The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20101005 • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Cedar Creek II, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of BP Wind Energy North America Inc. Wind Energy Generation Facility and 230kV Transmission Line USR-1723 Application Submitted to Weld County for Areas and Activities of State Interest • Prepared for: bP Prepared by: © TITRATKH EC,INC. Submitted May 2009 EXHIBIT Revised September 2009 • Revised January 2010 �l 2010-1005 TETRATECH EC, INC. • Transmittal Cover Sheet To: Chris Gathman, Weld County Planning Department Phone: (970) 353-6100 ext. 3540 From: Sarah Jensen, Tetra Tech EC Date: February 25, 2010 Project: Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project(USR-1723) Subject: Cedar Creek II, LLC Response to Public Works Comments Enclosed please find the response of Cedar Creek II, LLC to Public Works comments received on Friday, February 19, 2010. • • ..�" r) Tel Fax SGS Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments February 2010 Response to Weld County Public Works Department Comments Introduction The Weld County Public Works Department reviewed the submitted application for critical items, including, but not limited to, the Site Plan, Traffic Study, Preliminary Drainage Report, Geotechnical Soils Report, and Flood Hazard Development Permit. Cedar Creek II, LLC (CCII), a wholly owned subsidiary of BP Wind Energy North America Inc. (BPWENA), has prepared the following response to these additional comments. CCII is optimistic that this supplemental information will address all of Weld County's requests. Comments are printed in bold-face type; the responses follow in plain type. Following Board of County Commissioners Hearing 1. A Road Maintenance Agreement for the designated haul route will be required. The maintenance agreement implies that the applicant will be responsible for the maintenance of roads within the project area and bonding to insure repairs and maintenance are kept up to a high level of service. • Response: CCII agrees that responsibility for maintenance will be set forth in a mutually acceptable Road Maintenance Agreement with Weld County and that collateral requirements and level of service will be as agreed therein. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for posting collateral (bonding)to insure road repairs and road maintenance do not impact the level of service for the county roads. Response: CCII understands that it will be required to post collateral for road repairs and maintenance at the amount and in the form agreed upon in the Road Maintenance Agreement, which should be reasonable in both amount and duration. 3. A map showing all approved haul routes will be submitted to Public Works for review and acceptance. Response: CCII has provided Weld County with a preliminary haul route map as part of its response to comments received from Public Works in June 2009 (submitted September 28, 2009). Once CCII has finalized the locations for gravel and water sources needed for this proposed project, CCII plans to finalize its haul routes and submit them to Weld County (Planning and Public Works Departments)for review and acceptance as part of the Road Maintenance Agreement. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 1 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments February 2010 Prior to Recording of the Plat • 1. A Final Drainage report must be submitted to Public Works for review and acceptance. The report must be stamped, signed, and dated by a registered professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado and must address the following items: a. Address all Preliminary Drainage Report red line comments that were returned to the applicant's engineer. Response: CCII agrees to comply with this request. b. Please address the capacity of the WCR 135 culvert to ensure that the release rate from the detention pond does not overtop the road. Response: CCII will address this request as part of our submittal of a Final Drainage Report. c. Please explain in the Final Drainage Report how the runoff generated by the developed condition is less than the runoff generated by the historic condition. Response: CCII agrees to comply with this request. 2. Final construction drawings must be submitted for review and acceptance by Public Works. Upon acceptance by Public Works, the applicant will be required to provide three sets (1 24x36 and 2 11x17) of construction drawings to Public Works. Response: CCII will provide all of the drawings needed to obtain building permits, grading permits, stormwater permits, and right-of-way permits from Weld County as well as any drawings required under the Road Maintenance Agreement. a. The gravel stockpiles need to be shown as Class 5, not Class 5/6. Response: CCII agrees to comply with this request. 