Southeast Metro 115 kV Transmission Line Project

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW)

NOTE TO PREPARERS This worksheet is to be completed by the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) or its agents. The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data necessary for the worksheet, but is not to complete the final worksheet itself. If a complete answer does not fit in the space allotted, attach additional sheets as necessary. For assistance with this worksheet contact the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) at (612) 296-8253 or (toll-free) 1-800-652-9747 (ask operator for the EQB environmental review program) or consult "EAW Guidelines," a booklet available from the EQB.

Note To Reviewers

Comments must be submitted to the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB), the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU), during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EAW in the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information, potential impacts that may warrant further investigation, and the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

Comment Deadline

Comments must be submitted to the RGU (see Item 3) during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Public notice of this EAW is to be published in the May 31, 1999 issue of the Monitor. Comments should be sent to the name and address of the EQB staff person listed below. The comment period for this EAW ends at 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 30, 1999.

1. Project Title: Southeast Metro 115 kV Transmission Line Project

2. Proposer: Northern States Power (NSP) Contact: Jim Alders Northern States Power Company Manager Regulatory Projects 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 Phone 612-330-6732 Fax 612-330-7601 E-mail James.R.Alders@nspco.com

3. RGU: Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB) Contact: Bob Cupit Environmental Quality Board 658 Cedar Street St. Paul Minnesota 55155 Phone 651-296-2096 Fax 651-296-3698 Email bob.cupit@mnplan.state.mn.us

4. Reason for EAW preparation

EIS scoping Mandatory EAW þCitizen petition RGU discretion þProposer volunteered

5. Project location Counties of Washington, Dakota, and Hennepin

Cities of Newport, South St. Paul, Inver Grove Heights, Sunfish Lake, Mendota Heights, Bloomington

