HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity of Saint Paul Wind Power Expansion Project Evironmental Assessment TDX Dowl May 2005Environmental Assessment
prepared by
TDX Corporation
and DC NL Engineers
MMX
MAY 201 Y,
Table of Contents
Summary...................................................... .......----V
Chapter 1. Introduction
Purpose and Need ............................................. ................................ 1-3
Background...........................................................................................1-4
PublicScoping................................................................................1.... 1-4
Chapter 2. Description of Proposed Action and
Alternatives
Proposed Action................................................................................. 2-1
No Action Alternative ................. ...................................................... 2-4
Chapter 3. Existing Environment and Environmental
Effects
Physical Resources
GEOLOGY...................................................................... 3-1
Existing Environment ....................................... ......................... 3-1
Environmental Effects..................................................................... 3-2
SOILS............................................................................. 3-2
Existing Environment...................................................................... 3-2
Environmental Effects..................................................................... 3-3
NAVIGABLE AIR SPACE ................................................... 3-3
Existing Environment...................................................................... 3-3
Table of Contents
OBSTACLE FREE ZONE (OFZ)............................................................. 3-3
RUNWAY SAFETY ZONE (RSZ)............................................................ 3-3
RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE (RPZ)..................................................... 3-3
Environmental Effects..................................................................... 3-4
AIRQUALITY................................................................... 3-4
Existing Environment...................................................................... 3-4
Environmental Effects..................................................................... 3-4
WATER RESOURCES AND WATER QUALITY ....................... 3-4
Existing Environment...................................................................... 3-4
EnvironmentalEffects..................................................................... 3-5
Social Resources
SOCIOECONOMICS.......................................................... 3-5
Existing Environment...................................................................... 3-5
Environmental Effects..................................................................... 3-5
LANDUSE...................................................................... 3-6
Existing Environment...................................................................... 3-6
Environmental Effects ........................... ............................... 3-6
VISUAL RESOURCES....................................................... 3-6
Existing Environment...................................................................... 3-6
Environmental Effects.......................................................•............. 3-6
NOISE............................................................................ 3-6
Existing Environment...................................................................... 3-6
Environmental Effects..................................................................... 3-7
ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES .............. 3-7
Existing Environment...................................................................... 3-7
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND................................................................ 3-8
PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES- ............................................ 3-$
Table of Contents
ON -SITE SURVEY RESULTS.............................................................. 3-1 O
Environmental Effects................................................................... 3-11
Biological Resources
WETLANDS.................................................................... 3-11
Existing Environment.................................................................... 3-11
Environmental Effects................................................................... 3-11
FLOODPLAINS............................................................... 3-11
Existing Environment .................................................. ........... 3-11
Environmental Effects................................................................... 3-11
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ....................................... 3-12
Existing Environment.................................................................... 3-12
Environmental Effects................................................................... 3-12
FISH AND MARINE AND TERRESTIAL MAMMALS ................ 3-12
Existing Environment. ................................................................... 3-12
FISH........................................................................................... 3-12
MARINE MAMMALS........................................................................ 3-12
TERRESTRIAL MAMMALS............................................................... 3-12
Environmental Effects ................................................................... 3-12
BIRDS........................................................................... 3-13
Existing Environment.................................................................... 3-13
Environmental Effects................................................................... 3-14
THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ...................... 3-17
Miscellaneous
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE ..................................... 3-17
Existing Environment.................................................................... 3-17
Environmental Effects................................................................... 3-18
Chapter 4. Required Permits............................................................4-1
Table of Contents
Chapter 5. Distribution........................................................................5-1
Chapter 6. List of Preparers and Contributors ...................... 6-1
Chapter 7. References.........................................................................7-1
Appendix1..................................................................................................a-1
Appendix1..................................................................................................a-2
iv
Environmental Assessment
cfe. Paul P14
TDX
i"4Y:"A4I
Summary
Tanadgusix (TDX) Corporation owns and operates a wind power plant on St. Paul
Island that was built in 1999. It proposes adding two Vestas V27 turbines to
increase energy output.
TDX contracted with DOWL Consulting Engineers; with Dr. Doug Veltre, an
anthropologist; and with Declan Troy, a field biologist and ornithologist, to prepare
sections of the required environmental assessment. In preparation of the
environmental assessment, two alternatives were evaluated: build and no build.
The build alternative would result in the installation of two Vestas V27 turbines and
ancillary equipment to meet planned future development at the POSS Camp. The
no build alternative would result in abandonment of development plans for the
POSS Camp.
Based on data collected during preparation of the environmental assessment and
the site surveys conducted, expanding the existing wind power plant would not
cause any significant adverse environmental effects.
Chapter 1: Introduction
The St. Paul Wind Power Plant
Expansion Project is proposed by
Tanadgusix (TDX) Corporation to
increase the output of the current wind
power plant.
TDX owns and operates the existing
wind power plant on St. Paul Island
(see plate 1-1) located on Tract P-1
(Sec 17, T35S, R131 W, Seward
Meridian), approximately three miles
south of the city of St. Paul (see figure
1-2), and north of the airport. It is
expanding the plant to include two
more turbines in order to generate an
additional 500 kilowatts of energy.
The proposed action requires
preparation of an environmental
assessment for Department of Energy
(DOE) approval as required by the
National Environmental Policy Act.
This document includes four chapters:
Chapter 1 — A description of purpose
and need, background, and public
scoping actions.
Chapter 2 — Identification of the
proposed action and the no action
alternative.
Plate 1-1. St. Paul Wind Turbine (left) and POSS Camp (right). The St. Paul airport is to the
right of POSS Camp.
1.1
{
F,P
BEAUFORT SLA h n�
G�\
L A S
/ 5
'� [.dA F[F8ANN5 C
E[CL
ST, LAKCE NoRT
Is>,�Nn sou
sr Nwrrs
i/ 5�'� NVNIYIJf �* ACE
U ! IStNYq�
ST. P—
9 19-ID LF OEALgS
BERING SEA 's;`e°acEg"Y GJ �R
Iv v [nu loolH o0 0 1oa zvo wo it
I SLAN 5
LOCATION
0
N01AE AST PT. ;h
h 1C1
IS
LAND
LDNANIN
DA, ST. PAUL
ST. PAUL
ISLAND
57'
P
P R I B I L Q F
5�
R�
5i, GEORGE
0 ISL ND
ST. GEORGE
b
ZAPADNI
56.30• O h BAY
5 D 5 10 15 20
MILES
I
N
Chapter 1
Introduction
D5856C\EA_REPORT\EA_SW—MC.dwg SCALE: AS SHOWN
dDOWL ST. PAUL WIND POWER EXPANSION
e N O IN E Elam DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
4W B STEEE ANCHORAGE. AA91A 995M VICINITY MAP T(IO/24/03)
Figure 1-2. Project site.
1-2
Chapter 3 describes the existing
environments for physical, social, and
biological resources and any
environmental effects that could result
from the project.
Categories under physical resources
are:
+ Geology
• Soils
• Navigable Air Space
• Air Quality
• Water Resources and Water Quality
For social resources, the categories
addressed are:
• Socioeconomics
• Land Use
• Visual Resources
• Noise
+ Archaeological and Cultural
Resources
Biological resources categories
include:
• Wetlands
• Floodplains
• Fish and Marine and Terrestrial
Mammals
• Birds
• Threatened and Endangered
Species
• Miscellaneous
Purpose and Need
The original wind turbine was built in
1999 to provide base load electric and
1-4
Chapter 1
Introduction
thermal energy to the POSS Camp,
an industrial facility that presently
includes office space for a contracted
federal government project, the airport
and airline offices, crew housing
quarters, and equipment repair
facilities. The 550 kilowatt (kW) wind
power plant provides thermal energy
to heat the FOSS Camp and excess
energy from the wind turbine is used
to produce hot water, including
producing heat for potable water.