3. Weld County Public Works has received a Traffic Study for USR-1723 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm prepared and stamped by Eugene Coppola. After reviewing the submitted traffic study and visiting the project site the following comments must be reviewed and accepted by Public Works. a. The applicant is proposing approximately up to 510 trips per day; with up to 115 peak hour trips during the AM and PM peak hours. Response: As indicated in the traffic study conducted by Gene Coppola, 45 to 115 morning and afternoon peak hour trips and 140 to 510 daily trips can be expected during construction of Cedar Creek. On average, 75 morning and afternoon peak hour trips and 300 daily trips will occur. Page 2 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments February 2010 • b. The traffic study states on page 4 "sight distance analysis at intersections of turbine access roads, haul routes, and county roads will be completed as part of the final project layout." This is unacceptable. The sight distance analysis must be included within the traffic study to determine if any mitigation measures will be required as part of onsite and offsite improvements. Response: CCII will perform a site distance analysis once the final construction plans have been completed, which will be after the Use by Special Review permit has been issued but before the start of construction. CCII has conducted all of the traffic analyses requested by Public Works based on a preliminary road layout. Because of the considerable expense associated with preparing detailed and final engineering work, CCII will not finalize the internal road layout until Weld County has issued the Use by Special Review Permit. The Sight Distance Analysis will require identification of the final road layout. c. All haul routes must be defined prior to the road maintenance agreement. Response: The mutually agreed upon haul routes will be defined in the Road Maintenance Agreement. This agreement will be executed once the Use by Special Review • Permit has been issued. d. Statements on page 10 make the assumption that trucks on gravel roadways travel at an average speed of 30 mph, this is false assumption and should not be used as an assumption. Response: Work site rules will require trucks to limit their speed to 30 mph on Weld County roads. e. Statements on page 12 suggested that passenger vehicles and pickup trucks would not be restricted to haul routes, this is unacceptable. All traffic associated with this project needs to be restricted to the designated haul routes. Response: CCII has gone to considerable effort to develop designated routes for all of the heavy trucks that enter and leave the project site so that Weld County Roads are protected from unnecessary wear and tear. It is our opinion that it will be unnecessary to restrict the transportation routes taken by passenger vehicles (cars and light pick-up trucks), and monitoring and enforcement of any such requirement would be impractical. f. All offsite and onsite improvements must be included within the final construction drawings. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 3 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments February 2010 Response: CCII will provide all of the drawings needed to obtain building permits, grading • permits, stormwater permits, and right-of-way permits from Weld County as well as any drawings required under the Road Maintenance Agreement. g. All radius improvements, temporary construction easements and Right-of-Way easements anticipated as part of this project must be included within the final construction drawings. Response: CCII will provide all of the drawings needed to obtain building permits, grading permits, stormwater permits, and right of way permits, as well as any drawings required under the Road Maintenance Agreement, from Weld County. h. Due to increased traffic volumes during the construction phase of the project; WCR 132 between SH 71 &WCR 135 and WCR 135 between WCR 132 & 130 must be treated with mag-chloride. Response: CCII agrees to comply with this request. i. All other Weld County roadways that are included in the haul route must be treated with water. Response: CCII agrees to comply with this request. j. No parking or staging of commercial vehicles on the county road is allowed. Use on- • site parking area. Response: CCII agrees to comply with this request. k. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has jurisdiction over all State highways. Please contact Gloria Hice-Idler at the Greeley office (970-350-2148 or 970- 350-2163) to verify if any improvements will be required at the intersection of SH 71 with WCR 132 and WCR 120 to accommodate traffic from the Cedar Creek II project. A stop sign will be required to be installed at all project accesses before traffic will enter onto weld county roadways. Response: CCII agrees to comply with this request. • Page 4 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments February 2010 • Prior to Commencement of Construction Activities 1. The applicant shall obtain a grading permit for any project improvements that disturb more than one acre of land. The grading permit application shall include an erosion and