Sections 26,27,28,29,30 of Township 28N, Range 22W

Sections 25,26,27,28,29,32,31 of Township 28N, Range 23W

Section 6 of Township 27N, Range 23W

Sections 1,2,3 of Township 27N, Range 24W

	Enclosed following the text are the following:
		Figure 1 General Site Location Map
		Figure 2 Existing Route and Topography: 2 sheets
		Figure 3 National Wetlands Inventory Map: 4 sheets
		Figure 4 Soils Map: 4 sheets
		Figure 5 Protected Waters Map
		Figure 6 Typical Single Pole
		Attachments: Erosion Control Plan Agency Letters Project Aerial Photography Alternative Route Considerations
6.		Description: Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes. Include modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. The southeast metro area transmission system supplies electricity to the southeast metropolitan area. This transmission system is interconnected with other transmission systems to provide uninterrupted service in the event that any portion of the system fails or must be removed from service for maintenance. The current system consists of a single circuit 115kV transmission line which crosses six communities and supplies power to the area. The line connects Red Rock Substation in Newport, Stockyards Substation in South St Paul, Rogers Lake Substation in Mendota Heights, Airport Substation at the international airport, and Bloomington and Wilson substations in Bloomington. Electricity is distributed to each community from these substations which serve as power sources. As the southeast metro area continues to grow, the current transmission system will not be able to meet energy demand by the year 2001, resulting in power outages under certain conditions. In order to meet the increased energy demand into the future, NSP must upgrade the existing transmission system. This will be accomplished by the addition of a second 115kV line connecting Red Rock, Rogers Lake and Wilson Substations. NSP proposes to construct the new line by replacing the existing single circuit 115 kV line with a double circuit line. Both the existing and the new electrical conductors will be carried on single steel pole structures on the existing centerline in the existing right of way. The new structure is shown in Figure 6. The project will replace existing transmission structures with new structures that will be located in the same place as the existing structures. The new structures will be single galvanized steel poles replacing “H” pole wood and steel lattice structures. The new structures will have a typical height of 84 to 100 feet, about 25 feet taller than existing structures. No new right of way will be required. To accomplish addition of a new circuit without widening of the existing right-of-way, the new structures are taller. The wood double-pole current structure will be replaced with a single, larger diameter steel pole. None of the existing substations will require expansion: equipment additions at the substations will occur within the existing fenced area. A related but separate project affecting the southeast metro transmission system consists of relocating the Bloomington Substation and placing a portion of the existing and new line underground along the 494 freeway corridor to facilitate the new runway development on the south side of the airport. It is characterized as a separate project because it is the result of planning initiated by and directly associated with the airport and involving the city of Bloomington. Construction is planned in two phases. Phase 1 consists of the eastern portion from Red Rock Substation to Rogers Lake Substation and construction is scheduled to begin in the fall of 1999. Phase 2 consists of the portion from Rogers Lake Substation to Wilson Substation which would be constructed in 2002. There are no other future stages of this development. This project is not a subsequent stage of an earlier project. Length of Transmission Line by Community Community Length in feet Newport 2116 South St. Paul 9500 Inver Grove Heights 9600 Sunfish Lake 6400 Mendota Heights 21,800 Fort Snelling St. Park 8800 Bloomington 19,400 Total 77,616 Construction of the overhead transmission line would generally follow a sequential set of activities performed by small crews proceeding along the right-of-way (ROW). The activities include: 1. Surveying (stake existing ROW and structure work) . 2. Preparation of access, wire handling areas, construction lay down sites, and structure sites. Clearing will be performed as needed. 3. Selective topping and clearing of right-of-way vegetation. 4. Material delivery and distribution. 5. Augering and setting concrete foundations. 6. Structure erection. 7. Conductor and shield wire installation. 8. Transfer of existing wires to new structures 9. ROW cleanup and refurbishment. Large trucks and equipment will move materials and erect the line, with most activity occuring at structure sites. Temporary access to structure sites by heavy equipment will be along the ROW or, where available and to avoid sensitive areas, from adjacent public and private roads. Maintenance would occur over the life of the proposed project and would involve periodic aerial and ground patrols. Except in special access situations, permanent access roads are not maintained. As needed, for routine or emergency repairs, work would be performed on the line by the utility within rights conveyed in easements. ROW are trimmed or cleared of potentially conflicting vegetation about every five years. Herbicides may be used in undeveloped areas, usually in consultation with landowners. Typically, utilities provide easement property owners with advance notice of routine entry and attempt to maintain good relations. Operation of the transmission line will have to comply with the National Electric Safety Code. Typically, utilities work with individual landowners to mitigate any effects which have not been addressed in ROW agreements. ROW easements will specify the restrictive rights conveyed to the utility. Activity that could interfere with the transmission line or present a safety concern is typically specifically prohibited. Homes and other substantial structures cannot be built within the ROW. Similarly, equipment such as communication towers are restricted. Examples of activities which may be compatible include farming (crops and pasture), lawns, roads and driveways, Christmas tree plantations, and hunting. No rights for public or non-utility use are conveyed. Physical changes within the ROW would be primarily short-term construction related impacts, though long-term tree control and maintenance access will be necessary. There would be short-term disruption during construction of the transmission line due to the generation of dust, noise, and traffic. Long-term impacts to land use would result from the presence of the transmission line. Impacts of transmission lines on urban land uses can occur when; 1) crossing a commercial or industrial property will interfere with operations; 2) the acquisition of the ROW restricts the use of property; 3) crossing a parcel limits development potential; or 4) crossing private properties results in changes in existing uses. Urban and residential areas may be more sensitive to construction-related impacts due to the greater density of commercial and residential lots.
		Consideration of project alternatives is not required in an Enviromental Assessment Worksheet. However, a route alignment alternative between Red Rock and Rodgers Substations have been raised by the petitioners, and NSP has submitted documents describing its analysis of a proposed route modification. NSP’s documents are at the end of this Worksheet as the last attachment .
7.		Project Magnitude Data
Electrical Size: 115,000 volts (115 kV)
		Total Project Length: 14.7 miles Width of Right of way : 50 feet (existing; no new right of way) Structures: 130 Double circuit steel poles at existing structure locations Height: 100-140 ft Typical Span: 500 ft Length on existing ROW 13 miles Length on new ROW 0 miles
8.		Permits and Approvals Required: List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals and funding required:
		Unit of Government Type of Application Status
		Pollution Control Agency Stormwater NPDES Not yet applied for
		DNR & Corps of Eng. Crossings of public waters Not Yet Applied For
		Section 404 dredge and fill Not yet applied for City of Inver Grove Heights No Cond.Use Permit Required Not Applicable
		City of Mendota Heights Conditional Use Permit Not yet applied for
		City of Newport Cond. Use and Bldg. Permit Not yet applied for
		City of South St. Paul Conditional Use Permit Not yet applied for
		City of Sunfish Lake Conditional Use Permit Not yet applied for
		City of Bloomington R/W Permit, Cond. Use Permit Not yet applied for
9.		Land Use Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and nearby land use; indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past land uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks. The current land use on the site consists of the existing 115kV transmission line and utility corridor. Uses of land within the right-of-way generally have developed since the existing transmission line was built in the early 1960’s. Right-of-way vegetation has been periodically controlled since the line was installed. Uses are diverse, and are limited by rights purchased by NSP when the existing line was built. Compatible uses are any that do not encroach on operational or maintenance rights of the facility. The surrounding land is occupied by industrial use along the Mississippi River and by residential developments, commercial uses, and open land in most of the remaining areas. Typically, compatible land use on the right-of-way is the same as adjacent areas. The right-of-way is not fenced or otherwise restricted to landowners beyond rights granted to the utility. In residential areas, lawns, landscaping, gardens, and other non-vertical structure uses have been established on the right-of-way. In commercial areas, other infrastructure, parking lots, and landscaping have been established. In all areas, other linear features such as roads and trails,cross the right-of-way. Newport: Red Rock Substation is located in Newport near the Mississippi River in an industrial setting. There will be no change in alignment or structure types. The steel lattice structures crossing the Mississippi River will remain the same. The crossing was originally built using double circuit structures with only one circuit installed. The new line would be placed on the existing structures without modification. South St. Paul : Stockyards Substation is located on the west bank of the Mississippi River in an industrial setting that was once part of the Stock Yards industrial complex of South St, Paul. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency records of known contaminated sites was queried. There are no known contamination sites along the right of way. West of Concord St. the line passes through seven blocks of residential area. Inver Grove Heights: The line passes through undeveloped land in the vicinity of Hwy 52 and high density residential property near the intersection of Hwy. 110 and 494. Sunfish Lake: The existing line passes through a mixed large lot residential and wooded open space setting and parallels the north shore of Sunfish Lake through 18 residential lots. Mendota Heights: In Mendota Heights the existing alignment passes through wooded parcels, a large wetland, and through residential areas near Dodd Road. Rogers Lake Substation is just west of Dodd Road and is surrounded by residential development to the south and west and a recreation complex and golf course to the north. To the west of the substation the existing alignment crosses Rogers Lake, passes along the southern border of another golf course , then crosses I-35 E, a cemetery and two small lakes, Augusta and Lemay. West of Hwy 55 the line crosses along the southern edge of a cemetery adjacent to light industrial uses to the south. The line then crosses State Hwy 13 and enters the Minnesota River Valley. Fort Snelling State Park: In the River Valley the line passes through the southern part of Fort Snelling State Park through floodplain forests and wetlands. Bloomington: In Bloomington the line parallels the I 494 freeway corridor through commercial areas of hotels and office complexes. Aerial photos showing the alignment are provided as an atttachment. Since the existing corridor is going to be utilized for the upgraded system, no significant long term land use impacts are anticipated beyond those resulting in the past from installation of the existing line. The potential for impacts during construction can be minimized through construction practices designed to minimize adverse effects and by working with landowners. Some land use on the existing right-of-way will be disturbed during construction. The impacts may be significant to individual residential landowners who have established landscaping and outdoor uses on the right-of-way crossing their properties. The land use can be reestablished, though it may require multiple growing seasons and significant investment. Cost of this mitigation will be an issue to be resolved by the utility and landowners.