To fulfill its local economic
development mission, TDX has
planned a variety of new commercial
activities to be located in the
underutilized POSS Camp building.
Most of the commercial activities that
are planned for the POSS Camp
involve fish processing and storage
facilities, which would include building
a freezer.
Development of these new
commercial activities is dependent
upon the availability of abundant, low-
cost electric power and facility
heating. The capacity of the existing
wind power plant was sized to meet
the current electrical and heating load
and is insufficient to meet the
projected demand —approximately
500 kW beyond current capacity. In
addition, TDX has been negotiating
with the city of St. Paul for the long-
term provision of wind -generated
electricity.
Background
Until the 1960s, the economy of St.
Paul Island was forged by nearly a
century of fur seal harvesting, first
under the rule of Russia, and then
under the custodial auspices of the
United States Government. Nearly 20
years after the Fur Seal Act of 1966,
the Aleuts became self-governing and
turned their attention to building an
economy separate from the harvest of
fur seals. Fishing became a primary
interest, and an investment in an
onshore processing plant was made.
Tourism also became a focal point,
and tours were developed to attract
birders from around the world to view
the many avifauna found on the island
during spring, summer, and fall.
Today, the St. Paul community relies
heavily on the commercial fishing
industry. For the past four years, it
has suffered from a poor economy in
conjunction with reductions in the
commercial crab fleet quotas. To
attract more business, TDX has
developed plans to offer additional
services to the commercial fishing
industry in the form of an onsite flash
freeze storage facility.
TDX has operated the St. Paul Wind
Power Plant since 1999_ It is a 550-
kW wind power plant that provides
base load electric and thermal energy
to the POSS Camp. POSS camp is
the site of the airport and airline
offices, crew housing quarters, and
equipment repair facilities. The camp
1-4
Chapter 1
Introduction
also provides office space for a
confidential Federal government
project. ,
In addition to providing thermal energy
to heat the POSS Camp, excess
energy from the wind turbine is used
to produce hot water. Heat for potable
water also is provided by the excess
energy.
The complete wind turbine system
includes dual Volvo diesel generators,
a synchronous condenser, a binary
dump load, one Vestas V27 wind
turbine, and an insulated, 6,000-gallon
thermal hydronic heating system. The
hydronic tank includes electrical dump
load immersion heaters, heat
exchangers for each diesel engine,
and domestic heating heat exchanger,
and pumps and controls for zone heat
distribution. System components
were sized to meet the current needs
of the POSS Camp.
PUBLIC SCOPING
Currently, only informal public scoping
has been done for this project.
Chapter 2: Description of
Proposed Action and Alternatives
Proposed Action
The proposed action consists of
erecting two additional wind turbines
to be located to the north and south
of the existing wind turbine (see plate
2-1 for aerial view and figure 2-2 for a
drawing of the site). Expansion of the
existing wind power plant will consist
of design, acquisition, and
construction of the additional wind
turbines and related equipment.
Preliminary engineering design to
assure proper integration with the
existing wind power plant is in
progress.
TDX proposes expanding the existing
wind power plant to include two
additional Vestas V-27 wind turbines.
An Industrial wind turbine, the Vestas
V-27 produces 3-phase power and
has a generator rated at 225 kW with
winds of 32.6 mph. It has a range of
760 to 1008 RPM and an output of
480 VACI3-phase160 Hz.
The manufacturer specifications for
the Vestas V-27 indicates that wind
speeds averaging 13 mph produce a
yearly output of 458, 000 kWh. In the
proposed project area, wind speeds
average 18 mph (approximately 15
knots).
2.1
Expansion of the existing wind farm is
needed to meet projected increased
demands at the POSS Camp.
Components of the new turbines will
be sized appropriately for expected
demand. Two additional wind
turbines would produce another 500
kW of power. The design and
specifications for the two new
turbines will be compatible with the
existing turbine.
The addition of the two new wind
turbines will require installation of a
larger generator. However, the new
generator will not increase fuel
consumption. When the existing wind
turbine was put into operation, fuel
consumption dropped. With the
addition of two wind turbines, another
drop in fuel consumption most likely
would occur.
The current generator is located in a
shelter near the wind turbine. The
existing diesel control shelter, diesel
generator shelter, and thermal bay
will support the proposed wind
turbines, as well as the proposed
generator.
The existing 3,000 gallon diesel
storage tank is sufficiently sized to
support the current wind turbine
because no new diesel generation is
proposed.
Chapter 2
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
Plate 2-'I . Aerial view of project area with project site marked. Prepared by DOWG Engineers.
2.2
Chapter 2
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
f
a
-� E P,,NT c/
L � �cirl+ihitYG � ��
5E 22•vC ` 6.7,3' m
9.3,3 i ! r-'58'
t loco.c�' ` c
Su � TRACT 7
--
c7 - O EX:s}1r,G --
TAX WAY
- & APFON
7n'ACI P_
] pOSSiaMp�
e =3.38' �
sao22'oo-
N
LEGEND:
49 SURVEY MONUMENT
M EXISTING WIND TURBINE
0 PROPOSED WIND TURBINE
'VOTE :
TRACT P-' 15 AN UNSURVEYED PARCEL LOCATED WITH 'N N 1/2. SEC. 17. T35S, R131W, SEWARD MERIDIAN.
FURTHER DESCWBED AS=GLLOWS :
9EGSNNING AT THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF TRACT 7. A SURVEYED NON -DEVELOPMENT AREA ADJACENT TO THE
AIP,FDRT HCAJNDARY: HENCE N80'22'WE. A DISTANCE OF 1000 OO FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY
Or' TRACT P-1; HENCE N0938'00"E, A DISTANCE OF 15.73 FEET TO :HE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT P-1,
TH- TRUE PONT OF BEGINNING; HENCE S08'38'0C'w, A DISTANCE OF 933.3B' TO THE SOUTH EASTERLY CORNER OF
TRACT P-1; HENCE NBC'2Z W W, A DISTANCE OF 933.3E FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF TRACT P--;;
HENCE N09'38'00'E. A CkS'ANCE OF 933.38 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTER4Y CORNER OF TRACT P-1: HENCE
S80'22'00"E. A D STANCE 7F 933.38 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT P-1, THE TRUE POINT OF
SEG'+;Ni,NG. SAID TRACT P-1 CONTA"NG 2000 ACRES MORE OF. LESS.
DR[ CONSUi ING BNG EUM
.Hi . cim sanveyvac PLANNmG WIND FARM
T-5-v&— (ar)as lwa ft- (2Q7)344-1N0 TRACT P-I LOCATED VITMN
3-4W-P""V`L " - 1.I 11 1/2, SEC_ 17, C35S, R191►1, S.M.
w o 03614 -oua. nI£ 81 aCGP 1 f staL< 1-_ 100' -L 10-2-03
Figure 2-2. Original site plan prepared by DHI Consulting Engineers.
2-3
The configuration (see figure 2-3) of
the proposed wind farm sites the two
new turbines north and south of the
existing turbine and will require
excavation of less than an acre of
land. Once the design is complete,
the additional turbines, switchgear,
controls, and other necessary
equipment will be obtained and
installed.
No Action Alternative
If chosen, the No Action Alternative
would mean that TDX would be
unable to move forward with future
expansion projects planned for POSS
Camp. This is due to the fact that the
current power generated by the
existing wind power plant is
completely consumed by the current
activities at the POSS Camp.