sediment control plan, a grading plan, installation details for all BMPs to be used, installation and maintenance notes for all BMPs to be used, and a copy of the stormwater construction permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Please note that construction activities will not be allowed to begin until a grading permit has been issued. Response: CCII agrees to comply with this request 2. The applicant shall obtain overweight and/or over width special transport permits from Public Works for all applicable trucks. Please contact Amy Burry at 970-381-3779 if there are any questions regarding the special transport permits. Response: CCII agrees to comply with this request 3. The applicant shall obtain right of way permits before installation and/or construction of any above ground or buried features in or crossing Weld County road rights-of-way. Response: CCII agrees to comply with this request • 4. The applicant shall provide three gravel stockpile locations and stock each one with 5,000 cubic yards of gravel that can be used for road repairs. Response: CCII will provide the necessary road maintenance as required. CCII will have the proper repair equipment available to gather the gravel from any damaged county roads and use this material, which will be supplemented as necessary from 7 stockpile materials, to repair the road. CCII feels that a single gravel pile of A '01 approximately 1,000 cubic yards is sufficient inventory and will be replenished as necessary to maintain county roads as agreed in the Road Maintenance Agreement. Because CCII will be bringing new gravel supplies in daily, the need for a large inventory is unnecessary. The requested quantity of 15,000 cubic yards of material (three stockpiles of 5,000 cubic yards) is excessive and represents approximately 1,000 dump truck trips (into and out of the project site). CCII estimates that 15,000 cubic yards of gravel equates to approximately 6.4 miles of new roads (16 feet wide and 9 inches deep). CCII proposes that the 1,000 cubic yard gravel pile to be located at the batch plant location. Final selection of the required quantity of materials and the location of stockpile(s)will be defined in the Road Maintenance Agreement. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 5 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments February 2010 5. The applicant shall provide evidence showing that an on-call contractor has been contracted to handle emergency road repairs. Response: CCII's construction contractor will be responsible for emergency repairs to Weld County roads. If Weld County needs to notify CCII or the construction contractor about a road issue, the chain-of-command list for notification is: 1. Project Manager for the Construction Contractor 2. Site Manager for CCII 3. Project Manager for CCII The names and phone numbers of the above individuals will be provided to the Weld County Public Works Department prior to the start of construction and after a construction contractor has been hired and a project team has been assigned. Page 6 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line I al- p_F G? _ M i' G -0 U _ Ill wvH f0 5 03 0 yrW ° a d a H�y ° ° ° m � W IL '' �° c c m o 2 Q N a V ;'- E J J C U u N C ' S_. IX ^ E C C c .4 a, LI C �P ,.o C cti U V LL C O N Ci N y N 04 D o a 3 N N e wwit �/ C N Q N Q N H Y E y ° 0 v 9 1CO te L� x fa Vi a D r ! o ` CV 09 o -, rn m J $ 10 � ra 11J 4) Q Q m U CO ° mIjIi !a v� ii aDli a� •- C_C U U to CN p C C � U �1' IiIllih W aNi :_ _ _ d ov o d ° y md ° `�u- awa p u_ 0_ a 5 a c co NS U I qaa o C C iffiEcn Us c `Ia. 2 ei1_3'. m O 67 0; • i :� tlloSn �3c1 = q as _ L CP a I 11 1 p s • CdSn • H ?L p3� a X,i > J Ii1 _ J a � � • 5 1'- z '' z '; Nz' mcrzz° Mace ' — ..• a i it ' / p • �y rhir/ '1 • i '.v .r: M f$ ) V r • , in ''.. . e _,..4„ •Li i II ---a-:. - .,:! illi LI eii ri :-— 6/ Air Ail + proms n . •l4 'C• ZI I 1_ _• ' I + - / _ •r . .tl' _ L its . . v n . 1 , �. .• ,• , - _ _ 2 Cam_ r 7r __ " _ • •_ —SCR-- —�� - S ..I '- — . .. . . iiii%i ._ _ �'1' _ 4. _ _ _ _ ♦� __SiL�'�— Y loot• Jove. ,i . . . . . . • kiN04., S At. I 14 it 9 Ds r. err 40) ei %ill Lain" pr ,lir?, . a I es I , I" 74 , 1 il- 1 4. i .4„A cc -a — • �� > • rii a. I _ - -. , w ,�" , , fit'- r .A ` =•J. i1 F lie{- ti� v i `yr=- Ahoo . - ,, I I rill,ge.reiI _ lilib r 1 , �If e __ s 1 �c .. I a 4 N i ,• • lee a.- aa • s-el 1 ee _. s - .% , � = r a, .I / . / Via - _ ; i r• I III:. t: , JJ y5; I " o r II n 1 tie l It a • eiI I 13 II • ec M iA. hi 5' � — Dr- 1f III 1�/ �a ' ' z p u it S. 1 I 1 f i1 -J 4, rsla? I 11 intilli ipi CZ i— ei or_.- • 2 �'� if i - 1 s � _. i I y cI jilt q - -SZ_l-a� --� - ___-- ;Zt aD_ 9_,... a'�II✓- \ SZ L.a_�__ ___ I _ - I il I 1 q,r: 1 •'� 1� 1 q� ; ,- . _ w r s 1 - \r--an'n I • vll III • • eI L I1 F ‘'1 • j ` r 1 1yr 1.VI 1 4 1 I I ' 61; gill 4`1 i .1 _ . • - _ . - .• w I spirt - _T — _, II 4 **1111110111 _ ' _ _. II - Ir 1 al: 710 fi y� • J' 17, gat l i 'ale r i yam, �' • • t I I I I `/ .4• Aii . ,- sir, '1 tt • 6C I • ��. '� I I I t • �;4 - l II 1 �� 4o �rooso 1 I z �, ti 1 1' 1 ® rl t f I.