10.	Cover Types Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development (before and after totals should be equal): Because the project will replace an existing facility with essentially the same surface footprint, the change in permanent landuse will be negligible. The following estimates are in lineal feet.
		Before	After
	Types 2 to 8 Wetlands	4,300	4,300
	Wooded/Forest	17,172	17,172
	Brush/Grassland	16,622	16,622
	Crop Land	0	0
	Urban/Suburban Lawn/Landscaping	4,322	4,322
	Impervious Surface	21,550	21,550
	Other (describe) Lakes,Rivers	3,650	3,650

Total 77,616 77,616

11.	Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources
	a.	Describe fish and wildlife resources on or near the site and discuss how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. Areas around the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge and Fort Selling State Park may hold significant numbers of waterfowl. Since the new transmission line will be utilizing the existing corridor, no detrimental impacts to the wildlife resources are anticipated. Game and non-game fish resources also exist in the stretches of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers where the transmission line will be crossing. Since the transmission line will not be affecting the river substrate or aquatic habitat, fishery and other aquatic resources will not be impacted due the placement of concrete base supports. In other open and residential areas construction of the new transmission line would result in various impacts to the wildlife resources. Displacement of Wildlife. Activities from the construction of the line may displace wildlife from the immediate area. The amount of displacement would vary by species. In urban and suburban areas, wildlife will tolerate more disturbance than in rural areas. Some species may move away from the construction actiivity. However, the impact to wildlife is anticipated to be short-term. Loss of Habitat. Construction of the line also should not result in the loss of habitat. Any habitat effects resulting from reclearing of vegetation within the existing ROW should be temporary. Avian Collisions. Avian collisions could occur as a result of the project. Because the rebuilt line would replace an existing line, the potential for avian collisions with the line could increase as a result of the reconfiguration of the new line. Placing the lines on a vertical plane on taller structures increases the area that birds must negotiate. Raptor species typically have a low collision potential based on their slow flight speed and high maneuverability. There is no basis for assuming that bird losses will be significant. Petitioners present information from the general literature about the potential for bird collision with transmission lines. NSP states that there have been no reports of bird collisions along the existing transmission alignment. The literature cited by the petitioners identifies areas of large migratory bird concentrations as most sensitive to the introduction of new transmission lines. It recommends the use of existing rights of way as one method of mitigating potential impacts of new lines. Sunfish Lake is not a setting of the type discussed in the literature as higher risk. Electrocution. Electrocution of large birds such as raptors are a concern with electrical facilities. However, electrocution is typically restricted to smaller distribution lines. Electrocution occurs when birds’ wings come in contact with either two conductors or a conductor and grounding device.
	b.	Are there any state-listed endangered, threatened, or special concern species; rare plant communities; colonial waterbird nesting colonies; native prairie or other rare habitat; or