The No Action Alternative would not
meet the purpose, nor satisfy the
need for, the proposed project.
2-4
Chapter 2
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
Chapter 2
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
�v
TOF
I�1_Ic Pa-1fE•2T � �,,r
5Goo
�7 p E per' 00'
Lr
c� •'r , wv�.. .—
u.' r fiyA THY, r
M .rj kr
q , [`i ^TAIt.I WAY
a::,PRCra
'PACT p._ 1 �C��s41rI�
SOO
m
may"'
I
1E>iCaaCr,
s supVE'i 11UNLM0jT
® EMSTNG ftID TURBUtE
3 PPOnsto vArjo TI,9 oraE
NOTE
MAU P-1 r, AN IJMf4JAV'E'V'Eo F'ArtCa LOCATED %17li M 14 1J1~ SrC. 17, T3%, k131V1, SWARD MPIMIAM,
FURTHER 00CRIVEG Ai I`OLLM, :
£{£GINNING Al THE NORTH WS1 CORIaEN OF TRACT ,. A `%itv YED 1#ON-x'4EL 1PArAT AREA AVjAC.L11•T TU THr
AIRPORT DCUNQAR7; HENCE NaVZT"UO 7, A rASTANCE OF 1W,1 DD FZET TO A POIRT ON THr CAa1ERI-7 BOU14VAR'f
OF MACT P-1; HaIC£ N&X3E F, A CISTMICC LV IG 73 FEET 70 Mr I*PTHEASTEPut coRNER for TRACT ?-1.
THE TRUE PaN'r CIF BEGIUME.; HENCE SW'M-00-% A I4STANCt Or 333.38" TG THE ,r,f UIH EASTERLY CORaaER GF
1RAC7 P-1. #a@14CE NHO722'00-W, A C' UNCr Or 433 38 rUT Tb IRE SaITHN'ESTFPL1' CoRrrL' OF• W.A,r_T P-I-
HENCE 1#b9'� E'Chb'� A M!;TANCE OF *. J.zA F'm To rt r NMHRV5TERLT' QM4ER OF TRACT P-% HENCE
A Dt',FA14`E GF 9-13.38 FEET 70 THE 14ORIKOLSTERLY CM- NETR OF TRACT P-1. THL TPUE KAJfT L1F
E+EGRNMNG. 'SAID TRACT P-I W4TANIRO 20 04 ACRLri 4ORC OR LOSS.
s
DHl CONSULTING ENGINEERS
CrIlm rsN:a.�r ;G nuatnm WIND FARMr.wi.l..r; Icaro"-Am F.M pC7z4" 14" TRACT P--1 LOCATED WITH
o IL NOW + inn r-.H, fraemq Q"U Im" N 2/2. SEC. 17. TN6,c', R131 . s.m.
wo a361• caw 'ILK
61:CCT Ir ^"'r toy" cATC 4/esras
Figure 2-3. Plan showing location of two new wind turbines.
2-5
Chapter 3: Existing Environment
and Environmental Effects
Physical Resources
GEOLOGY
Existing Environment
St. Paul Island was created
approximately 13 thousand years ago
during the last major glacial
meltdown.
Plate 3-1. Southwest Point, an example of the
island's geology.
The island is composed primarily of
basalt flows and various kinds of
pyroclastic debris of Pleinstocene and
Recent Age. There is no evidence of
any glaciation affecting the existing
surface. Many of the volcanic
landforms are relatively fresh;
suggesting that they were formed as
recently as a few thousand years
ago. Extensive sand dunes have
formed in places, particularly on the
3-1
northern and northeastern portion of
the island.
Although flow rocs constitute the bulk
of the island, it is apparent that in
many places the flows are relatively
thin and are separated by layers of
pyroclastic material or scoriaceous
rocks. Relatively recent volcanic
ejects also cover portions of St. Paul
Island. The basaltic lava flows
exposed on the surface have been
weathered in place to boulder rubble
by frost driving (breaking up bedrock
by cycles of freezing and thawing).
Plate 3-2. Looking northwest from the access road
to the wind turbine toward the navigational dome
on Lake Hill (on the horizon in the center of the
picture). Undisturbed tundra extends from the
road to Lake Hill.
The topography of the island
generally is low rolling plateaus
punctuated with extinct volcanic
peaks. In the project area,
topography ranges from flat to
undulating.
Environmental Effects
installation of two new wind turbines
will not impact the geology of the
area.
SOILS
Existing Environment
The proximity of the site of the wind
power plant to areas where prior
geotechnical investigations have
been performed negated conduct of a
new survey. It can be assumed that
the soils found during the two
previous geotechnical investigations,
conducted nearly 10 years apart,
would be similar in nature to the soils
found within the project area.
The first geotechnical investigation
was conducted in August 1994 by the
Alaska Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) as
part of an airport improvement project
(see appendix 1). ADOT&PF drilled
test pits and test holes at even
intervals throughout the airport
property. The southeast corner of the
airport, around the airport apron, and
south of the apron were excluded
from the investigation.
The generalized soils profile shows
approximately 0.5 feet of organic
topsoil over 0.5 to 0.4 feet of organic
silty sand. These soils transitioned
3.2
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
into 2.0 to 6.0 feet of brown silt,
sandy gravel, and/or sandy silty
gravel. Test pits typically were
advanced to basaltic bedrock, usually
to a depth of 4.0 to 11.0 feet. Large
boulders were encountered
occasionally in some of the test pits.
The water table was encountered in a
few of the test pits, and generally was
observed to be perched above the
bedrock. Surface water seeping into
the test pits was found only
sporadically. Groundwater levels
fluctuate seasonally with the
precipitation and runoff conditions.
The general direction of the surface
runoff is to the southeast.
In April 2003, ADOT&PF contracted
with DOWL to perform a geotechnical
investigation for the St. Paul Airport
Pavement Project. Thirty-seven test
borings were drilled, sampled, and
logged to bedrock (auger refusal or
five feet of continuous rock) at depths
ranging from 11.5- to 30-feet between
April 11 and April 24. Sixteen
additional test pits were excavated in
the safety areas to bedrock and at
depths ranging from 1.5 to 12 feet.
During the 2003 geotechnical
investigation, soil borings were done
at the TDX apron, which is adjacent
to the POSS Camp. The generalized
soil profiles for this specific area show
fill material over native soils and
bedrock.
The fill material is as shallow as 2.5
feet and, in some areas, as deep as 5
feet. The composition of the fill was
not consistent. Poorly and well -
graded sands with silt were observed
in the upper portion of the soil
column. These soils then were
followed by silty sands, poorly graded
sands, and silt. Traces of organics
were found at about 5 feet. Bedrock
was present at depths between 12-
and 20-feet below the surface. The
fill typically is medium dense with
some frost susceptibility. No
groundwater was observed in any of
the test borings.
It is important to note that during the
installation of the first wind turbine,
volcanic rock was encountered at a
shallow depth to the west of the
existing wind turbine location.
Environmental Effects
Installation of two new wind turbines
will displace approximately 1500
cubic yards of soil. Material removed
from the site will be used on the
surrounding roadways for
maintenance. A portion of the soils
removed could be used by local
residents for landscaping projects
within the city of St. Paul.
The site of the wind power plant is
relatively flat. The intent is to match
existing ground once the two new
wind turbines and associated
equipment are installed. Neither the
Proposed Action, nor the No Action
3-3
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
Alternative are anticipated to have an
effect on the geology and soils of the
project area.