--. r_ '11 iiviI } i • 1 .. r4 I �i� i if 3' '4 X51, y Y I1 \ 4 P r V. • Ill i +.. t . ��44 _ q — s - s - -- - - • s • i r f �Y �` I 11 St 1II vi of _ t ` Jr. 1 1 ! -WI ..„1...i b\ ,— F. ... i', .1 ,, t.�t-W' f� i 7 1 j .8' ,, r i e e i li i 41 • II i O if i iI - - .. I 1 II y a • . ! iw F 1 1, a ,II I $ I I 1 T _ >,. t,• 1 • Ii Ili 0 1 I r rasa s i m }h 0 === a o`�s"`�i s 1 J / fI -� _ ... _ I $ 1 II 1 1 II QQ ` tl ID I,. II # \ 4 ill J I so, NO I so,. 1 II _ I I $ , I IL. - I Ili i B Ix 1 � 1 I 1 1 1 0 i "{ .. .o i iit mesa- J;I 1 I ii _--- ir i .. • 1 —-.... _ .--,,- r 4>4/ �[.rjw� w•. �. it 1 ' NZI. i NULL 6 1 V ri 8 c C') _� ap cc rc W /O�// • c ti m m m =c to c c A Sjs L 3 • - ‘t ' 4 , in ..-E e, n o 5 ii o ot c 1 o !s Av> 'a W LL 0 c c m _ t c c E m s a ,k o Y °c - c0 l 0 g m �q J J o o U C ° o nR 3_ y� c c S a E € o o m e m ° a � c c ° g r' ySe arm GQi i N 9 • c z. C p U 5 V U LL (4- N a U E m C al E#6 Yc 9 ro E °� > > > o Nifil E g � H F Y o _ a Q .4re C4 `• N a o c S m c a o E • m ° m m ' tIl v° e; 8 E ' Q Q d y m a N N � or F � p y N �* y in 3 a �n 7n C C C R d a E fi PS € m o 9 E ,C . Q E m 000 U •° n V ?. a N ca'1 VJ J �0 t0 fq S LI gg u •y' O p (n ry 1 , . . 3 co U c a t E um � � O coo y m m m m U g� m ° E o m u € 6 v g $ >1 •2 ro F N g a 73 'Dom m m = a 2 a =-' n 2 0 c ▪ am o r o u `" 8 C fC L@ s m ° a S' € S °E g rn- €, ' 1 w a c= e' i3 c� z � 51 a C W Q W = p aai 4 no a y t m �` C n —° m m g E °vat U� . F 3i a o v �xc 3x� (� ,A 5 4 R iiii o O U U 13 IL tL 2 Is. � d -5 -0 V LT_ a d d `c « N J € Z € d a. -t] oP � ; � � � n e c -am ._ al Ugg � a [� � Z• _ a d seises t i ( C . I co # yr i a -# .e0a • if d n �F�i u ` gF u € >. 9 Ecaeee _ I I . H ' E a � �a� • u C 0 d € a� �B m i iff � F. (2.�mrDUm � goo i ;1 ,5 .;3' aaz Ill r- . �' — - r A " �1 1 `• a • • o as ll l .1'' -----ilirec1 • r O•- • ( . I I V ,.ei . _ ,_ A ' ,,, , ,, i C. — ;911) vs. - , a-f‘r--c , ce - -1.., 4/ T . . :::(5•.- '1.-----"? ‘-' 1 ' U , _ ,II 40 <> . ,. Zr4._____. I . a r• I . lei ' + { ` ere r_ ✓ r Th 1 • ll.c= Q� '} t _ �y r. .Q ,del (a_i' I • r' ,r 4.!.. t - 'r. f ll 4 1,14. I I 4- an. S]f ..H7 ( u /////� - }' •,�� - ' t, t 'l 'r :" - 1 r .. ,_ I 1 I __ , , .1 I ,l -3I I L„.. ., . t .,, . .a Iiir 4 •• ,. iliOll! ,ri ._ _ ., .,.. . , v, . , ., . • ,, ,, . , . , w ____\1/4 -lie --.:' - ? kra - • _ . i • 1 _ aii, , 1 I ill", . iiih.... ov, a. c.;-, 411 il. \ 44444-4 AI I - 41(i. e 4 -ff -N.% tiz3/4, \ 4 is%-' . orr1.---„„.„. • 10 _ ill.{ e e " e /• , I air. I ri ,�`!e !IP . li 1/1" C. .2. el , III'.,.: , is, iv.. ____ ____ _ .k. . ;. k_,__ • CI GP C0 S ID • I 3�-• - I �•sll• -,4r ,y'1 •�f 2 III \I�ii , I �� _. .Sr r �fy t S 1., If:_,...--. Ai...4. AAP di 4____ _ i c• . Altss- --- ---• Fr 0 a a ,•;, ,,e5-i _ i \ _ _. .., . , gip - -‘-dr) ? ? 1 -, :i - 111114IIMIN il - PA , a A• 1 ..._ . Ei.I /Z II 1 F _._. — SIsl. 7.=-__: _ Ill , _ ..." ,riki1 r s` II al d.v14 1`� , 4 _ g k . 1 1 � ,� �, [ •1 •r� IP- 1 ' l PI' - I �- f _ -1, t W —__ a � - 1.rT-'s:yet se r p r Lc GG Hotrii::%::::ita.".„..{:. :::,_is_alfzoolii.„ d :i.yiic ssems8 91 "J k.' 37 t cc II sloe . / s Sr f 1 fly ii2a nal as, at Ht 1 i'-'- I ::.II. I 1 1 l ' ppp-I el *ft ! / � _ s1. / �' a- -�21 —r -- -tj " — _ Lt a- I zt a� iii? Ill )1 1 Pi Pi' ,_ iii u '1j; r a I 1' =T• ',p - - SZta� _ - • 9LL -� ( SLta_ --- - -� it - • ! o - - .� , ; _ ; • 11 J ! _ c _ la 3 I 1 3 - -} O O- .f-' 11 :rei• t `' • In 160 s e- _ _ .• Illtre i. . ‘.; il i i . 4 . WHN o 0 • r i lt _ , I. . _ ____,, 'fp , „ i , , i I ... • . 74f,, 1 r ci 1 , � ,, ��• , ... ,_ ,_ _ , . ,. _ 4 , ILI" ; It, • ? )11" r i I i _ ,4..yr t _I 'c . . \ (. - --) " - .‘ Ai liglaillib -I I. •-• I e i Ill; ... A ,_____ , . „1 , c ._ il _ 2.. i . 2.4 _,..... 1.:: .. e \ jari 1 r - __ : F 111111w: is .4„,„ . _ i...v . , .? - --) , 1 IL i • is _ - S C\ 'I 1 .� i. o tr.,, t _ f)+' r • ! r,. -..., a El ir----, ..., . /. . JO iii y Sys, / 1 "-. - ill• , • - - a c ' l , - 4 -,- r I , r ao— ` — 4 \\,i f r 1 cc j, i iill 43 33 .- ' 1 :, , iii • a _, i _ef I + n 9 4 t I , _ , L 4 . d in I -„ di 1 ' J-r, •I 10 __L I a �, SOt a� a 1 sot �ll __ 1� �I �_ �; ' .: Noir et r� SUl yl a -- "s3 ode a as en o t liti rt. s ‘- Illikkiiirl1asso ` t Syr( I • Will lir Ara 4114 ••• Ollak NLtl Nttl • N61 From: Snmalez David • To: Clayton D. Kimmi; David Bauer; Janet Carter; Donald Carroll; Chris Gathman; Trevor Jiricek; Cohen. Matthew; Gray. Jamie 0. NPR Associates); Randolph. Kimberly Cc: Jensen Sarah; Miller. Rachel Subject: RE: Recap of Cedar Creek II Meeting on February 11, 2010 Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 910:55 AM Clay, As a quick clarification: • While our original application was for 300 MW's, we are hopeful that the first phase of the project will be 250 MW's and the drawings that were provided by Tetratech last week reflect this 1st 250 MW phase of a possible 300 MW total project. Since we only intend to have 1 staging area, batch plant, substation, and O&M building for each phase, the drawings submitted by tetratech reflect our plans for the 