		other sensitive ecological resources on or near the site?	þ	Yes	No
		If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources was conducted. Describe measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
		According to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, letter dated January 26, 1999 there are three species of concern in the area of the project. The species present are: Cycleptus elongatus (Blue sucker, special concern), Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding’s turtle, threatened) and Acer saccharinum (Floodplain Forest Silver Maple subtype #32). Since the project will not affect the river substrate, adjacent wetlands, will not require the removal of river flood plain trees, nor will it inhibit turtle movement or impact habitat, no detrimental impacts to these species are anticipated.
12.	Physical Impacts on Water Resources Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration (dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, impoundment) of any
	Surface water (lake, pond, wetland, stream, drainage ditch)?		þ	Yes	No
	Although the transmission line will be crossing the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers, no impacts to surface water resources are anticipated as a result of the project. At the Minnesota River crossing concrete foundations will be constructed for the new poles and will be placed in the same approximate location as the existing towers. Two or three structures will need to be replaced in forested flood plain wetlands in Fort Snelling State Park east of the Minnesota River. One structure will be replaced in a wetland east of Dodd Road. See the attachment describing construction practices that will be employed to mitigate the potential for wetlands impacts.

13.	Water Use
	a.	Will the project involve the installation or abandonment of any wells?
			Yes	þ	No
	b.	Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water (including
		Dewatering)?	Yes	þ	No
	c.	Will the project require connection to a public water supply?	Yes	þ	No

14.	Water-related Land Use Management Districts Does any part of the project site involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100-year flood plain, or a state or federally designated
	Wild or scenic river land use district?	þ	Yes	No
	If yes, identify the district and discuss the compatibility of the project with the land use restrictions of the district.
	The transmission line will be crossing the Mississippi River between river miles 833 and 832. According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers the west bank of the river up to the levee is within the delineated 100-year flood plain. The 100-year flood plain elevation for this stretch of the river is 704.5 feet above mean sea level. This stretch of the river is also located within the Mississippi National River Recreation Area (MNRRA) and state designated Mississippi River Critical Area. No detrimental impacts are anticipated since the line will be crossing overhead and within the existing corridor. The line crosses through the flood plain of the Minnesota River and also passes along the north shoreline of Sunfish Lake, and crosses Rogers Lake, Augusta Lake, and Lemay Lake.

15.	Water Surface Use Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any waterbody?
	This project does not involve watercraft use.		Yes	þ	No
16.	Erosion and sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: acres; cubic yards . Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after project construction. Foundations for the pole structures will be excavated using truck mounted auger–type drill rigs on tracks thereby reducing soil erosion and potential sedimentation. Approximately 25 cubic yards of soil will be excavated at each site. There will be roughly 130 structures required. Excavated soil will be removed from the site or thin spread depending on the situation and arrangements made with the landowner. This construction method limits the amount of soil exposure and minimizes soil erosion and sedimentation potential.
17.	Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff
	a.	Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe methods to be used to manage and/or treat runoff.
		Since the existing utility corridor is vegetated and minimal disturbance is anticipated during the upgrade, quantity and quality of site runoff is not expected to be significant. NSP has committed to taking necessary precautions during construction at structure locations and during the removal of existing structures to minimize the opportunity for soil sediments to be moved by surface water run off.

b. Identify the route(s) and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site. Estimate the

impact of the runoff on the quality of the receiving waters. (If the runoff may affect a

lake consult “EAW Guidelines” about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed).

18.	Water Quality-Wastewaters
	a.	Describe sources, quantities, and composition (except for normal domestic sewage) of all sanitary and industrial wastewaters produced or treated at the site.
		Wastewater will not be produced during operation or during construction at structure sites.
	b.	Describe any waste treatment methods to be used and give estimates of composition after treatment, or if the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of the site conditions for such systems. Identify receiving waters (including ground water) and estimate the impact of the discharge on the quality of the receiving waters.
		Wastewater is not generated during construction or operation.

c.	If wastes will be discharged into a sewer system or pretreatment system, identify the system and discuss the ability of the system to accept the volume and composition of the wastes. Identify any improvements which will be necessary.
	No wastewater system will be needed for the project.

19.	Geologic Hazards and soil conditions
	a.	Approximate depth (in feet) to ground water: to bedrock:	Variable minimum 25-30 average ~51 minimum ~150 average
		Describe any of the following site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations/karst conditions; soils with high infiltration rates; abandoned or unused wells. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards.
		According to the Dakota and Hennepin County Geologic Atlases, there are no known sinkholes or karst conditions along the site corridor, however, there are numerous records of water well construction in the surrounding area. The project does not involve the use of any potentially hazardous materials, therefore, no impacts to groundwater will occur.
b. Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications, if known. Discuss soil granularity and potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination.
		East to West Washington County Faxon silt loam Chaska silt loam Dakota County Algansee sandy loam Faxon silty clay loam Urban land-Waukegan complex - 0 to 1 % slopes Urban land-Waukegan complex - 1 to 8 % slopes Urban land-Kingsley complex - 3 to 15 % slopes Urban land-Kingsley complex - 15 to 25 % slopes Chetek sandy loam - 8 to 15 % slopes Colo silt loam, occasionally flooded Antigo silt loam - 1 to 8 % slopes Gothum loamy fine sand – 6 to 12 % slopes Kingsley sandy loam – 3 to 8 % slopes Kingsley sandy loam – 8 to 15 % slopes Kingsley sandy loam – 15 to 25 % slopes Auburndale silt loam Jewitt silt loam – 1 to 6 % slopes Kingsley – Mahtomedi complex – 15 to 25 % slopes Quam silt loam Crystal lake silt loam Palms muck Udorthents, wet Urban land – Chetek complex – 1 to 8 % slopes Chetek sandy loam – 8 to 15 % slopes Kenebec silt loam Wadena Loam, 2 to 6 % slopes, eroded Wadena loam, 6 to 12 % slopes, eroded Kanaranzi loam, 2 to 6 % slopes Kanaranzi loam, 6 to 12 % slopes Hubbard loamy sand, 12 to 18 % slopes Crystal lake silt loam Kato silty clay loam Hennepin County Chaska clay loam Marsh Estherville sandy loam, 2 to 6 % slopes Salida coarse sandy loam, 18 to 35 % slopes Mixed alluvial land, frequently flooded Cut and fill land Urban land