NAVIGABLE AIR SPACE
Existing Environment
TDX's St. Paul wind power plant is
located near the southwest end of the
St. Paul Airport. The St, Paul Airport
consists of a paved runway (6,500
feet by 150 feet) and a paved taxiway
and apron. As described next, there
are several protection zones
surrounding the runway.
OBSTACLE FREE ZONE (OFZ)
The OPZ is a three dimensional
volume of airspace that provides
protection for the transition of aircraft
to and from the runway. It extends
200 feet beyond either end of the
runway and 200 feet on either side of
the runway centerline.
RUNWAY SAFETY ZONE (RSZ)
A defined surface surrounding the
runway prepared, or suitable for
reducing the risk of damage to
airplanes in the event of an
undershoot, overshoot, or excursion
from the runway. The RSZ for the St.
Paul Airport is 250 feet on either side
of the runway centerline.
RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE (RPZ)
RPZs are a trapezoidal area at the
end of a runway designed to enhance
the protection of people and property
on the ground in the event of an
aircraft landing or crashing beyond
the end of the runway.
Environmental Effects
The project area is outside the
airport's flight path and the OFZ,
RSZ, and RPZ. A Federal Aviation
Administration Notice of Construction
has been completed and submitted to
the FAA. This coordination with FAA
will help ensure that there are no
conflicts with the navigable airspace.
The No Action Alternative would have
no effect on the navigable air space
in the project area.
AIR QUALITY
Existing Environment
Emissions in the project area are
limited to vehicles, airplanes, and
some occasional heavy equipment.
These emissions are considered
negligible given the distance of the
project area to the populated area on
St. Paul Island, the physical location
of the island, and its climatology.
Wind speeds on the island can range
from an average of 1.7 mph (1.5
knots) to 81 mph (71 knots)_ In the
project vicinity, wind speed averages
18 mph (approximately 15 knots).
The proposed project is located within
an attainment area for air quality
allowing for moderate growth with air
3-4
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
quality maintenance according to the
Alaska State Implementation Plan.
Environmental Effects
During project construction, heavy
equipment exhaust fumes may
temporarily decrease air quality in the
immediate vicinity. Any decrease in
air quality because of emissions from
the diesel plant is expected to be
negligible given the wind velocity in
St. Paul. Even a slight decrease in
air quality should not be significant
enough to place the area into non -
attainment. Therefore, no long-term
environmental effects are expected
from expansion of the wind power
plant.
The No Action Alternative would not
affect air quality in the project area.
WATER RESOURCES AND
WATER QUALITY
Existing Environment
Water available to the city of St. Paul
is supplied from seven deep wells
located approximately one mile from
the airport. Freshwater from rain
infiltrates porous volcanic substrata
and perches atop the ocean saltwater
beneath. Consistent rainfall events
and careful well withdrawals keep
saltwater from wicking upward and
contaminating freshwater drinking
supplies_ Water service reaches all
residents through underground pipes.
Environmental Effects
Less than one acre will be disturbed
by the construction of the two wind
turbines, so National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System
requirements would not be required
for this project. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
requires a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a
Notice of Intent to be submitted if
more than one acre of land is
disturbed during construction.
Because the project would not impact
an area greater than one acre, a
Notice of Intent would not be filed.
Furthermore, the distance of the wind
power plant from water bodies and
from the Bering Sea lessons the risk
to water quality or local drinking
sources. Therefore, no adverse
environmental effects to water
resources or to water quality would
occur during construction activities for
the wind power expansion project.
The No Action Alternative would not
affect water resources or water
quality in the project area.
Social Resources
SOCIOECONOMICS
Existing Environment
St. Paul is a 2nd class city
incorporated in July 1971. Located at
approximately 57.12 degrees North
Latitude and—170.28 degrees West
Longitude (S25, T35S, R132W,
3-5
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
Seward Meridian), the city
encompasses 3 square miles on St.
Paul Island, as well as Walrus and
Otter Islands. Basic community
services and facilities are managed
by a seven -member city council and a
city manager. The city provides basic
services such as street maintenance,
police protection and jail facilities,
solid waste collection and disposal,
fire protection, power, water, bulk
fuel, port operations, and land use
planning and zoning. According to
the state of Alaska, the population in
2000 was 532 people of which
approximately 86 percent are Alaska
Native.
TDX is the village profit corporation
formed in July 1973 under provisions
of ANCSA. One of its primary
missions is to identify and develop
business opportunities that will
increase economy on the island.
Expansion of services to support
commercial fishing and tourism are
just two opportunities targeted by the
corporation.
Environmental Effects
Expansion of the wind power plant
will positively impact the community,
temporarily creating jobs for the local
labor force during construction and
potentially providing employment for
a part-time employee at the wind
power plant when construction ends.
Of greater benefit are the new jobs
that could arise from the planned
development at the POSS Camp.
No direct impact to the local economy
would occur as a result of
implementing the No Action
alternative. However, the No Action
Alternative would prevent the
expansion of the commercial
activities at the POSS Camp, which
would have a negative impact on the
local economy.
LAND USE
Existing Environment
The wind power plant is in an area
zoned light industrial. The site is
owned by TDX Corporation,
subsurface rights are owned by The
Aleut Corporation. The airstrip
northeast of the wind power plant is
owned or leased by the state of
Alaska.
The island of St. Paul lies completely
within the St. Paul Coastal
Management District. Consultation
with the Alaska Department of
Natural Resources, Office of Project
Management and Permitting has
determined that the project is not
subject to an Alaska Coastal
Management Program review.
Environmental Effects
This project is an expansion of an
existing wind power plant, which is
consistent with the land use in this
area. Therefore, neither the
Proposed Action nor the No Action
Alternative would have an effect on
land use in the project area.
3-S
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
VISUAL RESOURCES
Existing Environment
As stated previously, the project site
and adjacent properties are zoned
light industrial. The site of the wind
power plant is bounded to the east by
the POSS Camp and airport runway.
To the west is the U.S. Coast Guard
Loran C Station.
There are no homes, churches, or
schools in the area. Nor is the vicinity
used for recreation.
Environmental Effects
Expanding the wind power plant to
include two additional turbines would
be consistent with the aesthetic value
of existing facilities within the project
area.
Neither alternative under
consideration would result in impacts
to the aesthetic value of the project
are
NOISE
Existing Environment
The Vestas V-27 wind turbine
produces approximately 96.5 dBA
(decibel) of noise when operational.
Plate 3-3. The vestas V-27 wind awbine. In the
background, slightly left of the turbine, the
USCG's communication tower is visible.
Commuter airplanes taking off and
landing at the airport produce noise at
130- to 150-dBA, which is higher than
the noise level of the wind turbine.
Cargo planes generate even higher
decibel levels.
Environmental Effects
Although the addition of two turbines
to the wind power plant will increase
the noise level when operational, any
environmental impacts would be
negligible for several reasons. First,
there are no sensitive receptors (i.e.,
housing, church, and school) in the
project area. The wind power plant is
sited in an area that is virtually
uninhabited —it lies 3.5 miles from the
3-7
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
city. Second, the turbines operate
only when wind conditions are
optimal. Typically, there are higher
winds in winter than summer, which
means the turbines do not operate
each day.
The No Action Alternative would have
no effect on noise levels in the project
area.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Anthropologist Douglas Veltre, Ph.D.,
conducted an on -site survey of
possible archaeological and cultural
resources in the project area during a
summer 2003 field trip to St. Paul
Island.
Existing Environment
The project area lies immediately to
the west of the north -south road,
which passes just to the west of the
airport complex of buildings. Dr.