1st phase. • Please note that we've hired Tetratech to help us with our local permit application but they have not been involved with our road use discussions so far. Since the road use issues have both a schedule and cost impact to our project, Tetratech is not in a position to discuss the road use issues so any concerns with the use of the roads should be directed to BP Wind. We're working on providing Weld County with a road use agreement using the form that was provided late last year by Weld County and hope to have an agreement for your review within the next few days. After you've had a chance to review the agreement, we will continue our discussions on the specifics of the road use agreement including gravel storage locations, volumes, etc. • • I'm a little confused by your comment on the haul route map. We still intend to use the haul routes that were proposed last summer, and from our discussions with Public Works, thought that these haul routes were acceptable. The only modifications to the haul routes that could occur would be if the sources of gravel or water are different than what was proposed last summer. • Finally, while we've requested bids from a general contractor, who in turn has requested bids from the major subcontractors, we have not selected a construction contractor yet so any discussions with subcontractors about the use of the roads was highly speculative and exploratory from the subcontractors point of view. In other words, the subcontractors did not know how important it is to stick to the agreed upon haul routes. While we did share the haul route information with the general contractors, we don't know if the general contractors shared this information with the subcontractor while they were preparing their bids. I'd like to reassure you that we fully intend to make this a significant issue during our contract negotiations and we will address this with our general contractor. In other words, we fully intend to utilize the haul routes into and out of our project area that were proposed and will require our contractors and subcontractors to use the approved routes as well. • Finally, I'll let our engineers know that only 2 access points are allowed for a single parcel of land in Weld County, and we will plan to work with this requirement for the batch plant, staging area, and substation area. Thanks for your help on our proposed application. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (713) 254-2138 or on my cell phone at (832) 434-9338. • Sincerely David Gonzalez, P.E. BP Wind Energy North America Inc. • 700 Louisiana St., 33rd Floor Houston, TX 77002 e-mail: david.gonzalez2@bp.com Phone: (713) 354-2138 Cell: (832) 434-9338 nwv .bpalternativenergy.com This e-mail and any attachments hereto is/are intended for the sole and exclusive use by the intended recipient(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged, trade secret and/or other confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachments hereto, is strictly prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me, at 713.354.2138, and permanently delete the original and any e-mail or printout copies thereof. From: Clayton D. Kimmi [mailto:CKimmi@co.weld.co.us] Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 8:51 AM To: David Bauer; Janet Carter; Donald Carroll; Clayton D. Kimmi; Chris Gathman; Trevor Jiricek Cc: Sarah Jensen@tetratech.com; rachel.miller@tetratech.com; Gonzalez, David Subject: Recap of Cedar Creek II Meeting on February 11, 2010 • Importance: High All, Below is a summary of the discussions that we had between Weld County and Tetra Tech in the February 11, 2010 meeting. The meeting was attended by Clay Kimmi,Janet Carter, and Chris Gathman from Weld County. Sara Jensen and Rachel Miller from Tetra Tech were representing Cedar Creek II. The meeting lasted approximately 20 minutes. Tetra Tech presented a new packet of maps. The maps had been revised to remove the phasing from the project. The project will now include only 1 phase. Tetra Tech provided a map showing the revised turbine corridors. Public Works asked to see a map of the 3 gravel stockpile locations that are to be included. Tetra Tech indicated that they were under the impression that those locations did not have to be determined at this point and would only need to be included in the road improvements agreement. Public Works informed Tetra Tech that those locations needed to be identified prior to the hearing so that they could be discussed in the upcoming hearings. Public Works asked to see a revised map of the haul routes. The haul route map that was presented is not clear on what the exact haul routes will be. Public Works informed Tetra Tech that all parties involved with the project including BP, Mortenson, and any subcontractors need to be informed of the approved haul routes. Public Works indicated that they had received several phone calls from subcontractors who were intending to utilize haul routes different that the one presented by BP. Public Works indicated that more than 