20.			Solid Wastes; Hazardous Wastes; Storage Tanks
			a.	Describe types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during construction and operation. Identify method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste, indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how the project will be modified for recycling. If hazardous waste is generated, indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments. The existing 131 wood and lattice structures are anticipated to be recycled.
b. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present on the project site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating ground water. No contaminants will be used during construction. No known contaminants are present along the project route.
		c.		Indicate the number, location, size, and use of any above or below ground tanks to be used for storage of petroleum products or other materials(except water)
	The project will not involve the use of any above or below ground storage tanks. The MPCA database search also indicates that there are no known tanks along the transmission route.
21.			Traffic Not Applicable This project does not involve expansion or construction of parking facilities or roadway construction. Construction traffic will not add significantly to local traffic volumes.
22.			Vehicle-related Air Emissions Provide an estimate of the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts.
			Other than the vehicles used during construction and in the delivery of materials used for the transmission upgrade, there will be no vehicle related emissions after the project is completed.

23.	Stationary Source Air Emissions Will the project involve any stationary sources of air
	Emissions (such as boilers or exhaust stacks)?	Yes	þ	No
	If yes, describe the sources, quantities, and composition of the emissions; the proposed air pollution control devices; the quantities and composition of the emissions after treatment, and the effects on air quality.
	Stationary sources of air emissions are not part of this project.