Veitre's field procedures included
walking over the area, as well as
additional surrounding ground,
several times_ He examined the
ground surface for any indications
(e.g., non -natural surface
irregularities, surface artifacts, and
vegetational peculiarities) of cultural
materials or activities. No subsurface
testing of the project area was
undertaken.
In addition to field examination of the
project area, documentary sources
concerning the history of St. Paul
Island were consulted, and results of
previous archaeological research on
the island were examined. The
conclusions offered next are based
on consideration of all of these
sources.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Oral tradition holds that the Pribilof
Islands (St. Paul Island and St.
George Island) were known to the
Aleuts of the Aleutian Islands before
the arrival of Russians in the region
beginning in 1741. It does not appear
that Aleuts —or any other Alaska
Natives —settled on the islands or
used them to any appreciable extent
before Russian contact.
It was not until 1786 and 1787 that St.
George Island and St. Paul Island,
respectively, were located by Russian
fur hunters who had spent years
searching the waters of the Bering
Sea for the islands that they expected
to be there to serve as the breeding
grounds for the Northern fur seal.
Immediately after finding the Pribilofs,
Russian fur hunters brought Aleut
laborers to the islands to harvest the
fur seals, first on a seasonal basis
and later to live year-round in villages
on each island. In those years before
1800, there existed multiple
settlements on both St. Paul and St.
George (plate 3-4), but these were
consolidated into single villages (with
outlying work camps) on each island
by the early 1800s.
3-8
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
Plate 3-4. Current and former settlements on St.
Patel and St. George islands.
ST. PAUL ISLAND
>�a
� webaie�Lake
Vesdia 6tis+a
zap -- � ✓�w�a
St. Paid wage
orreR ISLAND 57•
PRIBILOF ISLANDS
SWIaya A I51. C[ Iqe YAaye
-- Zapadni/ "'"Gallen Ceve .
56.5T
T' ST. GEORGE ISLAND 16v
Since nearly the sole reason
Russians and Aleuts came to St. Paul
Island was to harvest fur seal pelts, it
is not surprising that all of the
settlements and work camp locations
were at, or very close to, the seal
hauling areas and rookeries.
Originally, foot trails undoubtedly
connected these, but in most areas
later road development rendered
such trails obsolete, their locations
becoming lost over the years in the
tundra and sand dunes.
PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES
The most comprehensive review of
archaeological information
concerning St. Paul Islands is that
done by Veltre and McCartney
(1994). In their report, the authors
review the history of archaeological
investigations on the island and
present an inventory of all known and
reported sites, including historical
documentation concerning each.
Some of their overall conclusions (but
not many individual site details) also
are presented in Veltre and
McCartney (2002).
The known and reported
archaeological sites on St. Paul
Island are shown in plate 3-4.
Polovina is the closest archaeological
site to the project area (see plate 3-
5). The Polovina site is more than 3
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
miles from site of the wind power
plant expansion project.
Of these sites, only the Vesolia Mista
site has not been found, perhaps
because of shifting sand dunes on
that part of the island. The remaining
sites all show generally similar
characteristics'. vegetation is usually
quite lush compared to areas away
from the sites themselves; most
former houses and buildings are very
- `z' Polovina Hi!!
'- ��-`._. IWpux7anaA OayaaJ
"' take �' S A -'I N� T ti P "A U L I S L -A N D
000 aav"i i�nmr
� E
(T A IV A X A M I i) >w
. ee
I
I
Polovina Site
' 1 0
r ,
smasr I f
+ RFStRVA7101Y '�
To�wr ' I
- SF•mcat &ue
o
Va/PCh
Y
Ilsvg`iin CM7i7etrdaxl
Plate 3-5. The former settlement at Polovina (marked) is the closest archaeological site to the project area.
Also shown is the location of U.S- Coast Guard facility, the airport, Weather Service buildings, and Lake Hill.
Note that the existing wind turbine is incorrectly labeled on this USGS map as "Communication Tower. "
3-9
apparent from their raised sod -block
lower walls; most structures have
floors noticeably below the present
ground surface; long whale bones
occasionally protrude from the ground
in and near the structures' remains.
Importantly, these sites are very easy
to see today; thus, it may be
concluded that any appreciable
disturbance or alteration of the fragile
tundra vegetation takes more than
centuries to heal completely.
Of all of the archaeological sites
identified, Zapadni is the largest, with
over 30 structural features clearly
visible on the ground surface today.
It was this site, located several miles
from the wind expansion project
location, which served as the focal
point for large-scale excavations in
2000 and 2001 (Veltre and
McCartney 2000, 2001). Those
excavations produced a large
collection of artifacts, including
traditional, precontact-style Aleut
stone and bone tools as well as
glass, metal, and other items of
obvious Russian origin.
To date, no demonstrably precontact
age (i.e., pre -Russian or pre-1787)
archaeological remains have been
located on St. Paul Island, and it is
considered unlikely that any are, in
fact, present on the island. The most
likely reason for this absence is that
the Pribilof Islands —unlike all other
islands in Alaska —lie well out of view
of all other land areas of Alaska or
the Russian Far East. This visual
3-1 D
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
isolation, therefore, appears to have
served as an effective means for
preventing any purposeful (as
opposed to accidental, such as
shipwrecked) human use of the
islands until the historical period.
It is important to note that all of the
oldest settlement and camp locations
found on St. Paul are in close
proximity to the fur seal resources of
the island. The only cultural features
elsewhere on the island appear to be
for special purposes and date to the
twentieth and present centuries.
These include defunct reindeer
corrals near the north end of the
runway and in Lake Hill, recent and
current radio antennas and other
navigational aids (such as at the U.S.
Coast Guard Loran Station, at Lake
Hill, and at Southwest Point), and
facilities such as the Weather Service
buildings southeast of the airport and
the airport buildings themselves.
Therefore, most areas of the island
away from the immediate coast show
no signs of cultural remains of any
age.
ON -SITE SURVEY RESULTS
Several areas within and around the
project area have been sites of recent
development and other activity.
Except these areas, the ground
surface throughout the project area
and the land elsewhere in the general
region are vegetated with typical
tundra plants and show no indications
of any cultural activities. No surface
artifacts, ground disturbances, or
other archaeological indicators of
human activity were observed in the
area.
Environmental Effects
Based on historical documentation,
the results of previous archaeological
work on the island, and the present
on -site examination, there is no
reason to expect that significant
cultural materials exist in the project
area or in the immediate surrounding
region. The project area is not one
that would have had any particular
appeal to the early Russians or
Aleuts on the island. Except for the
island's road system, the only recent
use of this part of the island appears
to be directly related to airport
activities.
Neither alternative under
consideration would result in impacts
to the archeological value of the
project area.
Biological Resources
WETLANDS
Existing Environment
In October 1996, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers evaluated the
function and value of the wetlands
within the airport vicinity, which
includes the proposed project site
(see appendix 2). Wetlands were
investigated and classified according
to the methodology described in
3.11
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
Methodology for Wetland Delineation
and Site Characterization for FAA
Stations, Alaska (1996). Based on
the evaluation, two areas located
south of the airport and the project
site were identified as wetlands
having low value. However, no
wetlands were identified in the project
area.
Environmental Effects
The proposed project is well outside
the identified wetlands area.
Therefore, neither the proposed
action nor the No Build alternative
would impact the wetlands.
FLOODPLAINS
Existing Environment
The wind power plant is
approximately 3,000 feet from the
south shore of the island, and 44 feet
above sea level. Based on the 1994
ADOT&PF St. Paul Airport
Improvement Project it appears that
there is not a flood hazard in the area
of the airport. Historical information
did indicate that there had been some
coastal flooding caused by storm
surges in the area south of the
village, but such events did not affect
the airport.