21,000 truckloads of gravel would be required for the project and the County's gravel roads could not handle that level of truck traffic. Public Works reiterated that all contractors were to utilize Highway 71 as the haul route to the batch plant and substation. Tetra Tech was informed that the 3 proposed access to the batch plant and substation area were not acceptable. Generally, the County only allows one access per parcel. Public Works indicated that it might be possible to grant two accesses but Cedar Creek II would need to justify the need for two accesses. Clay Kimmi, P.E., CFM Drainage and Floodplain Engineer 1111 H Street Greeley, CO 80632 (970) 304-6496 x 3741 1 1 bp BP Wind Energy 0 David Gonzalez BP Wind Energy North America Inc. 700 Louisiana,33'd Floor Houston,TX 77002 Direct: 713-354-2138 Direct Fax:713-354-2120 Email:david.gonzalez2@bp.com January 21, 2010 Chris Gathman, Planner III Weld County Department of Planning Services 918 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Use by Special Review Permit for a Wind Energy Generation • Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Resubmittal Dear Mr. Gathman, Thank you for all of your assistance on our application for a Use by Special Review(USR) permit for our proposed Cedar Creek II wind farm. We have reviewed the comments from Weld County's referral agencies including the Weld County Environmental Health Services Department, Weld County Public Works Department, Colorado Division of Wildlife, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Revisions to the temporary batch plant USR are also submitted. Also provided is the preliminary drainage report and transportation study as requested by Weld County Public Works. On behalf of Cedar Creek II, LLC, I'm pleased to provide you with four copies of the responses to these comments, including attachments, and one electronic copy of all materials. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (713) 354-2138 or on my cell phone at(832)434-9338. Thanks again for all of your help. Sincerely, IC ,l • David Gonzalez, P.E. • Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 Response to Weld County Comments Introduction Cedar Creek II, LLC (Cedar Creek), a wholly owned subsidiary of BP Wind Energy North America Inc. (BPWENA)submitted a 1041 Permit application to Weld County, Colorado, on May 20, 2009, for the Cedar Creek II Wind Farm. On June 2, 2009, Weld County Environmental Health, Planning, and Public Works Departments provided completeness review comments regarding this application. Cedar Creek II, LLC provided a response to these comments on September 28, 2009. After a review of Cedar Creek II, LLC September 28th response, Weld County provided additional comments, which were received on December 2009. Cedar Creek II, LLC has prepared the following response to these additional comments. Cedar Creek II, LLC is optimistic that this supplemental information will address all of Weld County's requests. Comments are printed in bold-face type; the responses follow in plain type. Environmental Health General 1. Portable toilets, hand washing units and bottled water can be utilized during construction of the facility and associated turbines and transmission line. • Response: During construction, drinking water will be trucked to the construction site by the construction contractor. Sanitary portable toilets, including hand washing units, will be provided during the construction period and a regular cleaning service will be scheduled. 2. Permanent water and sewer is required for the operations and maintenance building. The application indicates that a well will be installed prior to the start of the commercial aspect of the facility. A septic system will also be installed to serve the operations and maintenance building. The septic system shall be designed by an engineer and sized to accommodate the maximum number of employees on site. Response: The septic system associated with the operations and maintenance building will be designed by an engineer and sized to accommodate the maximum number of employees on site. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 1 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 3. The application indicates that water will be trucked in for dust control during construction, • for the concrete batch plants and the temporary construction sites. Since an individual well will be provided for the operations and maintenance building, trucked in water for temporary uses is sufficient. A detailed dust control is required for onsite dust after construction is completed. Response: A dust control plan will be submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment—Air Pollution Control Division (CDPHE—APCD)for review and approval prior to construction by either Cedar Creek II, LLC or one of its contractors. Once construction has been completed, and before vegetation has been reestablished, some minor amount of additional fugitive dust emissions could occur. The amount of additional dust would be monitored by Cedar