24.	Odors, noise or dust. Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during operation?
			þ	Yes		No
	If yes, describe the sources, characteristics, duration, and quantities or intensity, and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify the locations of sensitive receptors in the vicinity and estimate the impacts on these receptors. Discuss potential impacts on human health or quality of life.
Dust and noise impacts will be typical of construction involving heavy machinery, concrete placement, steel pole erection and installation of transmission facilities. Construction noise will be temporary and will not exceed more than a few days at any one location. Fugitive dust impacts, caused by vehicle movements over dirt access areas should be short-term and insignificant with proper mitigation. During project construction, fugitive dust will be controlled by periodically watering the affected areas as required. There will not be any significant audible noise from the transmission line during operation. Audible noise from the transmission lines will be at background levels during operation during fair weather or heavy rainfall conditions and well below MPCA noise standards.
25.	Nearby resources. Are Any of the Following Resources on or in Proximity to the Site:
	a.	Archaeological, historical, or architectural resources?		Yes	þ	No
	b.	Prime or unique farmlands?	þ	Yes		No
	c.	Designated parks, recreation areas, or trails?	þ	Yes		No
	d.	Scenic views and vistas?	þ	Yes		No
	e.	Other unique resources?		Yes	þ	No
	Letters from the Minnesota Historical Society (see attachment) report that there are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places and no known or suspected archaeological sites in the area that could be affected by the project. Although some of the soils listed under #19b are classified as prime farmland soils, no farmed lands are crossed. Parkland and other recreation lands will not sustain long term impacts beyond the current right-of-way conditions. The existing line passes through Fort Snelling State Park. There are scenic views and vistas where the project will cross the Minnesota River Valley that will be affected by the new configuration of the transmission line, principally where new structures on either side of the river are viewed.
26.	Visual impacts. Will the Project Create Adverse Visual Impacts? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas, and large visible plume from cooling towers or exhaust stacks?
			þ	Yes		No
	The project will replace existing transmission structures with new structures that will be located in the same place as the existing structures. The new structures will be single galvanized steel poles replacing “H” pole wood and steel lattice structures. The new structures will have a typical height of 84 to 100 feet, typically 25 feet taller than existing structures. The color of the new structures will be metallic silver (galvanized steel) which tends to minimize the visual impact when viewed in intermediate and distant settings. Existing structures through the Minnesota River Valley are typically 75 to 95 feet tall with 110 foot structures at the river channel crossing. New structures will be typically 25 feet taller.
The aesthetic impacts from the larger transmission line will be somewhat greater over that of the existing line. Some residences currently experience visual impacts from the existing transmission line. The degree of aesthetic impact from the existing and proposed line is highly subjective, but nonetheless is significant to some people.
27.	Compatibility with Plans Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive land use plan or regulation, or other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state, or federal agency?
				Yes	þ	No
	If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project, and explain how any conflicts ) will be resolved. If no, explain.
Transmission lines are considered to be essential utility services and exist in a wide variety of land uses. The project involves upgrading of an existing transmission line in an existing transmission line corridor. The new structures will be located in the same place as the existing structures. Local land use plans do not speak to the redevelopment of an existing transmission right of way. Conditional use permits are required as presented in #8, Permits and approvals required.
28.	Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other
	infrastructure, or public services be required to serve the project?			Yes	þ	No
	If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure/services needed.
29.	Cumulative Impacts. Minnesota Rule part 4410.1700, subpart 7, item B requires that the RGU consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause cumulative impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts (or discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate item(s) elsewhere on this form).
	Additional stages of this project are not planned. As part of a separate project to accommodate airport runway development, a portion of the line in Bloomington will be placed underground and Bloomington Substation will be moved.
30.	Other Potential Environmental Impacts If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts which were not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation.
Electric and Magnetic Fields: The Health Issue. The question of whether exposure to power-frequency (60 Hz) electric and magnetic fields can cause biological responses or even health effects has been the subject of considerable research for the past three decades. A number of potential health effects have been examined, including alterations in cellular properties that could lead to the development of cancer, alterations in reproductive function, and other alterations in the normal functioning of the human body. A thorough review of scientific evidence relevant to this topic would lead to an examination of over 10,000 scientific reports. The initial concern was electric fields, however in the early 80s the concern shifted to magnetic fields. The shift away from the examination of electric fields appears justified in that subsequent studies reported no associations between measured electric fields and cancer in either children or adults. Over twenty independent scientific groups through in the past 18 years have evaluated the evidence from human, animal and exposure assessment research on the potential health effects associated with exposure to electric and magnetic fields. All of these groups have concluded that the body of data, as large as it is, does not support the conclusion that exposure to power-frequency electric or magnetic fields (at intensities that span the lowest recorded environmental levels to those that far exceed environmental and usual occupational exposures) causes cancer or otherwise constitutes a health hazard. The most recent effort to clarify this issue is the EMF Research and Public Information Dissemination (EMF RAPID) program, which was a $41 million effort resulting from the 1992 Energy Policy Act. This program officially ended at the end of 1998. One summary report, the National Academy of Sciences review of the EMF RAPID program has been competed. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences report to Congress and the federal Interagency Committee representing ten federal agencies report are expected by the end of this year. The NAS report from its National Research Council concludes the following: An earlier Research Council assessment of the available body of information on biologic effects of power-frequency magnetic fields (NRC 1997) let to the conclusion “that the current body of evidence does not show that exposure to these fields presents a human health hazard. Specifically, no conclusive and consistent evidence shows that exposures to residential electric and magnetic fields produces cancer, adverse neurobehavioral effects, or reproductive and developmental effects”. The new, largely unpublished contributions of the EMF-RAPID program are consistent with that conclusion. We conclude that no finding from the EMF-RAPID program alters the conclusions of the previous NRC review on the Possible Effects of Electromagnetic Fields on Biologic Systems (NRC 1997). In view of the negative outcomes of EMF-RAPID replication studies, it now appears even less likely that MFs [magnetic fields] in the normal domestic or occupational environment produce important health effects, including cancer. Excerpted from the Executive Summary, Research on Power-Frequency Fields completed under the Energy Policy Act of 1992. Final Report, 1999. Existing and Predicted Electric and Magnetic Fields. Electric Fields. Due to the conductor configuration and the height of the conductors above ground for the proposed lines, the voltage gradient (electric field) from the proposed lines will be lower than the voltage gradient from the existing line. Voltage gradients due to this project, as calculated 1 meter above grade level, will be approximately [13%] of the maximum allowable levels established by the MEQB. Within the right of way the maximum voltage gradient of the proposed lines will be about [25%] below the maximum voltage gradient of the existing line. At the edge of the right of way (25 feet either side of the center line) the voltage gradient of the proposed lines will be about [42%] below the voltage gradient of the existing line. [Bracketed items are based on typical structure dimensions for the proposed project, assumed 12.5 foot spacing between conductors for the existing line and conductor height of 25 feet above grade] Magnetic Fields. Due to the conductor configuration and the height of the conductors above ground for the proposed lines, the magnetic field from the proposed lines will be lower than the magnetic field from the existing line. The orientation of the phases of one of the proposed circuits will be flipped relative to the phases of the other circuit in order to provide some cancellation of magnetic fields and thereby to reduce overall magnetic field levels. The reductions in magnetic field levels at 3 feet above the ground in 2001 due to the proposed project are summarized in the following table. *Reduction in magnetic field levels due to the proposed Project, calculated as a percent of magnetic field levels of the existing line in the year 2001. Other Electrical Concerns Ground Current. Ground current associated with the project is expected to be minimal due to the following factors: · Except during short circuit conditions, transmission circuits are normally balanced 3-phase circuits. Ground currents can occur when the load on a 3-phase circuit is unbalanced, such as a distribution circuit where customers are served from various locations along the line. The unbalance produces a current on the neutral conductor, some of which can flow back to the source through the ground. Ground currents can flow during electrical short circuits on the transmission system which occur infrequently during events such as lightning storms and are of short duration, typically lasting for only a fraction of a second. · Transmission structures and substations are designed and grounded according to industry standards which reduce the impact of ground currents. Stray Voltage. Stray voltage is a term used to describe voltages on farm neutrals ( neutral to earth voltages) associated with the electrical service connections to farms, and voltages induced on equipment by transmission circuits. The proposed line does not involve any electrical service connections and does increase the likelihood of induced voltages above the existing line. TV/Radio Reception. Interference with existing television or radio is typically not a problem for electric facilities designed and operated at the voltage rating of the proposed facilities. The proposed transmission facilities will operate at the voltage level of the existing transmission lines and thus will not introduce higher voltage levels. The proposed transmission facilities will be designed to industry standards to avoid interference with reception. If due to some unique circumstance the facility causes some localized effect outside the right of way that was not previously experienced it can be readily repaired. Accidents. The facilities will be designed in accordance with the National Electric Safety Code to avoid tampering or accidental contact by humans or equipment.
31.	SUMMARY OF ISSUES List any impacts and issues identified that may require further investigation before the project is commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions.

