and other public meetings, agency interdisciplinary team meetings, and citizens working group meetings, will be supported through attendance at the meetings and preparation of technical exhibits depicting right of way, EMF and structure configuration issues. Field Review Field review is necessary to identify and optimize siting and routing opportunities while avoiding or identifying mitigation for environmental and permitting challenges. A field review is required to provide the data needed to complete the project description portion of the EIS, and to identify practical technical options. 16 - APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al The field review team will be composed of appropriate Dames & Moore, Dryden & LaRue and POWER personnel. Areas of particular interest include: e Identification of potential submarine cable landfalls/transition sites Underground cable routes through, or overhead lines around, Captain Cook State Park Overhead line routing across Fire Island Line routing into Bernice Lake Substation Line routing between Power Line Pass and Turnagain Arm The Bird Point to Sniper’s Point crossing site The line segment between Bird Point and Girdwood Line routing from Sniper’s Point down Sixmile Creek Line routing around Coopers Landing Line routing into Soldotna Substation The northerly end of the Enstar route The Anchorage area overhead and underground lines POWER would provide a review of the draft EIS, review and assist in responding to comments received on the draft EIS, and assist in preparation and review, prior to issuance, of the final EIS. Overhead lines Design criteria for different geographic areas and preliminary designs for guyed X steel structures and single pole single circuit tubular steel structures were developed in the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study and will be used as a - basis for additional design efforts. The environmental review in the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study determined the need for a wood pole H-frame preliminary line design for use on several of the route links. This preliminary design will be developed for 138kV and 230kV. In order to fully evaluate routing opportunities in Anchorage it may be necessary to develop a preliminary design for a double circuit single steel pole line. It may also be necessary to evaluate the impact of adding an underbuild on either single or double circuit single steel pole structures. If needed, preliminary designs to permit cost and visual impact evaluation of these structures will be developed. After field review of the potential routes a selection of overhead line structure types for each route segment will be made. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH - 17 System Studies The studies described in this proposal will be refinements of the work conducted as part of the Route Selection Study contract and will use the system models previously developed. The objectives and approach of the proposed system study work will be to: e Determine the system modifications required for termination of the Southern Intertie (Quartz Creek Route) at the ML&P Plant #2 or APA Anchorage Substations (Anchorage-area endpoints at Pt. Woronzof, International, and University Substations were analyzed in the previous work). e Perform N-1 outage analysis of the two additional endpoints to establish pre- contingency and post-contingency emergency transfer limits. e Refine the Battery Energy Storage alternatives by preparing a working BES model (PTI to provide refined BES model) and performing dynamic stability analysis to evaluate in more detail the use of this technology to increase power transfers and enhance stability on the existing 115kV intertie. e Perform steady-state power flow analysis of the existing 115kV intertie at 10MW increments above 70MW (up to 120MW) to determine intermediate system reinforcement requirements and evaluate secure and pre-contingency transfer limits (a 125MW transfer was evaluated in the previous work). e Perform analysis of transfer tripping one Bradley Lake unit to balance Kenai generation and load during high intertie power transfers. A summary report will be prepared describing the analysis and conclusions of the systems studies. Inductive Coordination and Cathodic Protection To determine the allowable separation between the transmission line and existing pipelines or linear communication facilities, inductive coordination studies will be conducted through a combination of calculations and contact with owners of the facilities. Cathodic protection of the pipelines will be reviewed relative to the installation of the Southern Intertie. Mitigation measures to be applied, if necessary, will be identified. 18 - APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Electric and Magnetic Field Effects EMF has been identified as a concern by the public as a result of comments from the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study public meetings. EMF calculations to determine the fields within and at the edge of the right of way will be completed. Exhibits depicting the level of electrical and magnetic fields for the various transmission line configurations will be prepared for the public meetings and for inclusion in the EIS document. Specialized expertise in the area of electric and magnetic field effects would be provided by Mike Silva, P.E., of Enertech Consultants. Enertech Consultants are recognized internationally in the area of EMF consulting and expert testimony. Submarine and Land Cable The previous Route Selection Study relied on a literature search and contacts with cable installers and pipeline companies to provide a basis for the evaluation of the feasibility of installing submarine cable over the potential routes crossing the Turnagain Arm. Definitive data describing the composition of the bottom and the bottom profile along the proposed links is not currently available. Consequently, additional field work is required to evaluate the feasibility of embedding the cable, installation techniques, and required cable construction. Any one of these three issues could impact the constructed cost of the project as much as several million dollars. We propose to conduct a preliminary (one pass) hydrographic survey of the 60- plus miles of potential submarine cable routes to determine bottom profile, subsurface features, and bottom densities. This will allow a more definitive assessment of cable embedment options, installation techniques, and required cable. This will enable a more accurate assessment of the feasibility of actually installing submarine cable over each of the routes and how it would be accomplished, and will provide the data needed to estimate constructed cost with a higher level of confidence. The investigation of potential 138kV cable types conducted as part of the previous study revealed that use of two NKT flat three-phase cables could result in overall cost savings of up to $10.6 million on the Enstar route and up to $18.9 million for the Tesoro route, when compared to the installation of four single-phase cables. The initial investigations of the performance of the NKT flat type cable indicates a very good performance record since 1950 at 115kV and above. At present, the cable has been predominately used in Denmark by local utilities. To provide a more definitive assessment of the feasibility of using the NKT flat three-phase cable for the Southern Intertie, we propose to visit the NKT factory to HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH -— 19 discuss the site-specific requirements for installing the cable in the Turnagain Arm, and to review production methods, shipping and installation techniques. We would also meet with two utilities with a history of using the cable, to discuss cable installation and maintenance/performance issues. A summary report would be prepared outlining the issues and conclusions resulting from the discussions with NKT and the utility users. Working with the manufacturers, preliminary cable performance specifications would be developed based in part on the field data gained from the hydrographic surveys, and would be used to obtain refined cost quotes from the cable manufacturers. This data would also be discussed with the cable installers to refine the proposed installation techniques and estimated installation costs. For the land cables, the preliminary designs and cost estimates developed as part of the Route Selection Study would be used. All of the findings from the cable investigations would be summarized in a report. Substations and reactive compensation Substation preliminary designs and cost estimates from the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study will be used. Two additional endpoint substations in Anchorage will be investigated (ML&P Plant #2 and APA Anchorage) and preliminary designs for terminating the Southern Intertie will be prepared (138kV only). The reactive compensation preliminary designs and cost estimates from the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study will be modified to taking into account any changes in reactive compensation required by the additional electrical system studies performed. Cost estimates The cost estimates prepared in the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study will be revised taking into account the updated and refined preliminary engineering information developed in the EIS process. Per mile cost estimates for overhead lines will be prepared for any new preliminary line designs. The submarine cable costs were prepared based on information obtained from literature searches and the experience of existing pipelines and utilities. Hydrographic surveys, including side scan and bottom scan sonar, will be performed, permitting more accurate estimates by the cable manufacturers The submarine cable material and installation estimates will be revised based upon the 20 - APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al additional information obtained in the hydrographic surveys and through consultation with cable manufacturers. Two additional substation endpoints are being considered in Anchorage, not addressed in the Route Selection Study. These endpoints include the ML&P Plant #2 and the APA Anchorage substations. Cost estimates will be prepared for the modifications required at these two substations. The route cost estimates will be revised to reflect any changes made in overhead line structure type used, updated submarine cable material and installation costs, and any price changes resulting from the addition of new substation end points in Anchorage. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPROACH - 21 Bie aeaee | ue oem eee Te ll. WORK PLAN Introduction This section contains our work plan prepared specifically for the Southern Intertie EIS and Preliminary Engineering Project. The work plan provides a detailed breakdown of the tasks required to complete the work. It explains how we intend to accomplish the work and what deliverables will be provided. Our work plan serves as the foundation for project scheduling, budgeting and control. It organizes the work into discrete, well defined elements, which allows Chugach Electric and POWER to effectively track and manage the project. The work plan is organized into tasks consisting of related units of work. The tasks are further broken down into subtasks, each of which contains a specifically defined unit of work. Work plan review We invite you to review and discuss any desired revisions of this document with us before the project starts. This joint review will provide an opportunity to modify the work plan to best suit your project needs and will enhance coordination among all involved parties as the project progresses. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 1 TASK OUTLINE Task 0 Project Management Subtask 0.1 Project Supervision 0.2. Project Control 0.3. Project Document Control 0.4 Project Procedures Manual 0.5 Project Reporting 0.6 Project Meetings Task 1 Scoping Subtask 1.1 Base Map/Photography 1.2 Public/Agency Scoping Meetings 1.3. Finalize Alternatives 1.4 Scoping Report Task 2 Inventory Subtask 2.1 Data Collection 2.2 Documentation 2.3 Private Lands Parcel Research 2.4 Right of Entry 2.5 Property Survey Support Task 3 Impact Assessment/Mitigation Planning Subtask 3.1 Develop Project Description/Location 3.2 Conduct Assessment / Mitigation Planning 3.3. Documentation Task 4 Alternative Selection Subtask 4.1 Environmentally Preferred Alternative Selection 4.2 Documentation 2-WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Task 5 Subtask 5.1 Dee Ds 5.4 Task 6 Subtask 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 Draft Els PDEIS Preparation DEIS Preparation Print and Distribute Public Hearings Final EIS PFEIS Preparation FEIS Preparation Print and Documentation Public Review Record of Decision Public / Agency Involvement Program Overview Task 7 Subtask 7.1 V2 73 74 Ts 7.6 ea Task 8 Subtask 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 Studies Alternate Load Studies System Outage (N-1) Dynamic Stability Supplemental Studies Report Inductive Coordination Studies EMF Calculations Cathodic Protection Engineering Field Work Hydrographic Studies Hydrographic Supervision Geotechnical Evaluation Field Investigations Summary Field Report HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN -3 Task 9 Preliminary Engineering Subtask 9.1 Manufacturer/Utility Site Visit - Submarine Cables 9.2 Preliminary Design and Specification - Submarine Cables 9.3. Summary Cable Report 9.4 Submarine/Land Cable Transition Sites 9.5 Preliminary Design - Overhead Line 9.6 Supplemental Design Criteria - Substations 9.7 Preliminary Design - Substations 9.8 Supplemental Design Criteria - Reactive Compensation 9.9 Preliminary Design - Reactive Compensation 9.10 Cost Estimate - Submarine Cables 9.11 Cost Estimate - Overhead Line 9.12 Cost Estimate - Substations 9.13 Cost Estimate - Reactive Compensation 9.14 Cost Estimate - Rights of Way Acquisition 9.15 Summary Cost Report 4-WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Task 0 Project Management Objective: To facilitate completion of the project within Chugach’s budget, schedule, technical, and quality requirements. Approach: e Provide project reporting and management in a similar fashion as the Route Selection Study-Phase 1. e Select and maintain a project team that communicates freely and proactively with all project participants. e Develop a clearly defined, Chugach-approved project work plan, schedule, budget, procedures and communications protocol. e Document and implement a project management/control process. ¢ Monitor project progress and coordinate/prioritize/redirect resources as required. e Identify and document potential work scope, deliverable, budget, or schedule variances and bring them to the attention of Chugach for discussion and resolution. e Provide support for the EIS, preliminary design and related field activities. Subtask 0.1. — Project Supervision Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Project supervision Description: Provide project supervision of POWER and associated subconsultants and coordination with project participants from Chugach. Monitor the progress of the work, enforce compliance with procedures, require timely task completion, review status reports, and expedite the work by coordinating, allocating or redirecting resources. Require project execution in accordance with Chugach technical, quality, schedule, and budget objectives, the project plan and procedures manual, applicable codes, and POWER’s internal document and drawing standards. Identify risks, anticipate problems, and propose and implement plans to minimize negative impacts to the project. Provide general project administration, including clerical support as required to support and complete the project. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 5 Implement the agreed-upon project review, reporting, correspondence and general procedures. Conduct internal POWER project control and design review meetings as needed. Subtask 0.2 _—_— Project Control Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Project control documentation Predecessor: Chugach-approved project procedures manual Description: Develop and maintain the following project control documentation: e Project Plan: Chugach-approved and, if necessary, updated project plan consisting of a work plan, schedule and budget. e Budget Status: Monthly status reports providing summary and detail information on hours charged, expenses incurred, labor and expense costs, and percent of budget expended. Monitor tasks, subtasks, deliverables, action items, responsibilities, procedures, schedule and budget. Analyze project status. Subtask 0.3 — Project Document Control Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Document control system Description: Revise POWER’s standard document control system to accommodate Chugach’s project requirements. Develop and maintain the following document control documentation: ¢ Document Control Policy: Procedure for handling, tracking and archiving project documentation contained in the project procedures manual. e Document Archive: Archive original documents in a secure, fire-resistant room. e Project Record: Working file containing a chronological history of project progress, including status reports, correspondence, transmittals, phone and meeting documentation and other project-relevant records. 6 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Subtask 0.4 _—_— Project Procedures Manual Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Project-specific procedures manual Description: Refine the existing project procedures manual for use on the EIS/Preliminary Engineering effort. Establish the contact and correspondence lists and communications protocols. Include fiscal tracking and reporting procedures and control, quality assurance, administrative, communications and document flow protocol to be followed in all phases of the project for which POWER is responsible. Update the procedures as required to maintain current status. Subtask 0.5 —_— Project Reporting Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Status reports Predecessors: e Chugach-approved project procedures manual e Project control documentation Description: Prepare monthly status reports. Summarize the previous month’s progress of the work, deliverables, schedule, costs, and major work items expected to be accomplished in the next month. Address problems, trends and/or delays, and the actions being taken to bring those areas back on schedule or budget. Submit monthly reports to Chugach and file the status reports in the project record and document archive. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN -7 Subtask 0.6 —- Project Meetings Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Meeting Documentation Predecessor: Chugach approved project review meeting schedule Description: Conduct project initiation meeting involving Chugach, POWER, Dryden & LaRue. Establish communications and reporting protocol, review project goals, identify/confirm areas of responsibility, and obtain clarification as required. Schedule and conduct quarterly review meetings with Chugach to review technical, project control, and community relations aspects of the project. Conduct informal POWER-Chugach telephone conferences on an as required basis. Prepare an agenda for each scheduled meeting, and compile and distribute telephone conference or meeting documentation. Follow up on action items. Develop action item lists to schedule completion of items not resolved at the meetings or during telephone conferences. Additionally these meetings include EIS Interdisciplinary Team Meetings, Community Working Group(CWG) Meetings, Public Hearings, Scoping Meetings and Open Houses. These number and types of meetings are described more fully in the task descriptions for the EIS activities. POWER will have representatives at selected meetings, as defined in the budgeting basis below. In order to prepare realistic and cost effective budgets the prospective schedule of meetings has been reviewed and meetings which are tentatively scheduled in the same or adjacent months have been included in the same trip. Budgeting Basis: e One POWER representative will attend: (Refer to the EIS tasks for exact numbers of meetings) —Eleven project review meetings in Chugach’s offices. —Three of the four expected CWG meetings —Five of the nine expected Interdisciplinary Team Meetings —Three of the three expected open house meetings —Three of the three expected public hearings —Three of the three expected scoping meetings e Dryden & LaRue will attend 12 selected meetings 8 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al ¢ Meetings will be scheduled so they can be attended with a maximum of 14 trips from Hailey to Anchorage e Project duration from June, 1996 to December 1998 (30 months). HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 9 Task 1 Scoping Deliverables: Three scoping meetings, base map, aerial photography, public and agency mailing list, and six newsletters. Preparation and distribution of a scoping report and EIS preparation plan. Predecessors: Initial input from public and agency contact program conducted during the Route Selection Study Phase 1. Budgeting Basis: e 3 scoping meetings, including presentation materials and advertising e base map preparation for study team members to use for inventory and analysis e base map preparation for reports and presentation e color aerial photography - 1" = 500' for Anchorage area routes and 1" = 2000' for all other routes. Four sets of rectified stereo pairs: —1 CEA —1 POWER —2 Dames & Moore 50 copies of scoping report 50 copies of preparation plan 6 newsletters mailing list of public agencies, special interest groups and individuals requesting to be on the project mailing list (assumes 2,000) 25 interviews CWG group of 12 - 14 individuals (CWG scoping meeting) ID team meeting public scoping meetings Subtask 1.1 Base Map/Photography Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Base maps will be prepared for both study team analysis, and for presentation purposes. A reproducible atlas of 1" = 1 mile scale USGS Quad maps will be assembled with project facilities, study corridors, etc. Presentation maps on 11" x 17" formats and 1" = 3 mile enlargements will be prepared for meetings and handouts during the study process. In order to obtain the most up-to-date resource information and inventory data, Dames & Moore will acquire current aerial photography for all alternative routes identified in the Route Selection Study. Four sets of color stereoscopic 10 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al photographs at two scales will be required to provide the detail necessary to inventory and assess the complex environment within the study area. Aerial photos for the Anchorage and Soldotna areas will be at a scale of 1":500' and will allow detailed analysis within the rural and urban environments. All aerial photos outside of the Anchorage and Soldotna areas will be rectified and scaled at approximately 1":2000'. Subtask 1.2 — Public/Agency Scoping Meetings Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Dames & Moore will attend all agency and public scoping meetings for the project. Meetings will be held in Anchorage, Cooper Landing, and Soldotna. The purpose of these meetings is to inform the public of the project and identify issues. The initial results of Task 3.1 Project Description and Location Studies and Tasks 7 and 8 engineering studies will be incorporated into the presentation of the project at the scoping meetings. We will also prepare 50 copies of the scoping report which will document the scoping process, identify the issues and concerns related to the project, and include copies of all comments received. We will also prepare a preparation plan for the EIS, based on the results of scoping and an initial ID team meeting. Additional activities directly related to scoping include the following: e update existing public and agency mailing list e preparation of factsheets/newsletters (6) e EIS preparation plan In addition to following the NEPA scoping process, a Community Working Group (CWG) of twelve to fourteen individuals will be established within the Anchorage Bowl. The CWG will provide input and guidance throughout the NEPA process specific to the issues and concerns within the metropolitan Anchorage area. The formation of the group will be based on a series of key informant interviews. The initial meeting will focus on issues in Anchorage. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 11 Subtask 1.3 Finalize Alternatives Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Input from the scoping process will-be used to finalize the identification of alternatives to be addressed in the EIS. Subtask 1.4 Scoping Report Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: The report will identify all participants, comments, and analysis of issues and comments raised, and indicate how they will be addressed in the EIS. 12 -WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Task 2 Inventory Responsibility: POWER/LFS/Dames & Moore Objective: Collect pertinent environmentally related study area data. Conduct landownership research and landowner contacts in support of the alternative route selection process. Participate in public meetings to support discussions of right of way acquisition. Approach: Contact applicable agencies, groups etc. that may be impacted by the proposed project. Use the services of Land Field Services (LFS) in Anchorage to provide land related task deliverables. Manage the task deliverables so as to provide an appropriate level of detail to the route analysis process in a timely fashion. Deliverables: Data collection and cataloging e Baseline inventory data, field verification, documentation and resource maps. e Route and site-specific parcel counts e Right of entry onto private lands e Centerline surveys Budgeting Basis: Parcel identification, right-of-entry and survey: — Approximately 60 miles of route with a route / right-of-way, 50 feet wide, and on either side of the street where applicable in Anchorage. — A 1,000-foot-wide route, 500 feet either side of the Tesoro Pipeline centerline, for the Tesoro Route. — Approximately 55 miles of route links 100 feet either side of the study corridor reference centerline, in the Soldotna area. — Research for number of parcels will be 500 feet either side of the Enstar pipeline right of way centerline. Research 100 feet either side of the existing Quartz Creek line right of way centerline. Research lands immediately adjacent to the existing right of way, and where applicable, on the opposite side of the road on the Quartz Creek route between Portage and the University Substation. Assume obtaining right of entry from 100 landowners within the study area. $20,900 is allotted for survey subcontracting. This is expected to provide surveying services for approximately 20 miles of line; however the number of parcels per mile, availability and difficulty of locating and using control points, adequacy of existing property corner monuments, difficulty in HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 13 obtaining line of sight, and other factors make it impossible to determine number of parcels and /or miles of line which could be surveyed for this amount. If survey costs exceed this amount, a budget adjustment would be required. Subtask 2.1 Data Collection Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Route Selection Study includes the inventory of resource data for the study region. Detailed data within alternative study corridors will be required for the EIS process, including further research and field verification. Data collection will be systematic and well documented, and will expand on the study area inventory. Procedures for collecting, refining, and verifying resource