Environmental Effects
There are no floodplains in the vicinity
of the project site and it does not
appear that the project site is located
within a flood hazard area; therefore,
neither the Proposed Action nor the
No Action Alternative would affect
floodplains.
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
Existing Environment
The island of St. Paul lies completely
within the St. Paul Coastal
Management District.
Environmental Effects
Consultation with the Alaska
Department of Natural Resources
Office of Project Management and
Permitting has determined that the
project does not require completion of
a Coastal Zone Questionnaire.
The No Action Alternative would not
impact the coastal zone
FISH AND MARINE AND
TERRESTIAL MAMMALS
Existing Environment
FISH
Anadromous and resident fish are
present in the Bering Sea located
approximately 5,000 feet from the
project site. Local populations of fish
species include Pollock, Pacific cod,
fin sole, Pacific Ocean perch, turbot,
sablefish, halibut, small flounders,
herring, squid, blue king crab, Tanner
crab, Korean hair crab, and red king
crab. The Bering Sea waters also
provide migratory passage for all five
of the Pacific salmon species. There
3-12
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
are no fish streams within the
proposed project area.
MARINE MAMMALS
Northern fur seal, the number of
which are in decline, migrate to the
Pribilof Islands for breeding and
pupping. Seal breeding and sunning
beaches are located on the southern
tip and along the north and northwest
shores of the island approximately
three miles from the project site.
Plate 3-5. Northern f tr seal lounging at Reef
Point rookery, more than 4 miles from the project
site (picture taken August 2003).
TERRESTRIAL MAMMALS
A herd of reindeer, Arctic fox and the
Pribilof shrew are found on the island.
The reindeer herd roams freely on the
island, as do Arctic fox. Reindeer
forage for food in the valleys and
higher elevations of the island. Arctic
fox typically stay close to the cliff
areas for their food source. Pribilof
shrews burrow in soft soil.
Environmental Effects
The St. Paul Island Wind Power
expansion project will not impact fish,
marine mammals, or terrestrial
mammals.
Plate 3-7. Part of the island's reindeer herd
(picture taken June 2003).
BIRDS
Alaska field biologist and ornithologist
Declan Troy performed an onsite
survey of the project and surrounding
area during a field trip to St. Paul
Island in August 2003.
Existing Environment
Spectacled Eider has occurred in the
Pribilof Islands during winter;
however, Saint Paul is well south of
the southern limit (61 °N) of the
normal winter range (Petersen et al.
2000)_ Steller's Eider occurs more
regularly in small numbers, primarily
during the winter. Most or all of these
are likely of the Russian breeding
population. It is unknown if any
Alaska breeding Steller's Eiders (i.e.,
members of the listed population) are
present. Most of the world's Steller's
Eiders migrate through the Bering
Sea but generally stay close to the
Alaska Peninsula, Bristol Bay, and
along the eastern coast (I_arned
2003). Neither of these species
would be expected in the project area
as no water bodies are present at the
project site and both species are
3-13
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
largely restricted to marine waters
during the periods when they might
occur around St. Paul Island.
St. Paul Island is renowned for its
seabird populations. Most bird
colonies are restricted to the coastal
fringe, in particular where cliffs
provide nesting sites for seabirds.
Inland sites on St. Paul Island have a
depauperate avifauna.
The most common terrestrial birds
breeding on Saint Paul are Rock
Sandpiper (Calidris ptilocnemis),
Lapland Longspur (Calcarius
lapponicus), Snow Bunting
(Plectrophenax nivalis), and Gray -
crowned Rosy Finch (Leucosticte
tephrocotis). The local populations of
Rock Sandpiper (Calidris p.
ptilocnemis) and Grey -crowned Rosy
Finch (Leucosticte tephrocotis
umbrina) are of interest due to their
rather restricted distributions. This
subspecies of Rosy Finch (breeds
only on Bering Sea islands of the
Pribilof and St. Matthews groups and
in the Aleutians.
Plate 3-8. Rosyfinch.
The breeding range of Rock
Sandpiper is restricted to the Pribilof
and St. Matthew groups and St.
Lawrence Island. Rosy Finches on
Saint Paul breed primarily near cliffs
and human habitation (Hanna 1922)
so are unlikely to nest on the project
site (but do occur around the facilities
at the airport). The highest densities
of breeding Rock Sandpipers occur in
the drier upland portions of the island
(Hanna 1921) but it does occur in
Lowland Forb Tundra such as around
the project site), at least early in the
summer before the vegetation
becomes too rank (Lee Tibbitts
USGS, personal communication).
The most likely breeding species
around the project site are expected
to be Lapland Longspur and perhaps
Rock Sandpiper. Additional species
such Snow Bunting (Plectrophenax
nivalis) and Gray -crowned Rosy
Finch (Leucosficte tephrocotis) would
be expected where the tundra has
been disturbed, such as along access
roads and near existing facilities
especially post -breeding.
No aggregations of birds are known
to occur nor are expected at the
project site. The nearest
concentrations are found on
freshwater ponds approximately 1 km
SE of the proposed turbine sites.
Gulls primarily Black -legged
Kittiwakes (Rissa tridactyla) and
Glaucous -winged Gulls (Larus
glaucesens) loaf in these ponds. Most
movement of these birds appears to
3-14
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
be directly between the coast and the
ponds and is not thought to occur
trough the project areas. A landfill
that was located approximately 1 km
from the project site is being
relocated to another location on the
island. Incineration minimizes the
availability of food at the project site;
consequently, it is not an attractant to
gulls.
Environmental Effects
Only low numbers of waterfowl have
been reported among fatalities at
wind farms (Erickson et al. 2002).
This may reflect the location of
turbines in habitat little used by
waterfowl; however, Dirksen et al.
2000 found that diving ducks (mostly
Aythya spp.) appear to detect and
avoid wind turbines, even at night,
showing avoidance responses 100-
200 from the turbines. Some
mortality of Common Eiders
(Somateria mollissima) occurred at a
coastal wind farm in England (c.f.
Lowther 2000). Given the low
number of Spectacled and Steller's
eiders around Saint Paul Island and
the absence of suitable habitat near
the proposed turbines, impacts of the
project on these species is expected
to be negligible.
Wind turbines are perceived as
posing risks to birds. Indeed, poorly
sited wind farms have resulted in
substantial bird mortality. In
particular, several hundred raptors
are killed each year at a wind farm in
Altamont Pass, California (Hunt
2002). Substantial raptor mortality
has also been recorded at a wind
farm in Spain near Gibraltar (c.f.
Lowther 2000). These installations
have proved the exception in terms of
the prevalence of raptors amongst
fatalities. At most sites, raptor
mortality at wind turbines is relatively
infrequent. Monitoring at many
installations indicates that wind
turbines result in the deaths of 1-3
birds/turbine/year (e.g., Erickson et
al. 2003, Johnson et al. 2002, 2003;
Thelander and Rugge 2001, Young et
al. 2003). Combining studies yields
an overall average of 2.19
birds/turbine/year including 0.033
raptors/turbine/year fatalities
(Erickson et al. 2001). Excluding
California these averages are
reduced to 1.83 birds including 0.006
raptors/turbine/year.
Although examples of mortality
events involving of most groups of
birds are known, passerines comprise
over 80% of reported fatalities
(Erickson et al. 2001) and
approximately half of these involve
nocturnal migrants. Risks of bird
strikes increase in areas with large
numbers of raptors or large numbers
of nocturnal migrants. Raptors occur
infrequently in the Pribilof Islands.