Routing alternatives. Petitioners raise the issue of routing alternatives. It is not normally the purpose of an EAW to analyze alternative to a proposal. However applicants have provided information regarding routing options considered in developing the proposal. NSP’s analysis is attached as the last item in this document.

RGU CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that:

· The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge.

· The EAW describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined at Minnesota Rules, parts 4410.0200, subparts 9b and 60, respectively.

· Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list.

Signature Date

Title

Attachment

Southeast Metro 115 kv Transmission Line Upgrade

Routing alternatives

NSP proposes to upgrade the electrical supply system in the southeastern part of the metropolitan area by replacing an existing 115 kv transmission line with a double circuit 115 kv transmission line. The new line would be constructed on the same existing right of way. The existing right of way does not require expansion. New structures would be placed at or very near existing structure locations.

A petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet has been brought to the Environmental Quality Board by residents of Sun Fish Lake. One of the issues raised in the petition is the suitability of alternate alignments for the project.

The following analysis examines the availability of routing alternatives and their relative impacts. Figures following this text present the alternatives examined on maps and aerial photos.

Newport, South St. Paul and Inver Grove Heights: I 494

The existing crossing of the Mississippi River consists of double circuit structures with a single circuit line installed. In other words the new line can be placed on the existing structures without modification. Any other alternative would increase the overall length of the project and would not take advantage of the mitigating opportunity afforded by the available space on the existing structures.

In South St. Paul, west of Concord Street, the community is fully developed in small, single family residential lots. There are in essence two options for routing a transmission line through the area.

The applicants propose to replace the existing transmission line with a new one. Through South St. Paul the existing line is supported on wood h-frame structures on a 50 foot right of way with structures spaced 500 feet apart. The new double circuit line would be placed on single steel pole structures located at or very near existing structure locations. No new right of way would be required. Vegetation clearing necessary only for access to structure construction sites would be necessary. No additional tree trimming or clearing beyond what is currently done to maintain electrical clearance would be necessary. Small lot residential uses have grown up around the existing right of way.

The other major linear feature in the vicinity is the I 494 freeway corridor. Conceptually two options exist for routing the proposed line. The existing transmission line could be left alone and a new line routed along the freeway corridor. Alternatively a new double circuit line could routed along the highway corridor and the existing corridor abandoned. The I 494 freeway corridor is shown on aerial photography sheets 19B, 20A- 22A. In South St. Paul the freeway was developed in a relatively narrow corridor we presume due to the small lot residential development. Narrow frontage roads and homes on small lots abut the freeway corridor. The federal and state departments of transportation have consistently held that high voltage transmission lines cannot be placed on freeway rights of way due to associated safety issues. Therefore, especially in this situation where freeway right of way is restricted, the line would have to be placed outside the free way right of way. Doing so would place the line in areas currently occupied by frontage roads and residences. Substantial residential displacement along the entire 5 blocks of development would likely be required to establish a new right of way through the area regardless of which side of the freeway is considered.

In Inver Grove Heights the existing line passes through areas of undeveloped land and through areas of high density residential apartment development. The I 494 free way corridor presents similar land use circumstances.

Sunfish Lake and Mendota Heights: Highway 110 In Sunfish Lake and Mendota Heights east of Rogers Lake Substation there are conceptually two routing options available for the project. The applicants have proposed that the existing 115 kV line be replaced with a double circuit 115 kv transmission line using single pole structures placed at or very near existing structure locations. No new right of way or clearing would be necessary. Sunfish lake is a bedroom community consisting of large lot development. It is a mixed landscape of rolling hills, woodlots, wetlands and large homes that have been developed around the existing transmission line over time. The existing alignment is immediately adjacent to the north shore of Sunfish Lake and passes by 14 homes in Sunfish lake and 8 homes in Mendota Heights, east of Rogers Lake Substation (aerial photos 14 to 19).