Creek II, LLC and appropriate action would be taken to control the dust and ensure that potential wind erosion is minimized. An erosion control/stormwater management plan will be developed and implemented to prevent sediment input to the drainages within the overall Project Area. The plan will be designed to meet the requirements of the CDPHE Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit. Measures associated with this plan will be implemented during Project construction and any future maintenance activities associated with the wind energy facility, transmission line, and switching station. Wastewater from construction operations will be handled in accordance with the U.S. Corps of Engineers . Nationwide Permit 12 and CDPHE—Water Quality Control Division (CDPHE—WQCD) permit discharge requirements. Erosion mitigation measures will include the use of one or more devices such as temporary berms, slope drains, diversion mounds, or sedimentation basins, as appropriate. Silt fences will be used to prevent sediment from entering wetlands or open water. Temporary drainage control will also be implemented as appropriate to aid in controlling erosion and sedimentation. 4. A waste handling plan is required and should include the name, address and phone number of the waste removal company. The plan should indicate how any waste associated with the facility is disposed of. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC or its contractors would submit a waste handling plan to the Environmental Health Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment for approval prior to beginning construction activities. The plan would include the following: 1. A list of wastes that are expected to be generated on site, including expected volumes and types of waste generated 2. A list of the type and volume of chemicals expected to be stored on site Page 2 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 • 3. The name of the waste handler and facility where any waste would be disposed (including the facility name, address, and phone number) Specific We recommend that the following requirements be met prior to allowing the plat to be recorded: 1. The applicant shall submit a dust abatement plan, on site dust,for review and approval, to the Environmental Health Services, Weld County Department of Public Health & Environment. Response: Prior to initiating Project construction activities, Cedar Creek II, LLC or one of its contractors will submit a dust control plan to the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment for review and approval. 2. The applicant shall submit evidence of an Air Pollution Emission Notice (A.P.E.N.) and Emissions Permit application from the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of Health and Environment for the concrete batch plants and any other operations required by CDPHE to have an APEN. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC or one of its contractors will provide evidence of an APEN and • Emissions Permit application from CDPHE—APCD for the concrete batch plant to Weld County prior to the initiation of construction activities. 3. In the event washing of vehicles or equipment will occur on site the applicant shall ensure that any washing areas shall capture all effluent and prevent discharges from the washing of vehicles in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Water Quality Control Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Washing areas should be designated on the plat. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC will ensure that the washing areas capture all effluent and prevent discharges from the washing of vehicles in accordance with the rules and regulations of the CDPHE—WQCD and the Environmental Protection Agency. 4. The applicant shall submit written evidence from the Colorado Division of Water Resources, demonstrating that an individual well is or can be appropriately permitted for the commercial use. Response: Appropriate well permits would be obtained prior to construction. A copy of any obtained well permits will be provided to the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment. Information regarding permitting of commercial wells is available at the Colorado Division of Water Resources (DWR)website (http://water.state.co.us/groundwater/groundwater.asp). There is no indication that a • groundwater well permit would be difficult to obtain for the proposed commercial use, Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 3 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 which would be limited to drinking water, showers, and sanitary use. The proposed • commercial water well would not be located in a basin designated by the Colorado Ground Water Commission, nor would it be located within the Denver Basin, so the well would not be subject to review and approval by the Colorado Ground Water Commission. In addition, the commercial water well would not require a pumping rate greater than 15 gallons per minute and would, therefore, qualify for exempt commercial status. A commercial water well similar to the one proposed for the Cedar Creek II Wind Farm was obtained from the DWR for the existing Cedar Creek Wind Farm (#271293, Receipt#3609630). This well was constructed in 2007 and is currently in use. 5. The applicant shall submit a waste handling plan, for approval, to the Environmental Health Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public Health & Environment. The plan shall include at a minimum, the following: 1. A list of wastes which are expected to be generated on site (this should include expected volumes and types of waste generated, including lube oil). 