data are described in Appendix A. The following resources will be inventoried: Natural Resources Biology(Dave Erikson, Principal Investigator) e Vegetation e Wetlands and Aquatic Habitats e Fish Distribution/Fish Habitat e Wildlife (Birds and Mammals) Earth Resources (Nancy Darrigo, Principal Investigator) e research additional sources (primarily for on shore data) e review and map additional data specifically geology/structure/faults, e — soils/liquefaction potential/depth-to-groundwater, and slope stability/erosion potential. e review aerial photos to map/confirm bedrock e field review of onshore routes for geology/soils Marine Environment (Gary Hayward, Principal Investigator) e Conduct interviews with authors identified during previous study to obtain route specific data on Turnagain Arm. e review data and map sand bars, channels, etc. e review aerial photos to aid in mapping current Turnagain Arm conditions 14-WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Human Resources Jurisdiction/Land Use (Niklas Ranta, Principal Investigator) Review and finalize data from route selection studies: major land jurisdictions existing land uses future land uses major highways, railroads, and arterials proposed right-of-way access Recreation Management Areas and Facilities (Leslie Howell, Principal Investigator) Review and finalize data from route selection studies: National Wild and Scenic Rivers National Wilderness or Primitive Areas Areas Restricted to Off-Road Vehicles Wildlife Refuges, Preserves, or Natural Areas State Parks and Recreation Areas Other Major Parks Socioeconomics (Mary-Ellen Tutle, Principal Investigator) The socioeconomic study will include inventory data on the following categories: fiscal employment social economic demographic local subsistence uses commercial uses unique to the region (i.e., Set Net Sites) Visual/Aesthetics (Randy Palmer, Principal Investigator) The visual resource studies will be structured to address the key issues specific to urban and rural settings, and will include the evaluation of impacts on landscape scenery, viewers, and visual resource management policies. Data collection for visual resources will be closely integrated with the collection of land use and recreation data in order to permit comprehensive evaluation of visual sensitivity and agency management objectives. As a part of the evaluation, nine computer HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 15 generated visual simulations will be used to assist in the characterization and assessment of alternative transmission line routes. Review and finalize data from route selection studies, and provide site specific data on the following: scenic quality viewshed analysis from recreation, residential and roadside views visual management objectives for public lands visual character of urban lands 9 simulations (5 urban and 4 rural) Cultural Resources (Gene Rogge, Principal Investigator, Mike Yarborough, Archeology, Steve Braund, Traditional Culture and Subsistence) e Special status cultural resources, such as national historic landmarks and properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places. e other archaeological and historic sites e places of traditional cultural concern, such as subsistence zones and sacred areas Subtask 2.2 Documentation Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Compile and reproduce inventory maps and provide associated route descriptions. Subtask 2.3 Private Lands Parcel Research Responsibility: LFS/POWER Description: Identify the number of parcels on each of five routes in Anchorage. Identify parcels along the Kenai Peninsula portion of the Tesoro Route and up to three possible routes in the Soldotna area. Research the number of parcels on the Enstar route, and Quartz Creek route on the Kenai Peninsula. Research the number of parcels on the Quartz Creek route between Portage and the University Substation. Identify specific ownership, property size and configuration of each of three submarine cable landfall sites on the Kenai Peninsula and five sites on the north 16 —- WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al side of Turnagain Arm. Assume a potential landfall location within 1000’ either side of a provided reference centerline. Identify the specific ownership, property size and configuration of each of seven alternative substation sites. Subtask 2.4 —_ Right of Entry Responsibility: LFS/POWER Description: Provide right-of-entry for EIS field studies during corridor-level and route-level studies. Subtask 2.5 — Property Survey Support Responsibility: POWER Description: Conduct centerline surveys of selected route segments in the Soldotna and Bernice Lake areas to identify private properties and to assist in the analysis of alternative routes in those areas. This subtask is exclusive of other survey work that may be conducted in support of engineering and design efforts. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 17 Task 3 Impact Assessment / Mitigation Planning Responsibility: Dames & Moore Deliverables: Impact assessment documentation and mitigation recommendations. Budget Basis: e The task of developing project locations will be based on a refinement of the results of the Route Selection Studies, as itemized on Table 1 The field effort to locate alternative facilities is itemized on Table 2 ID team review of impact criteria and results IPG review of impact results CWG meeting Subtask 3.1 Develop Project Description/Location Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Final determination of the project description based on additional field review in conjunction with engineering support. Table 1 provides a list of project facilities that will require detailed field review, analysis, and local siting, and Table 2 defines the field investigation efforts. Subtask 3.2 Conduct Assessment/Mitigation Planning Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Parallel with the refinement of the environmental database, we will develop the impact assessment/mitigation planning process ([A/MPP) methodology. The IA/MPP methodology will be reviewed by the ID team so that pertinent issues and concerns are addressed. Through the use of the IA/MPP, we will define: potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts interrelationships (cause and effect) of impacts criteria definition determination of impact significance 18 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al The RUS, IDG, and the ID Team will review and approve all impact criteria and results. A preliminary mitigation assessment will then be conducted to determine requirements for mitigation in specific areas associated with the alternative corridors. In some cases, where impacts are low or mitigation will not be effective, no mitigation measures will be recommended. Where mitigation is warranted and will be effective, mitigation recommendations will be made by the resource specialists using a predetermined list of measures deemed both effective and realistic by the RUS, CEA, and POWER Engineers. Based on the application of mitigation recommendations, impacts will be reassessed. The impacts remaining after application of mitigation measures will indicate the effectiveness of particular mitigation, and are termed preliminary residual impacts. It is assumed that, in coordination with Dames & Moore and CEA, the RUS will evaluate the mitigation recommendations and decide whether or not to require mitigation in specific geographic locations on a case-by-case or selective basis. Finally, residual impacts will be determined and will become the basis on which the alternative corridors will be compared for environmental preference. Cumulative effects will also be addressed including a description of the potentially connected and related actions. Although cumulative impacts cannot be quantified, there will be a description and listing of the potential effects. Subtask 3.3 Documentation Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: The IA/MPP will be incorporated into the DEIS and FEIS indicting the anticipated environmental impacts as a result of the construction, operation, maintenance and abandonment of the proposed project. In addition, the mitigation measures identified through this process will be incorporated into the ROD and become a component of the agency permits required for the project. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 19 Task 4 Alternative Selection Responsibility: Dames & Moore Deliverables: e Identification of an environmentally preferred alternative(s) e Comparative analysis of alternatives Predecessors: Data analyzed in Task 3 Budget Basis: e Compilation of impact data in a comparative format by alternative e Development of route comparison materials for Dames & Moore study team e Two-day route comparison meeting with Dames & Moore study team to select environmentally preferred route e ID team meeting review of environmental preference, and select an agency preferred route e CWG meeting e IPG meeting e Public open house (Anchorage, Cooper Landing, Soldotna) Subtask 4.1 Environmentally Preferred Alternative Selection Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Dames & Moore principal investigators will conduct the following: ¢ comparison and “cross discipline” rankings of all alternative corridors e consideration of public and agency comments received through scoping This effort will be coordinated with the IPG and the ID team. Subtask 4.2 Documentation Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: A ranking of each alternative will be documented for inclusion in Chapter 2 of the DEIS. 20 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Task 5 Draft EIS Responsibility: Dames & Moore Deliverables: Draft EIS Predecessors: Tasks 1,2,3 and 4 Budget Basis: e PDEIS (50 copies for review, 150 pages) e DEIS (250 copies, 150 pages) e JD team meeting to review Draft EIS e Public Meetings/Hearings — Anchorage, Soldotna, Cooper Landing Subtask 5.1 PDEIS Preparation Responsibility: Dames & Moore Deliverable: Preliminary Draft EIS Description: Compile applicable data, report and summaries to support the selection of a preliminary preferred route documented in the PDEIS. e Compilation of EIS chapters e Preparation of PDEIS (50 copies, 150 pages) e Distribution of copies for review Subtask 5.2 DEIS Preparation Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Compile and incorporate appropriate changes to the preliminary Draft EIS based on comments received during PDEIS review. Compile the DEIS for distribution. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 21 Subtask 5.3 Print and Distribute Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Prepare 250 copies (150 pages each) of the DEIS and provide to CEA for distribution. Subtask 5.4 = Attend Public Hearing(s) Responsibility: Dames & Moore/POWER Description: Schedule and conduct public hearings regarding the proposed schedule in compliance with the NEPA process. Receive and compile public comments on the DEIS. 22 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Task 6 Final EIS Responsibility: Dames & Moore Deliverables: Response to public and agency comments and distribution of the Final EIS Predecessors: Task 5 Budget Basis: e PDEIS — 50 copies for IPG, RUS, and ID team review. This will be a 75-page document that will not require including the contents of the DEIS. e DEIS — 250 copies with 75 pages (does not incorporate DEIS contents) e ID team meeting to review comments on DEIS e ID team meeting to review FEIS Subtask 6.1 PFEIS Preparation Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Respond to comments received during public hearings. Incorporate applicable data and prepare the preliminary Final EIS for review and comment. Copy, bind and provide 50 copies total (75 pages each) to RUS and CEA. _ Subtask 6.2 FEIS Preparation Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Compile and respond to comments from the preliminary FEIS from appropriate agencies received during RUS and CEA review. Prepare FEIS for printing.. Subtask 6.3 Print and Documentation Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: Print 250 copies total (75 pages each) for distribution. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 23 Subtask 6.4 Public Review Responsibility: Dames & Moore Description: The FEIS will be made available to-the public via CEA. Subtask 6.5 Record of Decision Responsibility: RUS/Dames & Moore Description: The lead agency will file the FEIS with the EPA and provide the Record of Decision. 24 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Public/Agency Involvement Program Overview The activities summarized below will be completed as part of tasks 1-6. Interdisciplinary Team Formation and Meetings e identification of ID Team members e preparation for ID Team meetings (maps, handouts, presentations) e 9 meetings will be held with the ID team Community Working Group (Anchorage) e preparation of a list of potential interviewees © community leader interviews (25) e selection of CWG members (12 to 14) according to the following criteria: — potential issues of concern to be addressed through planning studies — special interest groups, individuals, and civic organizations that may have an interest in the project — potential members of the CWG — communication and power structures within the community — effective means of public participation and information — any information that might be helpful in transmission line siting and assessment Public Meetings/Hearing (Anchorage, Cooper Landing, Soldotna) e preparation of public service announcements to announce public meetings or other events e media briefings by CEA representatives e preparation of news releases and articles e invitation of media representatives to CWG meetings Newsletters/Factsheets (6) Public Involvement - Engineering Support Budgeting Basis: Public/agency involvement activities are incorporated in Tasks 1-6. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 25 Task 7 Studies Objective: Determine system components and operating limits for additional end- points in Anchorage, BES alternatives, and application of transfer tripping of Bradley Lake to improve system stability. Approach: e Perform steady-state power flow analysis of the existing 115kV intertie at 10MW load increments above 70MW to determine reinforcement requirements and evaluate secure and pre-contingency emergency transfer limits. e Analyze the Quartz Creek-Bird Point 138kV alternatives, using steady-state power flow software, with two additional endpoints in Anchorage to determine secure transfer limits. e Perform N-1 outage analysis of the two additional endpoints to establish pre- contingency secure and post-contingency emergency transfer limits. e Prepare a working BES model and perform dynamic stability analysis to evaluate the use of this technology to increase power transfers on the existing 115kV intertie. e Evaluate the use of transfer tripping or over-frequency tripping of one Bradley Lake unit to improve system stability for increased power transfers over the existing intertie and alternatives to add a second intertie. e Prepare a supplemental systems study report to summarize the analysis, equipment requirements and conclusions. Subtask 7.1 Alternate Load Studies Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Pre-contingency secure and emergency transfer limits for the existing intertie, alternative endpoints and BES alternatives. Description: Continue steady-state analysis of alternatives from the previous study. Refine the system models to reflect established ‘normal’ generation dispatch for the Railbelt system. Schedule and attend a one day meeting with IPG representatives to agree on generator dispatch schedules and operating issues to reflect how the system will actually be operated with and without the improvements. Generator dispatch should reflect practical aspects of dispatch based on the economics of operation. Evaluate and comment on how the ‘normal’ dispatch compares with generation schedules used in the previous analysis. 26 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Perform load flow runs to evaluate terminating the Quartz Creek alternatives at ML&P Plant 2 and APA Anchorage Substation. Alternative analysis will be performed for 138kV and 230kV. Other alternatives will not be evaluated since the endpoints will not change. Evaluate the impacts to all alternatives transfer limits for constructing the overhead portions of the line at 230kV spacing with the lines energized at 138kV. Define steady-state transfer limits of the existing 115kV intertie with incremental improvements to increase power flow from 70MW to the maximum amount practical. Increments will be evaluated in 1OMW steps to determine required equipment improvements to increase the power flow. Evaluations will include incremental reinforcements and losses. Re-evaluate and refine ratings of reactive compensation required for the alternatives. Revise equipment requirements for the reactive compensation and develop preliminary equipment requirements for installing a transfer trip scheme to Bradley Lake Hydro. Subtask 7.2 | System Outage (N-1) Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Existing intertie, alternative endpoint and BES alternative pre- contingency and post-contingency emergency transfer limits Description: Perform N-1 contingency analysis for incremental reinforcements of the existing 115kV intertie and the Quartz Creek alternatives with the two additional endpoints to determine steady-state performance under single contingency outage conditions. Single contingency outages will be limited to the contingencies evaluated in Phase 1 of this study. Evaluate N-1 cases with power transfers at the pre-contingency limits to determine bus voltages and line loading. Increase power transfers for the most severe component outage case to determine the post-contingency transfer limit to remain with the ASCC voltage criteria. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 27 Subtask 7.3 Dynamic Stability Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Additional load flow analysis Description: Perform dynamic stability analysis of the existing intertie with the incremental power flow increases to determine the dynamic response to the disturbances evaluated in Phase 1. This evaluation will include detailed analysis of the use of transfer trip of one Bradley Lake unit to balance Kenai generation and load during loss of the existing intertie with high power transfers. Consult with PTI to get the BES models included with PSS/E version 23 to operate properly for multiple BES installations. Perform analysis of the Railbelt System with additional BES’s located on the Kenai and in Anchorage. Battery Energy Storage will be evaluated at three points on the Kenai and at one point in Anchorage. Kenai BES’s will be located at or near Soldotna, Bradley Lake and Kasilof. BES’s in Anchorage will be located at International Substation. ML&P Plant 2 is not considered due to possible control interaction with the proposed Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage System (SMES) system to be installed at that location. Budgeting Basis: We have budgeted up to a maximum three days of PTI time to assist in getting the BES models functioning correctly. Subtask 7.4 Supplemental Studies Report Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Draft and final report section to summarize the methodology, analysis, findings and conclusions of the additional power flow, dynamic stability and system operation studies Predecessors: Subtasks 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3 Description: Prepare narrative, tables, one-line diagrams and cost estimates to summarize the transfer ratings and analysis for: e¢ Two additional endpoints in Anchorage for the Quartz Creek — Bird Point alternative at 138kV and 230kV e Increases of the power transfer over the existing intertie in 1OMW increments from 7OMW to 120MW 28 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al e BES alternatives at three locations on the Kenai and one location in Anchorage e Transfer tripping on Bradley Lake unit to enhance system stability on loss of the intertie ¢ Operational issues regarding generator dispatch and system configuration Budgeting Basis: e POWER will issue 10 copies of the draft report for the IPG review and comment. IPG comments will be discussed in a teleconference, agreed items will be revised in the report, and a final report section issued as an addendum to the route selection study report. Subtask 7.5 Inductive Coordination Studies Responsibility: POWER Deliverables: e Inductive coordination summary report of calculations and findings e¢ Recommended design parameters Description: Contact each pipeline, utility and/or communications utility along the proposed routes. Determine the amount of interference allowable and accordingly the required separations to pipelines or other utility facilities. Develop a summary study report that outlines recommended design parameters and practices. - Budgeting Basis: e Contact with the pipeline and other entities will be handled via telephone. No site visits or trips to pipeline companies or foreign utilities’ offices will be required. Subtask 7.6 EMF Calculations Responsibility: POWER/ENERTECH Deliverable: EMF data consisting of EMF models, text and graphs or charts for inclusion in the EIS, and RFI/TVI and audible noise analysis. Predecessors: e Overhead line preliminary designs e Underground line preliminary designs HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 29 e System studies Description: Prepare 2-D EMF models for overhead and underground lines. Prepare text and supporting graphs or charts for inclusion in the EIS. Also included in will be radio interference/TV interference, and audible noise analysis. Budgeting Basis: e Analysis will be done for up to three current levels at 138kV and 230kV for the following (a total of up to 54, 2-D EMF calculations): - overhead lines using guyed X structures - wood pole H frame structures - wood pole H frame structures parallel to the Quartz Creek line - single pole, single circuit structures - single pole, double circuit structures (if needed) - single pole, single circuit structures with distribution underbuild (if needed) - single pole, single circuit structures next to underground (if needed) - underground lines - Bird Point to Girdwood lattice structures Up to nine supporting graphs or charts for inclusion in the EIS Up to four full size drawings for public meeting exhibits Attendance by Mike Silva at one set of three public meetings Preparation of text for EIS presentation Subtask 7.7 Cathodic Protection Responsibility: POWER/Cathodic Protection Services Deliverable: e Cathodic protection summary report and findings e Recommended design parameters Description: Contact each pipeline company in the area of the proposed routes and determine type of cathodic protection used on facilities, location of anode beds or other grounding methodologies. Determine minimum acceptable spacing from pipe line based on protection requirements for overhead line, land cable and submarine cable. Compile and summarize findings and recommended methods of mitigation to existing cathodic protection facilities. 30 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Budgeting Basis: e No time or expenses have been budgeted for office visits to the associated pipeline offices outside of Anchorage. Additionally, no budget has been allocated for fees that may be imposed by the pipeline companies in researching files, reproducing information or mailing data. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 31 Task 8 Engineering Field Work Objective: To perform and document investigations of field conditions necessary to support the EIS preparation. Approach: e Perform preliminary hydrographic surveys and geotechnical evaluations of potential submarine cable routes. e Gather and review existing on-land geotechnical information collected from electric utility and pipeline sources. Subtask 8.1 Hydrographic Studies Responsibility: POWER / Ocean Survey Inc. Deliverable: Hydrographic report bottom profiles with subbottom geological features and side scan sonar traces, one track-line per link Description: Using coordinates of landfalls, conduct a preliminary hydrographic survey of the 60+ miles of potential submarine cable route centerlines. Hydrographic survey will include bottom profile referenced to coordinates (using differential GPS), side scan sonar (estimated 300’ width) covering bottom’s surface features and subbottom sonar indicating subsurface geological features. Compile and provide a report detailing findings of features of subsurface profile and subsurface densities that would impact the feasibility of embedment of cable. Budgeting Basis: ¢ One mobilization for hydrographic subcontractor e Ten copies of the report will be provided. Subtask 8.2 Hydrographic Supervision Responsibility: POWER / Dames & Moore / Jacobson International Deliverable: Work log of hydrographic survey Description: Prepare specifications, contract for and provide supervision and field support for hydrographic study. Investigate addition sources of data such as Army Corps of Engineers, State of Alaska Joint Pipeline Lines Office, files of data from existing crossings (Tesoro & Enstar Pipelines). Report findings of investigations and keep daily work log and notes. 32 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Analyze data from Hydrographic Survey and recommend preliminary cable construction and installation methods, based on data received, for each corridor route. Include preliminary recommendations on armoring and installation techniques. Budgeting Basis: e One field engineer will be present when hydrographic surveys are conducted. Subtask 8.3 Geotechnical Evaluation Responsibility: POWER/Geotherm/ Dames & Moore Deliverable: Geotechnical information summary Description: Review existing geotechnical data. Specifically, if available, the geotechnical information developed for the Enstar and Tesoro pipelines, and the Quartz Creek line and bore logs from the original Bird Point Geotechnical Investigation in about 1959. Review the construction and operations experience, to the extent it is available, for the Enstar and Tesoro pipelines and the existing Quartz Creek line. Arrange for and use, on as needed basis, the services of a geotechnical engineer and/or geologist with local experience to assist in interpreting the implications of the existing data for overhead transmission line design and to assist in expatrapolating from the existing data for locations where the proposed alignment will vary from the existing corridors. Budgeting Basis: ¢ One visit to Enstar’s offices in the lower 48 and one visit to Tesoro’s offices in the lower 48 to search their files for geotechnical information. e Chugach will make available any geotechnical reports developed for the Quartz Creek line. e Data on the construction and operations of the pipelines and the Quartz Creek line will be developed through telephone conversations and/or meetings held in the Anchorage area. e 80 hours of a local geologist/geotechnical engineer to assist as needed ¢ CEA will provide 1959 Bird Point crossing bore logs. ¢ CEA will provide thermal soil conductivity data from previous submarine cable installations. ¢ No soil thermal conductivity tests will be performed. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 33 Subtask 8.4 _ Field Investigations Responsibility: POWER/Dryden & LaRue/Dames & Moore Deliverables: Summarized field notes Description: Make field observations by key project environmental and engineering personnel of identified routes in order to more specifically identify prospective centerline locations, potential mitigation methods and where they _ would be required, most appropriate structure types, select submarine cable landfall locations, identify technical or environmental challenges, and note any other observed features or conditions which may affect the environmental permitting process, design, construction, or right-of-way acquisition. Budgeting Basis: e Fixed-wing aircraft overflight of the identified routes e Three days of helicopter reconnaissance to perform a more in-depth aerial reconnaissance and to provide on-the-ground access to remote locations e Nine days of on-the-ground reconnaissance Subtask 8.5 § Summary Field Report Responsibility: POWER/Dames & Moore Deliverable: Summary field report Description: Develop a report summarizing and collating findings from the hydrographic survey, research of existing geotechnical boring logs, and on-site field investigations. Preliminary submarine cable recommendations will be made as to the feasibility of embedment methodologies, not to embed if appropriate and level of armoring. The report will also address observations and conclusions impacting transmission structure selection, submarine/land cable transition sites and cable-to-overhead- line transition sites. NOTE: During detailed design a significant amount of additional geotechnical and hydrographic data will be required. This is only practical after an approved route is identified. Additionally, in-situ thermal testing will have to be accomplished for both submarine and land type cables to select the final 34 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al conductor size. These activities are not included in this proposal, but should be included in a Phase 2 detailed design work scope. Budgeting Basis: Provide 10 copies of the summary report for CEA’s use. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 35 Task 9 Preliminary Engineering Objective: Refine the existing, and prepare additional, preliminary designs, cost estimates, and engineering related information as defined in the subtasks to support the EIS preparation and presentation effort. Approach: e Make a factory visit to submarine cable manufacturer NKT (Denmark). e Prepare preliminary design and installation specifications for single-phase SCFF and three-phase self compensating type cables. e Identify and define the submarine/land cable transition sites in greater detail. e Prepare preliminary designs for wood pole H-frame and, if necessary, double circuit single pole designs to allow further refinement of cost estimates. e Investigate and prepare substation designs for two additional endpoints (substations) in the Anchorage area. e Revise the cost estimates prepared in the Southern Intertie Routing Study taking into account the new and revised information. Subtask 9.1 Manufacturers / Utility Site Visit - Submarine Cable Responsibility: CEA/POWER Deliverable: Manufacturer and factory inspections and utility-specific operating data. Description: Visit potential submarine cable suppliers to review production methods, maximum length capabilities, shipping methods, installation methods, etc. Visit utility users of specific designs of cables to learn of experience in operation and installation of cables. Budgeting Basis: e One seven-day trip for two people to visit NKT’s facility in Denmark and to discuss operating and performance history of the three-phase flat type cable with two Danish utilities. 36 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Subtask 9.2 _—_— Preliminary Design and Specification - Submarine Cables Responsibility: POWER/PDC Deliverable: Preliminary design parameters and performance specifications for submarine cable(s) Description: Develop preliminary designs of submarine cables for each route based on parameters developed from Task 8, Engineering Field Work. Working with manufacturers, develop designs that can be practically manufactured. Provide a preliminary performance specification for the single-phase SCFF and three- phase SCFF. Subtask 9.3. Summary Cable Report Responsibility: POWER / PDC Deliverable: Report Description: Provide a summary report including preliminary performance specifications and supporting documentation. Include details for each corridor link cable type. Recommend a specific cable type for each corridor link and most probable method of installation. Budgeting Basis: Provide 10 copies of the report to CEA. Subtask 9.4 Submarine / Land Cable Transition Sites Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Preliminary site-specific transition station arrangements Description: Provide preliminary site-specific transition method and arrangement. Designs will include discussion of specific location space required and type of structures needed. (overhead structure and/or manholes). Engineering sketches of the transition station will be provided. Budgeting Basis: e Provide design parameters and EIS support for 10 submarine cable landfalls (Point Possession, Fire Island [two], Point Campbell, Point Woronzof, Klatt HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 37 Road, Potter, Bird Point, Sniper Point, and Burnt Island Creek), and two land cable to overhead line transition sites. Subtask 9.5 _—_— Preliminary Design - Overhead Line Responsibility: POWER/Dryden & LaRue Deliverables: e Preliminary Design for Wood Pole H-Frame and if required, double circuit single pole structures. e Estimated additional structure height and weight to add a distribution underbuild to a single pole structure. Description: Develop preliminary overhead transmission line designs for selected links identified in the in the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study. Base the preliminary designs upon the preliminary design criteria established in the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study. The preliminary design will be used to support preparation of the EIS by establishing feasibility, approximate cost, and assessing the impacts of construction and operation of the overhead transmission line. The preliminary designs will establish: Anticipated span lengths Anticipated structure types, heights, material, and weights Structure geometry Insulator type and rating Anticipated structure mix Typical foundations Conductor size, type, and sag tension The preliminary design will be prepared using the same or similar computer programs as will be used for the final design, however design parameters which are anticipated from the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study, published data, and experience will be used in lieu of the specific survey and geotechnical information available for the final design. Conductor will be 795 kCM ACSR except in long span or other special circumstances, as it was for the preliminary design performed for the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study. A typical mix of structures for each combination of structure family and geographic area will be developed through a combination of experience, and if necessary, trial spotting using USGS mapping data. This information will be used to arrive at typical designs for the structure family and geographic area in which it is located. 38 —- WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Budgeting Basis: ¢ Wood pole H-frame structure families at 138kV and 230kV in two geographic areas (four structure families total - Mountain Pass and Kenai Flats geographic areas) e Double circuit single steel pole structure families at 138kV and 230kV in Anchorage (if required) e Estimated weight and additional pole height to add distribution underbuild to single steel pole structure in Anchorage Subtask 9.6 | Supplemental Design Criteria - Substations Responsibility: POWER Deliverables: e Site visit with involved utilities e Data acquisition/drawing collection for the two alternate endpoints in Anchorage Description: Schedule and attend meetings with the involved utilities. Provide site visits to determine feasibility of expansion of existing substations. Collect one-line and general arrangement drawings for modifications to show new endpoints. Provide a supplemental design criteria to a similar level of detail as provided in the previously submitted design reports. Budgeting Basis: e Requested information will be provided by the utilities owning the substations ¢ One mobilization/office visit Subtask 9.7 _— Preliminary Design - Substations Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: One-line and general arrangement drawings for the two endpoint alternatives Description: Provide an 8’2” x 11” one-line diagram for each of two substations. Illustrate the general bus arrangement and required additional major equipment, such as transformers, circuit breakers, disconnect switches, etc. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 39 Modify the existing general arrangement plans for two substations. Depict the physical bus arrangement and configuration, line entries and exits, transformer, circuit breaker and switch locations, any major site modifications, access roads, control building, etc. Identify and note bus connections and phasing on the drawing. We have anticipated showing general arrangement drawing modifications on CADD, provided the existing originals are furnished to us in a suitable electronic format. If the existing drawings are hand-drawn mylars, we anticipate modifying the drawings manually. The new one-lines will be CADD generated. Budgeting Basis: e Two substations, 138kV only Subtask 9.8 | Supplemental Design Criteria - Reactive Compensation Responsibility: POWER Deliverables: Supplemental Design Criteria Description: Based on findings from the systems studies provide an addendum to the previously submitted Reactive Compensation Design Criteria. Provide the revised data as supplemental information. Budgeting Basis: This subtask will be accomplished after all systems studies have been performed, reviewed and approved. Subtask 9.9 _—_ Preliminary Design - Reactive Compensation Responsibility: POWER Deliverables: Modify previously submitted one-lines and general arrangements to reflect changes based on systems studies results. Utilize the same format as Draft Report Submittals. 40 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Subtask 9.10 Cost Estimate -Submarine Cables Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Refined cost estimates for submarine cable Description: Refine existing cost estimates using manufacturer data based on preliminary performance specification(s) and local vendor-supplied cost for materials and installation. Budgeting Basis: The submarine cable corridors are as identified in the Southern Intertie Project Routing Study Subtask 9.11 Cost Estimate - Overhead Line Responsibility: POWER/Dryden & LaRue Deliverable: Refined preliminary estimates of probable construction costs and material costs for overhead transmission lines Description: Use guyed "X" and single steel pole single circuit cost estimate prepared for the Southern Intertie Routing Study. Develop estimates on a per mile basis for wood pole H-frame and, if needed, double circuit single pole and the addition of underbuild to single pole steel structures. Obtain two verbal budgetary quotes on major materials (transmission . line structures, conductor, insulators). Use single verbal budgetary quotes or results from recent procurements for other material items. Discuss construction costs with two line contractors as bid information from other projects to arrive at estimates of construction labor and contractor provided materials for each geographic area and structure type from the preliminary design subtask. Adjust costs through the use of a “difficulty factor” to take into account specific conditions anticipated for each line segment. A brief narrative of the process used in preparing the cost estimates, and the assumptions and qualifications applicable to the cost estimates will be included along with the cost estimates in the Summary Cost report. Budgeting Basis: e Double circuit, single steel pole preliminary designs and estimated weights and additional pole heights for additions of a distribution underbuild on single steel poles will be developed, if required. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 41 e¢ Wood pole designs from the overhead line preliminary design subtask e Per mile cost estimates for guyed X and single pole structures will be taken from the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study e Cost estimates, by link, will be recalculated for the Enstar, Tesoro, and Quartz Creek routes, as well as additional routes identified in Anchorage, based upon structure types selected during on the ground reconnaissance, and as required by environmental considerations (for example, wood pole H-frame structures will be required parallel to the existing Quartz Creek line). Subtask 9.12 Cost Estimate - Substations Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Cost estimate for two new endpoints Predecessors: e Supplemental Design Data e Alternative Substation Sites Description: Prepare preliminary estimates of construction costs and material costs for the substation scenarios for the two additional endpoints for the Southern Intertie. Include unit prices for labor and material. Develop an extension based on the quantity required for each unit A brief narrative of the process used in preparing the cost estimates, and with the assumptions and qualifications applicable to the cost estimates and the cost - estimates will be included in the Supplemental Summary Cost Report. Budgeting Basis: e Approval of preliminary design criteria and drawings for the two substations. Subtask 9.13 Cost Estimate - Reactive Compensation Responsibility: POWER Deliverable: Cost Estimates for revised Reactive Compensation requirements based on additional system studies. Predecessors: e Alternate Systems Studies 42 - WORK PLAN HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Description: Prepare preliminary estimates of probable construction costs and material costs for the reactive compensation scenarios based on the additional system studies performed under this contract. Revise the previously submitted Cost Estimate for the reactive compensation scenarios. Include unit prices for labor and material for conventionally switched devices. Compile and review data collected from vendor support for non-conventionally switched installations such as SVC’s or BES’s. Budgeting Basis: e For conventionally switched reactive compensation, use POWER’s estimating data base and historical construction data to provide estimates. e For non-conventionally switched reactive compensation (thyristor controlled devices), use POWER’s experience with and exposure to major vendors (i.e. ABB, Siemens, GE, GEC, etc.) to solicit turnkey pricing data. Subtask 9.14 Cost Estimate - Rights of Way Acquisition Responsibility: POWER/LFS Deliverable: Right of way acquisition cost estimates Description: Develop cost estimates to acquire right of way for each of three identified alternative routes. Develop land costs to be paid to landowners, and costs for labor and expense to acquire easements. Subtask 9.15 Summary Cost Report Responsibility: POWER Predecessors: e Approved preliminary engineering design, design criteria, and specifications ¢ Cost components from alternatives and options determined in this task. Description: Compile cost estimates for the various components of the Southern Intertie alternatives considered under this contract. Provide a brief summary report showing various cost options. Provide 15 copies for CEA use. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al WORK PLAN - 43 ASRS See oan e eee | al lll. SCHEDULE A proven system We are proposing to use the same scheduling and similar tracking systems used successfully for the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study, Phase I. In summary these tools include: A thought-out and complete work plan and schedule An established procedure for monitoring schedule performance An experienced team committed to maintaining the schedule A plan for cooperation between all participants in the project POWER’s Management Information System Industry accepted scheduling software Please refer to our September 15, 1995 proposal for the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study, Phase I, for a more detailed description of our scheduling approach. A proven team Looking back over the last few months, the schedule for the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study, Phase I, was challenging because a large amount of interdependent work had to be done in a short period of time. This required close coordination between all participants, effective communication among all team members, and the willingness to put in the hours necessary, when necessary, to maintain project schedules. The technical knowledge and experience of the team, and the experience of the project team working together on previous projects was critical to our maintaining the schedule. The EIS and Preliminary Engineering tasks included in this proposal will to require the same commitment to maintain the project schedule. The experience, HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al SCHEDULE - 1 skills, and technical competence of the project team will be invaluable in this effort. Schedule considerations Important points with regard to the schedule include: e The schedule included in this section is believed to be reasonable and attainable. e Preparation of the MOU’s between the IPG and the lead agency, and between the lead and cooperating agencies, will include negotiating the schedule and review activities associated with agency review and approval. In the process of coming to agreement with the agencies on schedule, the durations of some of the activities may change. e The schedule is based on receiving a Notice to Proceed (NTP) from Chugach by June 3, 1996. An NTP is required in June so that the 1996 summer season can be utilized to complete the necessary environmental and engineering field work. If preparation and execution of the field work is not completed during the 1996 summer season, it will have to be completed during the 1997 summer season, resulting in a schedule extension of one year. e Scoping is scheduled to occur during the 1996 summer as well, so that the key project issues can be identified early in the process. 2- APPROACH HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al ~ SOUTHERN INTERTIE PROJECT EIS . | Proposed Anchorage to Kenai | | Peninsula Transmission Line | — — ~ — — ] 1996 _ 1997 _ | | 1D Task Name ____ = 1 Start Finish Apr] May Jun Ju | Aug | Sep | Oct Nov | Dec Jan | Feb | Mar Apr | May dun [Ju [Aug Sep | Oct Nov | [Oct | Nov | Dec | | 1 | TASK 1 SCOPING 5/1/96 9/19/96 - | FILE NOTICE OF INTENT WITH FEDERAL REGISTER 6/6/96 6/6/96 MOUs WITH COOPERATING AND REVIEWING AGENCY 5/1/96 614/96 | DEVELOP BASE MAPS AND ORDER PHOTOGRAPHY 5/30/96 6/19/96 | PUBLIC/AGENCY SCOPING MEETINGS 7/12/96 9/1196, | PREPARE MATERIALS/DEVELOP MAILING LIST 6/20/96 7131/96 | FINALIZE ALTERNATIVES AND FIELD REVIEW 6/20/96 8/7/96 | | [8 | DOCUMENTATION (SCOPING REPORT/PREPARATION PLAN) 819/96 8/29/96 | 9 | AGENCY REVIEW AND APPROVE 8/30/96 9/19/96 __| | | [7 TASK 2 INVENTORY 5/30/96 10/13/97, | | | 11 | INVENTORY ALTERNATIVES 5/30/96 11/6/96 | a1 CONDUCT FIELD REVIEW AND AGENCY CONTACTS 5/30/96 10/9/96 v3 DATA MANAGEMENT 8/13/96 11/7/96 | 14 | DOCUMENTATION 10/14/96 196 | | | | | 15 ADDITIONAL REVIEW AND DOCUMENTATION 3/6/97 1011397) | | | — | | | ("46 | TASK 3 IMPACT ASSESSEMENT AND MITIGATION 6/20/96 3/28/97, | | PLANNING | 7 DEVELOP PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION 6/20/96 9/16/96 48 DEVELOP IMP 9/19/96 10/16/96 | | | | | 19 CONDUCT INITIAL AMP 10/17/96 11/2196 | | | 20 AGENCY REVIEW AND APPROVE 11/25/96 12/25/96 | | | 21 | FINALIZE IA/MP 12197 1/80/97 | = | | | [22 | DOCUMENTATION 131197 2128/97 | ts. | 8 AGENCY REVIEW AND APPROVE 33/97 3/28/97 | [@ critica! Completion Point | j 24 | TASK 4 ALTERNATIVE SELECTION 3/3/97 610/97 | |_| | | 25 DEVELOP ENVIRONMENTAL SELECTION CRITERIA 3/3197 yeu97| | | —| | | | [26 | CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL ALTERNATIVE SELECTION 3124/97 near) | 27 AGENCY REVIEW AND APPROVE 4/18/97 5/13/97 | Giles’ Compration Pom | 28 | =~ DOCUMENTATION 5/14/97 6/10/97 | | oo | 29 | AGENCY AND PROPONENT PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 5/14/97 e097) | SELECTION | | | 30 TASK 5 DRAFT EIS 1/2/97 219/98 | | | "31 DEVELOP PURPOSE AND NEED 2/97 er | | | | | 32 PREPARE PRELIMINARY DEIS. 5/16/97 8/13/97 33 AGENCY REVIEW 8/18/97 aio 3a | FINALIZE DEIS 9/12/97 10/21/97 35 AGENCY REVIEW AND APPROVE 10/22/97 111497) | | 36 | PRINT DEIS 11/17/97 reae7| | | | | 37 FILE WITH EPA 12/10/97 ee | | 38 | DISTRIBUTE 12/22/97 = 39 | PUBLIC REVIEW 1/2198 2nge| | t | 40 FEDERAL HEARING 1/16/98 woo | | acl | 41 TASK 6 FINAL EIS 2/11/98 9/14/98 | | | [a2 | RESPOND TO COMMENTS 2/11/98 3/17/98 POWER Engines, re — Mie sonmay QL - 7 Project: 120376-00 “ iestone @ aia Date: 4/15/96 PROPOSED SCHEDULE SOUTHERN INTERTIE PROJECT EIS Proposed Anchorage to Kenai Peninsula Transmission Line | = 1996 _ _ — __ | _ _ 7 - = 7 (1D Task Name a Start Finish [Apr May Jun Ju Aug Sep | Oct Nov Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar Apr] May Jun | Sep Oct Nov _| = Feb “Aug | Sep. Oct [Nov | Dec | 3 PREPARE PRELIMINARY FEIS 3/18/98 ara9e) | / 4a AGENCY REVIEW AND APPROVE 4/16/98 5/6/98 tl {| 45 PREPARE FEIS 5/7/98 698 | 46 AGENCY REVIEW AND APPROVE. 6/3/98 6/23/98 | 47 | PRINT 6/24/98 711498 | | 48 FILE WITH EPA 7/16/98 Treen} Critical Completion P [- 49 | DISTRIBUTE 7/31/98 8/6/98 50 PUBIC REVIEW 8/6/98 9/14/98 | | st RECORD OF DECISION 6/3/98 6/26/98 Critical Completion Point | 82 TASK 7 STUDIES 7/1/96 2/14/97 3 | ELECTRICAL SYSTEM STUDIES 711196 8/29/96 | 54 | EIS & PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS, 7/15/96 211497, | - hicenaal 8 ENGINEERING FIELD WORK 6/14/96 2/14/97 | | 56 HYDROGRAPHIC STUDIES 6/14/96 9/12/96 57 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 71196 112/97 | (58 | FIELD INVESTIGATIONS 6/14/96 10/16/96} | | | 59 | SUMMARY REPORT 10/15/96 2nao7 | 60 TASK 9 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING 6/14/96 5/16/97 4 6 SUBMARINE/LAND CABLE DESIGN 10/16/96 angi97| | rs @ OVERHEAD LINE DESIGN 9/16/96 5/16/97 63 SUBSTATION/REACTIVE COMP DESIGN 6/14/96 12/2/96 | | [64 | COST ESTIMATES 15/97 5/14/97 6s | PUBLIC/AGENCY INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM 5/30/96 7/10/98 ee ga 66 INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM 5/30/96 5/7/98 = LD or ID TEAM FORMULATION 5/90/96 6/19/96 | t= | 68 MEETINGS 71/5/96 win ma [I 11 Separate Meetings 69 COMMUNITY WORKING GROUP (ANCHORAGE ONLY) 5/30/96 4/16/97 | ec 9 | | ——) | 70 INTERVIEWS 5/30/96 oe ba] , 7 | MEETINGS 7196 meer | Mii! 4 separate meetings | | | 72 PUBLIC MEETING/HEARING 7/12/96 2/5/98 | e EE i | | al SCOPING MEETINGS (3) 7/2/96 7/90/96 | (IN 2 scoping Meetings 74 PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE (3) 5/97 sr2197) | @LLL 3 Public Open Houses 75 PUBLIC HEARINGS (3) 113/98 215998 [LT s Pute Hearings | 10_|_NEWSEETTEDSEACT SHEETS: = | | CAA LMT L TT 6 Newsterrersiract Sheets | | | POWER Engineers, ne [toe EET] tstne @ sonmay GL Project: 120376-00 Date: 4/15/96 [eee _ ee _ a - —_ _ _ PROPOSED SCHEDULE ie eee IV. BUDGET i eae a eee Introduction Our budget for the EIS and preliminary engineering is based on the approach in Section I, the work plan in Section II and the project schedule in Section III. Alterations to either the schedule or to the scope of work defined in the work plan may require a change in the budget. The work plan for the project assumes that the corridors and links identified in the Draft Environmental Section Report from the Route Selection Study, Phase I, will be the corridors and links carried forward into the EIS process. Budgeting factors Based on our previous experience, we have budgeted for what we believe to be a reasonable scope of work and schedule, considering the various factors involved in preparing the EIS documentation, and working with the public and agencies in permitting a project like the Southern Intertie Project. Several factors dependent on agency decisions could affect the scope of work and schedule, including: e The work scope and schedule could be modified as a result of public/agency scoping - additional alternatives could be added - selected alternative corridors could be dropped — additional technical studies could be required e The number of copies of the EIS and newsletters could increase e The review time frames for agencies could increase, extending the EIS time frame HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al BUDGET - 1 e The record of decision date could be extended 30 days or more by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service/Department of the Interior guidelines These issues can be addressed through the process of preparing the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the IPG and lead agency, and between the lead and cooperating agencies. Fee Basis It is assumed that the work contemplated under this proposal would be executed as an amendment to the existing contract between Power Engineers and Chugach as Project Manager for the IPG, Chugach Contract No. 95-208. Attachment A to that contract is the Power Engineers, Inc., Schedule of Charges for 1995, currently in effect for the Southern Intertie Route Selection Study, Phase I. Section 4 of the contract provides that Chugach may extend the contract in defined increments, subject to a mutual agreement on rates. We propose to invoice for the work under this proposal as follows: Work completed in 1996 - No change from the current 1995 Schedule of Charges Work completed in 1997 - The 1995 Schedule of Charges increased by 5% Work completed in 1998 - An additional ee in the Schedule of Charges Budget summary The project budget by task is shown on the next page. Task budgets are based on the work scope described in the work plan and take into account variations in the Schedule of Charges as described in the preceding paragraph. Costs are considered to be Not to Exceed by task. The budget summary is followed by an estimated cash flow by quarter. 2- BUDGET HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al BYDGETS MARY Scoping 365,238 Inventory 716,978 Impact Assessment / Mitigation Planning 637,782 Alternative Selection 332,822 Draft EIS 426,336 Final ElS 271,194 Studies 115,280 Engineering Field Work 289,475 192,660 oOAaAnN DOO fF WO MP — Preliminary Engineering NLT Beer reat!|||||| sa.eaz.705 PROJECTED CASH FLOW Quarterly Totals Fiscal Year 96 Quarter 3 919,000 Quarter 4 723,900 a Fiscal Year 97 Quarter 1 485,865 Quarter 2 332,000 Quarter 3 275,000 Quarter 4 226,000 Fiscal Year 98 Quarter 1 155,000 Quarter 2 147,700 Quarter 3 61,000 Quarter 4 22,300 TOTAL, $ 3,347,765 HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al BUDGET - 3 BRResource Development Council for Alaska, Inc (907) 276-0700 Fax (907) 276-3887 matey Pee es ES APPENDIX This appendix provides an expanded explanation of the biology, earth resource, land use, socioeconomic, recreation, visual and cultural resource studies. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Data Collection A reconnaissance field investigation is planned for each segment of the route to field check both vegetation, wetlands and to record notes on wildlife occurrence and habitat use. A field data form will be developed to be used for each segment checked. The survey will cover representative areas along each major segment and habitat types. Data collected will be incorporated into the affected environment sections and filed data sheet will be included in an appendix section. The survey will require approximately five days for two field personnel. Agency personnel of Kenai National - Refuge, Forest Service and State Parks will be invited to accompany the field team on segments within their areas jurisdiction. Collection of existing data on the routes will be done by contracting resource agencies and obtaining applicable information from their files. These would include the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks, and the Municipality of Anchorage. Vegetation Text Description of regional vegetation and site specific vegetation associated with alternative route segments. Tables Vegetation types in the study areas and characteristic species for each type. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPENDIX — 1 Maps Vegetation maps will be prepared, based on rectified air photos. Vegetation types will be mapped along Turnagain Arm, Chugach State Park, Anchorage area, Soldotna area and along the Tesoro Pipeline route according to new low-altitude aerial photography. Vegetation along the Enstar Pipeline Route will be mapped using new photography and existing raw data for the USFWS. Mapping will be to the Level IV of the Classification of Alaska Vegetation (Viereck and Dyrness 1986). Wetlands and Aquatic Habitats Text An overview has been prepared for the study area. Tables Tables will be developed listing all wetlands types and typical or characteristic species of each type in the study area. Maps Wetland maps will be prepared, based on National Wetland Inventory maps, aerial photos, and other published data. Fish Distribution/Fish Habitat Text For each route segment, all anadromous fish streams will be listed according to name, ADF&G stream catalog number, species present and relative numbers of spawners. Resident fish species will also be listed for each stream system and lake system within the corridors of each segment. Tables Anadromous, marine, and resident fish stream table. Scientific names, common names and habitats. Maps Maps of streams with fish species codes (i.e., CS -Chinook Salmon, PS - Pink Salmon) will be prepared. Wildlife (Birds) Text Avifauna - Descriptions of all major species of birds by habitat type intersected by the proposed alternative routes (i.e., forest bird, water birds, marine birds). A more detailed discussion of seasonal distribution and seasonal concentration areas will be added. Raptors - A separate section will be added to discuss the important species of raptors within the study area. The latest information on Bald Eagle nests from the Kenai Refuge and the location of Osprey nests will be incorporated into this section. 2 - APPENDIX HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Waterfowl - Descriptions of each major waterfowl use area will be incorporated into this section such as Chickaloon Flats, Potters Marsh, Portage Flats. Additional Trumpeter Swan data will be assembled from the files of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge and will be analyzed and incorporated into this section. Tables All species of bird within the study area are along with status and abundance. Table of major waterfowl concentration areas with species, relative numbers and types of activities such as nesting, staging, molting, and brood-rearing. Maps Location of Bald Eagle nest and other raptor nests will be added to maps of route segments and swan nesting areas within route corridors. Wildlife (Mammals) Text Small Mammals - This section is essentially complete. Black Bears - Any additional data from the files of resource agencies on black bear population size or distribution will be incorporated into the section but outstanding data is expected to be minimal. Brown Bears - Information from the Interagency Task Force on brown bear issues on the Kenai Peninsula will be added to this section. Movement corridors for brown bears between the foothill of the Kenai Mountain and Kenai Lowlands will be researched and added to the figures. Interviews with brown bear experts for this area will be conducted and added to this section. Population figures will also be researched and incorporated. Caribou - This section is essentially complete with the possible exception of recent population estimates. Moose - This section is essentially complete with the possible exception of recent survey data on population levels with certain portions of the study area. A discussion of long-term trends win the population of moose on the peninsula will be added with regards to regional habitat changes. Some additional research would be required reviewing resource agency files and incorporation of data. Dall Sheep - Essentially complete except for possible addition of recent survey data of population size. Mountain Goats - Essentially complete. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPENDIX — 3 Marine Mammals - This section needs to include more detail to address population numbers, distribution, seasonal concentrations of what is known about the biology of these animals in Cook Inlet. Tables All mammals within the study areas with scientific names and common names. Maps Minor refinements of existing maps would be sufficient for this section. Assessment / Mitigation Responsibilities DEE, LRH Develop Project Description/Location Biological input will be provided for each of the route segment location studies. Conduct Assessment/Mitigation Planning Development of methodology for impact assessment will involve a team effort between Senior Environmental staff, Wildlife Biologists and resource specialists based on experience on similar projects, established best management practices and on available scientific literature. Criteria will be developed for each of the major biological resources. This methodology will then be applied to the alternative route segments to assess the potential impact to biological resources from development of different alternatives. A list of mitigation options will also be developed through this team approach which could be used in specific areas to reduce impacts where there is a potential for significant impact to biological resources, and through discussion with the wildlife biologist and resource specialist. Documentation Text Area of terrestrial habitat lost to right-of-way clearing for each route segment will be scaled off the vegetation maps and calculated by vegetation type (i.e., mixed spruce/hardwood, spruce hemlock forest, tall shrub, alpine tundra). Mitigation options will be suggested to avoid adverse impacts to sensitive habitat which will include best management practices for construction activities for facilities, transmission line and access roads and site specific mitigation in areas of special concern (i.e., coastal salt marshes). Tables Acreage of vegetation type affected by route segments. 4 - APPENDIX HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Impact Assessment - Wetlands and Aquatic Habitats Text Discussion of applicable wetlands regulations for transmission line, facilities and access roads. Criteria will be established to then classify wetland types according to wetland functions and values and mapped as high, moderate and low value. Approximate amount of affected wetlands by major type of by each category will be calculated for each route segment. Mitigation option will be developed to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to wetland and aquatic habitats. Application of these options will be compared to develop the most appropriate mitigation method to reduce overall impacts to wetlands. Tables Amount of wetlands affected in each segment by wetland type and sensitivity (high, moderate or low value). Maps High, moderate or low categories will be delineated on maps of route segments. Impact Assessment - Wildlife/Habitat Text Criteria for rating habitat value of each route segment will be applied to vegetation type and modified to include specific geographic areas of importance irrespective of vegetation type such as caribou calving areas, mineral lick for dall sheep. Categories will reflect high, moderate and low value. This will enable a comparison of alternative routes according to each major wildlife species. A similar methodology will be applied to wetlands and aquatic habitat for each type and the criteria will focus on the areas function for providing staging, nesting, brood-rearing and molting habitats. Habitats should be ranked as high, moderate and low value. Approximate areas of each category would be calculated within each route segment and compared among alternatives. For key species such as Trumpeter Swans, numbers of documented nesting areas would be calculated by distance to the centerline of the proposed route (e.g., less than one mile, one to two miles). Proximity of route alternatives to raptor nests will be compared among alternatives. Mitigation options will be addressed and the options applied to situations where impacts are anticipated to see if the options will result in a reduction of HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPENDIX — 5 overall impacts. Mitigation options in certain areas could include reducing right-of-way clearing, micro alignments around sensitive areas, marker balls in areas adjacent to lakes or wetlands to reduce bird collisions. Tables Summary comparisons of alternatives according to wildlife habitat affects among the route alternatives. Comparison of impact with use of various mitigation options among route alternatives. Impact Assessment - Fish/Fish Habitat Text Impact analysis for fish habitat will focus on the anadromous stream crossings by transmission line and for access road construction. Comparison among alternatives will be based on numbers of streams for each segment and numbers of species using the stream or river relative numbers of spawning (100; 100-1,000; 1,000-10,000). Mitigation measures would include standard construction method of operation near streams such as silt fences, buffer zones, construction timing. The degree to which impact can be minimized will be addressed. Impact Assessment - Marine Mammals Text Potential impact to marine mammals will focus on construction/placement of the submarine cables under Turnagain Arm. Effects of noise from construction on beluga whales will be addressed from existing literature. Mitigation options would address construction timing, use of underwater explosives, and alternative construction methods. 6 - APPENDIX HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al EARTH RESOURCES The following topics will be addressed: geologic/structural setting soils/liquifaction/frost heave/depth to groundwater seismicity and earthquake-induced hazards slope stability/erosion potential avalanche Additional information and data on the geological resources will be obtained and reviewed for each of the alternative corridors identified during the Route Selection Study. Agency resource specialists will also be contacted. It is assumed for this project that the earth resources will require field work to aid in the determination of feasible locations for project facilities. The assessment will be based on available literature, data and air photos. Geological information will be mapped as described in the Scope of Work and documented in the Affected Environment Chapter of the EIS. An impact assessment will be completed and mitigation measures, if needed, will be determined and evaluated. LAND USE Data inventory and analysis will focus on corridors two miles wide. Much of the information will be obtained from the Route Selection Study. Additional information will be derived from aerial photo interpretation; overview flights (both fixed wing ~ and helicopter); field surveys by automobile; and additional meetings with agency representatives. Each of the major categories of land use will be further divided into those subcategories likely to exhibit differing levels of impact. For example, residential areas must be categorized by type of residency. Each type will exhibit differing degrees of sensitivity, which can be addressed only by data collection at the proposed level of detail. Categories to be inventoried and summarized, and their potential data sources include the following. Major Land Jurisdictions: Land jurisdictions at the federal, state, and local level will be inventoried in order to identify the legal entities controlling land use within the alternative corridors. Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Municipalities and Boroughs, Forest Service, USFWS, etc. will be used for jurisdiction data. HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPENDIX — 7 Jurisdiction maps will be produced that include the alternative corridors to facilitate public and agency review. Existing Land Uses: Within the general categories of land use, the following subcategories will be identified and mapped: e Residential - subdivisions - dispersed residences - farmsteads e Agriculture - timber management areas - cropland - pastures e Recreation/Open Space - Management Areas - Facilities e Commercial e Industrial - general - extractive - mining claims e Military - bases - military operating areas e Airports/Airstrips - clear zones e¢ Communications Facilities - aviation and marine navigation facilities - microwave/radio facilities Mapping will not necessarily be confined to the land uses listed above, and this list will be modified as necessary during the inventory. Future Land Use: The land use elements of the adopted plans for the Municipality of Anchorage and Kenai Peninsula Borough included wholly or partially within the study area will be mapped and described. Such plans will be obtained from the planning departments of the municipalities or boroughs. Information from zoning maps will be used for areas without plans. Areas with neither plans nor zoning will be designated as a separate category. The planned future land use categories anticipated for this map are the following: e Residential e Commercial e Agricultural 8 — APPENDIX HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al Forestry Extractive Industrial Recreation and Open Space Rangeland Airport eoeee#ee As with other inventory maps, this list is not final and other categories will be added if applicable. Major Highways, Railroads, and Arterials: Major highways, railroads, and arterials will be mapped. The sources will be railroads, state road maps, and state and county highway departments. SOCIOECONOMICS Data will be collected on several aspects of the socioeconomic and demographic environment for all boroughs, municipalities, and native corporation lands crossed by alternative corridors and for cities and towns within these corridors. The primary issues to be investigated in the socioeconomic assessment are: e Fiscal impacts, or effects on local tax bases e Employment impacts, or impacts resulting from construction employment, including increases in direct and secondary employment, and effects on local housing, community services, and economic activity e Social and economic impacts, including property value effects, impacts on other economic sectors, such as tourism and recreation, subsistence uses, and general social concerns The potential fiscal effects from construction and use of the transmission line will be evaluated for each jurisdiction crossed by the alternative corridors. Data sources will include appropriate state finance departments, assessors, and boroughs. The assessment of the utility property may affect local governments through the generation of additional property tax revenues and by shifting tax burdens from homeowners to the entities utilizing the project. Employment impacts include the effects of construction and secondary employment, and income on local areas and impacts from expenditures for materials for construction. Effects include increased demands for temporary housing and community services. In general, the study area includes some tourist areas and, HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPENDIX -— 9 consequently, adequate facilities may exist to meet the demands made by transient workers involved in the construction of the transmission line. In addition, because the size of the construction work force and highly mobile operations, both direct and indirect economic impacts to local areas are usually minimal. Third, the economic and social effects of building facilities such as transmission lines will be evaluated. Economic concerns include potential effects on tourism, recreation and quality of life. Information on social interests from the public planning component of the study will be used in conjunction with socioeconomic research to evaluate economic and social impacts. The inventory of demographic subjects will include population size and distribution, projected population, ethnicity, age distribution, and recent migration trends. These baseline data will provide an overview of the demographic, economic, and social characteristics of the study area. Secondary source materials will include comprehensive and overall economic development plans; county statistical compendia; economic base analyses; and community profiles which will provide past, present, and projected demographic and economic information on the areas of interest. It is anticipated that comprehensive plans and economic base analyses will be available for most of the study area. However, in areas where these documents are unavailable, information on pertinent economic, demographic, and social trends will be collected via telephone contacts with local planners or appropriate representatives. It is anticipated that minimal fieldwork will be required to conduct the socioeconomic analysis. RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREAS AND FACILITIES The recreation management areas and facilities study will incorporate all information identified during the Route Selection Study. Additional information including public input (scoping), use volumes, recreation trends, and agency management prescriptions will be identified and incorporated into the EIS. Recreation resource maps will be prepared based utilizing the previous information gathered during the first phase of the project and will be updated as needed and formatted to include alternative corridors that are four miles wide (two miles either side of the assumed centerline). Site visits will be conducted within the alternative corridors to verify the type of recreational facilities, proximity to the proposed project and site specific information. The additional data will facilitate the impact assessment process and assure that all major issues related to recreational use of the Anchorage Bowl, Turnagain Arm area, and the northern portion of the Kenai Peninsula are addressed. The impact assessment will incorporate agency and public input during the assignment of sensitivity for each resource category which will be identified through public scoping and input from the Anchorage CWG. Mitigation measures will be developed as needed to minimize the potential impacts to the recreation resources within the study area. 10 - APPENDIX HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al VISUAL RESOURCES The Southern Intertie Project study area consists of a variety of distinct regions, each defined by a different set of landscape characteristics and visual conditions ranging from urbanized and developed locations (City of Anchorage) to remote and rural natural areas. The visual resource studies will be structured to address the key issues specific to either urban or rural settings and will include the assessment of impacts to scenery, viewers, and agency management policies. The evaluation process will be based on principles established under the Forest Service Visual Management System, and adapted (where appropriate) to address visual issues in urban, suburban, and developed settings. Visual simulations will be prepared to illustrate the proposed alternatives in both rural (4) and urban (5) settings. Visual Inventory In order to describe the visual resources, the following data will be inventoried within the alternative study corridors: (1) scenic quality and existing visual conditions, (2) key observation points and distance zones, (3) visual sensitivity levels, and (4) applicable visual management objectives. Scenic Quality and Existing Visual Conditions: In natural areas, scenic quality levels will be based on landscape character types using existing Forest Service data. For lands not currently classified, agency criteria will be used to classify landscape character types and determine levels of scenic quality that are consistent with agency designations, including consideration for the degree to which the natural landscape has been modified locally by existing facilities (i-e., transmission lines). In developed areas, existing visual conditions will be inventoried in order to characterize the urban setting ranging from residential to commercial and industrial areas. Key Observation Points and Distance Zones: Key observation points (KOPs) include those defined during the Route Selection studies and additional locations identified during field review. Potential critical viewpoints that may have visibility of the project will be identified and inventoried within three miles of the assumed centerline for each alternative, and beyond in selective locations where long distance views are important. Potential key viewpoints include major travel routes, recreation areas, views from rural/urban communities, and dispersed rural residences. Areas visible from these locations will be determined through computer viewshed modeling and field review, and then separated into distinct distance zones ranging from foreground areas (within 0.5 mile) to background zones (3-5 miles and beyond). Visual Sensitivity Levels: Visual sensitivity levels reflect the measure of viewer concern for potential change in scenic resources. Sensitivity levels will be assigned HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPENDIX — 11 to each KOP based on (1) the user type associated with each viewpoint location, (2) user attitudes, and (3) the volume of use. Visual Management Objectives: The inventory of existing visual management objectives will consider federal, state, municipal, and local guidelines defined during the Route Selection studies as well as additional policies that may be identified during the corridor analysis. Current visual management practices are established for the Chugach National Forest (VQOs), Chugach State Park, Seward Highway Scenic Corridor, the Kenai Peninsula Borough, and the Turnagain Arm. Impact Assessment The major concern that will be assessed for visual resources is the potential decline in visual aesthetic quality. Determination of potential impact levels will be based on (1) the degree of visibility that the project will have from KOPS, (2) the ability of the landscape or setting to absorb visual changes and (3) the change to the scenic and aesthetic quality of natural and urban areas. Visibility Levels: An evaluation of the viewer’s response to change will be based on the context in which the proposed transmission line will be viewed (i.e., how far from it and how long it will be visible). For each KOP identified during the inventory phase of the study, the viewer’s perception of the proposed line will be defined in terms of visibility levels which consider distance, orientation, structure visibility, duration of view, number of viewers, and viewer use association. Collectively, these will be used to assign an overall visibility level for each viewpoint location ranging from high, to moderate, to low. Visual Absorption: Physical changes resulting from the proposed transmission line will be assessed in terms of the ability of the natural landscape or urban setting to absorb changes based on three variables: (1) landform, (2) vegetation, and (3) modifications such as existing development, transmission lines or other linear facilities. Levels of visual absorption will be established for each variable based on the degree to which the form, line, color and texture of a landscape or setting could be altered due to the introduction of the project. Scenic and Aesthetic Quality: The assessment of impacts to scenic quality will account for levels of scenic quality and the existing visual conditions identified during the inventory phase. This will address the ability of the natural or urban landscape to absorb visual change, including the potential for skylining in rural areas (both regionally and locally). The results of the visibility analysis, and impacts to the scenery and setting will be combined to determine the overall impact of the project, and mapped along each alternative centerline. This will be used to determine the potential effects to viewers and scenery/setting, and for comparison purposes. On federal, and state lands, the 12 - APPENDIX HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al final impact level will be compared with management objectives to determine whether the degree of visual change is within the acceptable limits of management guidelines. CULTURAL RESOURCES The National Environmental Policy Act established a federal policy of conserving the historic and cultural, as well as the natural, aspects of our national heritage as federal agencies permit, fund, or plan and construct projects. The implementing regulations issued by the Council on Environmental Quality encourage agencies to coordinate preparation of environmental impact statements with other environmental review and consultation requirements. The primary major other requirements related to cultural resources include the National Historic Preservation Act (particularly Section 106), the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, and Executive Order 12898 addressing environmental justice. The cultural environment includes those aspects of the physical environment that relate to human culture and society, along with the social institutions that form and maintain communities and link them to their surroundings. Cultural and historic preservation issues typically are concerns addressed as important aspects of the cultural environment. These issues include: e historic preservation issues, related primarily to archaeological sites, and historic buildings and structures e traditional cultural concerns, related primarily to places and resources related to traditional subsistence and religious practices. The goal of the historic preservation component will focus on characterizing special status cultural resources and other known archaeological and historical sites. Much of the available information was compiled for the regional corridor identification study. The inventory data will be used to develop sensitivity models that can provide a basis for comparing alternatives. Native Alaskan groups that may have concerns about the project include the Kenaitze Native Association, Ninilchik Native Association, and the Point Possession Native Group. Some information about traditional cultural practices often is considered confidential. No good inventory of traditional places within the project area is available. The listing of selected ANCSA Section 14H1 sites may provide some information, but direct contacts with native organizations are proposed to assess the extent and nature of any possible concerns about impacts on traditional lifeways. With few exceptions the Kenai Peninsula is neither a federal rural subsistence zone, nor a state designated subsistence zone. There is a special Kenaitze "educational HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al APPENDIX — 13 fishery," and the Ninilchik may pursue subsistence hunting and fishing within the project area. The extent of any subsistence concerns would be identified in conjunction with the proposed program of traditional cultural contacts. In addition, any concerns of other seasonal users, such as set fishers and recreational land owners, would be identified in conjunction with scoping cultural issues. We also recommend conducting an intensive cultural resource inventory of the proposed route once it is securely identified. The summer of 1997 would be an ideal time to conduct this fieldwork. Such an inventory would provide details needed to initiate compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act so that the required consultations, and potential mitigation studies do not slow the post-EIS implementation schedule. 14 - APPENDIX HLY 50-05-00-120376 (4/15/96)al