The only other linear feature through the area is the Highway 110 corridor shown on aerial photographs 14A to 19A. Conceptually the existing 115 kv transmission line could be left in its existing right of way without modification and the new 115 kv line built on the highway 110 right of way on single circuit structures or, alternatively, a new double circuit transmission line could be built on the highway 110 corridor and the old line removed.

From west to east, the line would leave Rogers Lake Substation and cross a golf course parallel to two other existing 115 kv lines. It would then turn east paralleling the highway 110 corridor to its intersection with I 494. Since the north side of the highway corridor closely abuts areas that are residentially and commercially developed we assume the line would parallel the south side of the right of way. Approximately 30 feet of additional right of way would be required to establish a transmission line along the highway corridor. Approximately 2400 feet of the alignment would be through open fields. The alignment would also pass by two churches fronting highway 110 and 2 homes. Roughly an acre of tree clearing would have to be done to establish necessary electrical clearance for the line. In 2 cases, clearing would reduce the buffer of trees that currently screens residences from highway traffic.

Mendota Heights west of Rogers Lake Substation Routing alternatives west of Rogers Lake Substation are driven by available corridors crossing the Minnesota River Valley. There are three crossings of the valley that currently exist: the existing 115 kv line, the Mendota bridge corridor, and the I 494 bridge corridor. Applicant concluded that existing 115 kv transmission line corridor is the only prudent river valley crossing alternative and, given that routing restriction, there are no practical alternatives to the existing alignment between Rogers Lake Substation and the River Valley.

The Mendota bridge crosses the river valley at the elevation of the valley bluffs. It is a high bridge with the roadway well above the valley floor. The bridge right of way offers no opportunity to mitigate or reduce the right of way and associated clearing necessary for a new transmission corridor. The valley below the bridge is part of Fort Snelling State Park and is a part of the Park that is more actively used than the area of the existing 115 kv alignment. For these reasons the applicant concludes that the Mendota bridge does not represent a prudent routing alternative.

The existing 115 kv transmission alignment crosses the valley south of the Bridge also in Fort Snelling State Park. The line is located in a mixed wooded and wetland area. No additional clearing would be necessary for the new line. Structure locations would be similar to existing structure locations. The aesthetics of the new line would not be materially different than the existing line to Park users since it is well screened from all but a few vantage points.

The I 494 bridge is a low viaduct that passes through a complex of open water wetlands and lakes managed as part of the Lower Minnesota River Valley Wildlife Refuge. The Bridge alignment in this case provides no opportunity to reduce right of way requirements for a parallel transmission line. In addition the alignment would require several structures be placed in wetlands that are currently inaccessible. Therefore construction is likely to be more disruptive, requiring more damage to wetlands than other alternatives. Again, for these reasons the applicant concluded that the I 494 bridge corridor through the Minnesota River Valley was not a prudent option.

Alternate Route ( Includes Alternate Route and Segments of Proposed Route)

Length of Transmission Line by Community

Community Length in feet

Newport 2116

South St. Paul 12000

Inver Grove Heights 10000

Sunfish Lake 7500

Mendota Heights 23,000

Fort Snelling St. Park 8800

Bloomington 19,400

Total 82,816

Cover Types ( Alternate Route)

Section 1. ( Concord Blvd./494 interchange to 494/110 interchange)

Before After

(feet) (feet)

Type 2 to 8 Wetlands 200 200

Wooded/Forest 800 800

Brush/Grassland 10,450 10,450

Cropland 0.0 0.0

Urban/Suburban Lawn 1800 1800

Impervious Surface 1100 1100

Other 0.0 0.0

Total 14,350 14,350

(acres) (acres)

Type 2 to 8 Wetlands 0.46 0.46

Wooded/Forest 0.92 0.92

Brush/Grassland 12.0 12.0

Cropland 0.0 0.0

Urban/Suburban Lawn 2.07 2.07

Impervious Surface 1.26 1.26

Other 0.0 0.0

Total 16.71 16.71

Section 2. ( 494/110 interchange to Rogers Lake substation)

Before After

(feet) (feet)

Type 2 to 8 Wetlands 0.0 0.0

Wooded/Forests 5400 5400

Brush/Grasslands 2000 2000

Cropland 0.0 0.0

Urban/Suburban Lawn 7750 7750

Impervious Surface 600 600

Other 300 300

Total 16,050 16,050

(acres) (acres)

Type 2 to 8 Wetlands 0.0 0.0

Wooded/Forests 6.20 6.20

Brush/Grasslands 2.30 2.30

Cropland 0.0 0.0

Urban/Suburban Lawn 8.90 8.90

Impervious Surface 1.20 1.20

Other 0.0 0.0

Total 18.6 18.6