Passerines are probably the most
numerous birds at the project site but
large numbers of nocturnal migrants
are not expected. Situations
conducive to bird strikes include:
3-15
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
+ Movement corridors
Birds often concentrate along linear
features such as coasts, rivers, and
ridges especially during the day
(Richardson 2000). The proposed
site is removed from all such
features.
• Tower height
Towers (all types, not limited to
wind turbines) less than 400-500
feet cause minimal mortality
(Kerlinger 2000) and towers less
than 300' rarely implicated in bird
kills (Kerlinger 2002). The wind
turbines proposed for Saint Paul are
less than 200' tall.
• Artificial perches
Some wind turbine designs attract
birds by providing perches in
formerly featureless terrain. For
example, lattice towers provide
numerous potential perches and are
discouraged to minimize attraction
of birds (Curry and Kerlinger 2000).
The turbine style to be used on
Saint Paul has a solid tubular tower
offering minimal perching
opportunities.
• Rotor speed
Available evidence suggests that
mortality is greatest at turbines with
faster rotors; therefore, models with
slower rotors (< 35 rpm) are
recommended to minimize potential
bird strikes. The wind turbines to be
used at Saint Paul have an
operating range of 760-1008 RPM.
• Lighting
Bird mortality at towers (not just
wind turbines) appears to be
exacerbated by lights, which,
especially under adverse weather
conditions. may attract and confuse
migrants. General guidelines are,
subject to requirements by FAA and
other regulation, to minimize lights
and if lights are necessary use the
minimum number, minimum
intensity, and only white strobes at
the minimum frequency.
• Guy lines
Guy lines supporting towers (not
just wind turbines) may be more
important than the towers they
support as agents of bird strikes
(Kerlinger 2002). The wind turbines
proposed for Saint Paul have no
guys.
Overall, most mortality at wind
turbines is usually unrelated to the
turbine itself but rather factors
associated with generic tower kills,
i.e., the poor weather in concert with
lighting, guy wires, and tower height.
The proposed towers minimize most
of these factors, being low, without
guys, without perches, and with
minimum lighting. The high rotational
speed of the turbine is the least bird
friendly aspect of the model turbine
being proposed. However, given the
relatively benign location, away from
the coast and known or potential bird
concentration areas the risk to birds
at the proposed wind turbines is
expected to be low and less than the
3-16
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
average reported for existing
installations.
In addition to direct mortality some
changes in bird use of the project
area may be expect due to
disturbance from increased human
activity, turbine noise, and perhaps
movement of the turbines. Leddy et
al. (1999) found reduced densities of
nesting birds in uplands near (within
approximately 180 m) wind turbines
in Minnesota.
The project also will entail
construction of gravel pads to support
the wind turbines and roads
connecting these pads to existing
facilities. In total gravel placement
cover less than 1 hectare of tundra.
Effects of this loss of habitat should
be minimal and likely to affect nesting
Lapland Longspur and perhaps Rock
Sandpiper. Disruption of tundra and
introduction of road edges will likely
increase use of the area by Gray -
crowed Rosy Finches, Snow
Buntings, and Lapland Longspurs
(foraging and post -breeding).
At present, electricity at St. Paul is
obtained from diesel -powered
generators. Greater reliance on wind
generated power would be expected
to reduce use of diesel. Shipping and
transferring fuel poses risks to birds.
In excess of 1700 birds (mostly King
Eiders) were estimated to have died
as an oil spill following a ship collision
near St. Paul Island in 1966 (Flint et
al. 1999). Although the proposed
action in isolation will result only in a
modest reduction in future fuel
shipments (the greatest reduction
occurred with the installation of the
first turbine), the potential benefits to
birds may outweigh the small risk due
to collisions with the turbines.
THREATENED AND
ENDANGERED SPECIES
According to the list of endangered,
threatened, and candidate species in
Alaska found on the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) web page,
there are no threatened or
endangered species within the project
area (see appendix). Furthermore,
consultation with USFWS during the
scoping process confirms that there
are no endangered species within the
project area.
Miscellaneous
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS
WASTE
Existing Environment
The following information is based on
past research done for the St. Paul
Airport Improvement Plan in 1994
and the St. Paul Airport Paving
Project in 2003.
A fueling facility on the east side of
the runway, next to the existing
parking apron, is used by transient
aircraft. It consists of one 22,500-
gallon aboveground fuel tank with a
fueling pump. There is another
3-17
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
aboveground storage tank, used for
heating, located behind the ARFF
building. Two aboveground aviation
fuel tanks were known to be located
south of the existing parking apron.
These tanks have been removed and
no known contamination or spills exist
at the location.
On the west side of the runway,
adjacent to the POSS facility, are
thirteen aboveground fuel tanks.
These were previously used by
EXXON U.S.A. for storage of aviation
fuel. TDX owns the POSS Camp
facility and stores fuel and waste fuel
in the tanks. ADEC indicated that the
POSS Camp facility has
contaminants in the adjacent gravel
pad surrounding the buildings. Spills
from aircraft and vehicle
maintenance, numerous 55-gallon
drums, and other assorted equipment
has produced surface contaminants.
TDX and National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
are in the process of cleaning up the
contaminants.
A landfill facility approximately 2,500
feet southwest of the wind power
plant contains hazardous materials in
the form of buried leaking drums.
The Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation (ADEC)
has required that NOAA cleanup the
drums in the landfill, as well as near
the airport.
The current wind power plant consists
of a wind turbine, a diesel control
shelter, a diesel generator shelter,
and a thermal bay with an insulated
6,000-gallon hydronic tank. There
also is a 3,000 aboveground diesel
storage tank. No solid or hazardous
waste is generated by the wind power
plant.
Environmental Effects
Based on the information obtained
from ADEC during the airport
projects, it does not appear that
hazardous materials would be
encountered during construction. Nor
is generation of solid or hazardous
waste anticipated during expansion of
the wind power plant
Should hazardous waste or
suspected hazardous substances be
encountered during construction, all
work in the vicinity of the
contamination would be stopped
immediately and the ADEC would be
contacted.
The No Action Alternative would
preclude any potential involvement
with hazardous materials due to the
lack of construction.
3-18
Chapter 3
Existing Environment and Environmental Effects
Chapter 4: Required Permits
The following list identifies permits or clearances that may be required before
construction of the Proposed Alternative. It is important to note that this permit list
may change as the result of agency comments received during the scoping
process.
• Application for a city of St. Paul Planning and Zoning Permit
• Federal Aviation Form 7460-1 Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration
• Department of Natural Resources, Office of Project Management and Permitting -
Coastal Zone Project Questionnaire
4.1
Chapter 5: Distribution
USACE, Regulatory Branch
ADNR, History and Archaeology
EPA
NMFS
ADEC, Division of Water
ADNR, OPMP-ACMP
ADNR, OHMP
City of St. Paul, ACMP
USFWS
ADNR
The Aleut Corporation
City of Saint Paul
Tribal Government of St. Paul
5.1
Chapter 6: List of Preparers and Contributors
Preparers
DOWL ENGINEERS
• Kristen Hansen, Project Manager, 7 years of experience
. LaQuita Chmielowski, E.I.T., Project Engineer, 3 years of experience
TDX CORPORATION
• Doug Veltre, Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology at the University of Alaska
Anchorage, Consultant
• Declan Troy, Field Biologist and Ornithologist, Consultant
• Helen R. Letts, Project Manager, Technical Writer/Editor
Contributors
TDX POWER
• Nick Goodman, CEO
• John Lyons, Operations Manager
6-1
Chapter 7: References
.........................................................................................................................................................
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, 1994. Environmental
Assessment St. Paul Airport Improvements Project No. 50678, Report
prepared for Federal Aviation Administration by Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities,
DOWL Engineers, 2003. St. Paul Airport Pavement Design Project Draft Scoping
Summary Report. Report prepared for State of Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities, Anchorage, Alaska, by DOWL
Engineers, Anchorage, Alaska.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, March 2001. Endangered, Threatened, and
Candidate Species in Alaska_
http://ecos.fws.00v/tess Dub Iic/TESSWeboage UsaLists?state=AK
Department of Community and Economic Development, Alaska Community
Information Summary.
http://www.deed.state.ak.us/cbd/commdbiCF—CIS.cfm
Veltre, Douglas W., and Allen P. McCartney
1994 An Archaeological Survey of the Early Russian and Aleut Settlements of St.
Paul Island, Pribilof Islands, Alaska. St. Paul, Alaska: Report submitted to
the TDX Corporation, Anchorage, Alaska.
2000 The St. Paul History and Archaeology Project: Overview of 2000 Field
Operations. St. Paul, Alaska: Report submitted to the TDX Corporation,
Anchorage, Alaska.
2001 The St. Paul History and Archaeology Project: Overview of 2001 Field
Operations. St. Paul, Alaska: Report submitted to the TDX Corporation,
Anchorage, Alaska.
7.1
Chapter 7
References
2002 Russian Exploitation of Aleuts and Fur Seals: The Archaeology of
Eighteenth- and Early -Nineteenth Century Settlements in the Pribilof Islands,
Alaska. Historical Archaeology 36(3):8-17.
2003 St. Paul Oral History Project: 2001 Interview Transcripts. Anchorage,
Alaska: Department of Anthropology, University of Alaska, Anchorage.
Curry, R.C. and P. Kerlinger. 2000. Avian Mitigation Plan: Kenetech Model Wind
Turbines, Altamont Pass WRA, California. Pp 18-28 In: PNAWPPM-III.
Proceedings of National Avian - Wind Power Planning Meeting 111, San
Diego, California, May 1998. Prepared for the Avian Subcommittee of the
National Wind Coordinating Committee by LGL Ltd., King City, Ont. 202 p.
Dirksen, S_, A.L. Spaans, and J. vander Winden 2000. Studies on Nocturnal Flight
Paths and Altitudes of Waterbirds in Relation to Wind. Turbines: A Review of
Current Research in The Netherlands Pp 97-109 In: PNAWPPM-111.
Proceedings of National Avian - Wind Power Planning Meeting 111, San
Diego, California, May 1998. Prepared for the Avian Subcommittee of the
National Wind Coordinating Committee by LGL Ltd., King City, Ont. 202 p.
Erickson, W.P., G. D. Johnson, M. D. Strickland, D. P. Young, Jr., K.J. Sernka and
R.E. Good. 2001. Avian collisions with wind turbines: A summary of existing
studies and comparisons to other sources of avian collision mortality in the
United States. National Wind Coordinating Committee, Washington, D.C.
Erickson, W., G. Johnson, D. Young, D. Strickland, R. Good, M. Bourassa, K Bay,
and K. Sernka. 2002. Synthesis and Comparison of Baseline Avian and Bat
Use, Raptor Nesting and Mortality Information from Proposed and Existing
Wind Developments. Prepared by WEST, Inc., Cheyenne, WY for Bonneville
Power Administration, Portland Oregon.
Erickson, W.P., J. Jeffrey, K. Kronner, and K. Bay. Stateline Wind Project Wildlife
Monitoring Annual Report, Results for the Period July 2001—December
2002. 2003. Technical report submitted to FPL Energy, the Oregon Office of
Energy, and the Stateline Technical Advisory Committee.
Flint, P.L., A.C. Fowler, and R.F. Rockwell. 1999. Modeling bird mortality associated
with the MIV/ Citrus oil spill off St. Paul Island, Alaska. Ecological Modeling
117: 261-267.
7-2
Chapter 7
References
Hanna, G.D. 1921. The Pribilof Sandpiper. Condor 23: 50-57.
Hanna, G.D. 1922 The Aleutian Rosy Finch. Condor 24: 88-91.
Hunt, G. 2002. Golden Eagles in a perilous landscape: Predicting the effects of
mitigation for wind turbine blade -strike mortality. California Energy
Commission Consultant Report P500-02-043F.
Johnson, G.D., W.P. Erickson, M.D. Strickland, M.F. Shepherd, D.A. Sheperd, and
S.A. Sarappo. 2002. Collision mortality of local and migrant birds at a large-
scale wind power development on Buffalo Ridge, Minnesota. Wildlife Society
Bulletin 30: 879-887.
Johnson, G.D., Erickson, W.P., White, J., and McKinney, R. 2003_ Avian and Bat
Mortality During the First Year of Operation at the Klondike Phase I Wind
Project, Sherman County, Oregon. Prepared by WEST, Inc., Cheyenne, WY
for Northwestern Wind Power, Goldendale, WA.
Kerlinger, P. 2000. Avian mortality at communications towers: a review of recent
literature, research, and methodology. Prepared for: United States Fish and
Wildlife Service. Office of Migratory Bird Management. Prepared by Curry &
Kerlinger, Cape May Point, NJ.
Kerlinger, P. 2002. An Assessment of the Impacts of Green Mountain Power
Corporation's Wind Power Facility on Breeding and Migrating Birds in
Searsburg, Vermont July 1996—July 1998. National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, NREL/SR-500-28591.
Larned, W.W. 2003. Steller's Eider spring migration surveys, 2003. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Management Office, Waterfowl Branch -
Anchorage, Alaska.
Leddy, K.L., K.F. Higgins, and D.E. Naugle. 1999. Effects of wind turbines on
upland nesting birds in Conservation Reserve Program grasslands. Wilson
Bull. 111: 100-104.
Lowther, S. 2000. The European Perspective: Some Lessons from Case Studies.
Pp 115-124 In: PNAWPPM-III. Proceedings of National Avian - Wind Power
Planning Meeting III, San Diego, California, May 1998. Prepared for the
7-3
Chapter 7
References
Avian Subcommittee of the National Wind Coordinating Committee by LGL
Ltd., King City, Ont. 202 p.
Petersen, M.R., J.B. Grand, and C.P. Dau. 2000. Spectacled Eider (Somaferia
fischeri). In: The Birds of North America, No. 547 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.).
The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA.
Richardson, W.J. 2000. Bird Migration and Wind Turbines: Migration Timing, Flight
Behavior, and Collision Risk. Pp. 132-140 In: PNAWPPM-III. Proceedings of
National Avian - Wind Power Planning Meeting Ill, San Diego, California,
May 1998. Prepared for the Avian Subcommittee of the National Wind
Coordinating Committee by LGL Ltd., King City, Ont. 202 p
Young, D.P., Jr., W.P. Erickson, R.E. Good, M.D. Strickland, and G.D. Johnson.
2003. Avian and bat mortality associated with the initial phase of the Foote
Creek Rim Windpower Project, Carbon County, Wyoming. Prepared by:
Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. Cheyenne, Wyoming for Pacificorp,
Inc., Portland, Oregon, SeaWest Windpower Inc., San Diego, California, and
Bureau of Land Management, Rawlins, Wyoming.
7.4
Appendix 1: Airport Improvement Project
Part of an airport improvement
project, a geotechnical investigation
was conducted in August 1994 by the
Alaska Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities.
A-1