2. A list of the type and volume of chemicals expected to be stored on site. 3. The waste handler and facility where the waste will be disposed (including the facility name, address, and phone number). Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC or one of its contractors would submit a waste handling plan to . the Environmental Health Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment for approval prior to beginning construction activities. The plan would include the following: 1. A list of wastes that are expected to be generated on site, including expected volumes and types of waste generated 2. A list of the type and volume of chemicals expected to be stored on site 3. The name of the waste handler and facility where any waste would be disposed (including the facility name, address, and phone number) We recommend that the following requirement be incorporated into the permit as a condition that must be met prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy: 1. An individual sewage disposal system is required for the operations and maintenance building and shall be installed according to the Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. Response: Comment noted. Page 4 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 • We recommend that the following requirement be incorporated into the permit as a condition that must be met one month prior to construction activities: 1. A stormwater discharge permit may be required for a construction site where a contiguous or non-contiguous land disturbance is greater than or equal to one acre in area. Contact the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment at www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/PermitsUnit for more information. Response: Comment noted. We recommend that the following requirements be incorporated into the permit as development standards: 1. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30 20 100.5, C.R.S., as amended) shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that protects against surface and groundwater contamination. Response: Comment noted. 2. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. This is not meant to include those wastes specifically excluded from the definition of a solid waste in the Solid • Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30 20 100.5, C.R.S., as amended. Response: Comment noted. 3. Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that controls fugitive dust, fugitive particulate emissions, blowing debris, and other potential nuisance conditions. Response: Comment noted. 4. The applicant shall operate in accordance with the approved "waste handling plan", at all times. Response: Comment noted. 5. Fugitive dust and fugitive particulate emissions shall be controlled along the construction route as well as after construction is completed. The facility shall be operated in accordance with the approved "dust abatement plan", at all times. Response: Comment noted. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 5 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 6. Adequate toilet facilities (portable toilets) and handwashing units shall be provided during • construction of the project. Response: Comment noted. 7. Bottled water shall be utilized for drinking during construction of the project. Response: Comment noted. 8. A permanent, adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary purposes for the permanent facility. Response: Comment noted. 9. Adequate drinking, handwashing and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees and patrons of the facility, at all times. Response: Comment noted. 10. This application is proposing a well as its source of water. The applicant should be made aware that while they may be able to obtain a well permit from the Office of the State Engineer, Division of Water Resources, the quantity of water available for usage may be limited to specific uses, i.e. domestic use only, etc. Also, the applicant should be made aware that groundwater may not meet all drinking water standards as defined by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. We strongly encourage the applicant to test their drinking water prior to consumption and periodically test it over time. Response: Comment noted. 11. Sewage disposal for the permanent facility shall be by septic system. Any septic system located on the property must comply with all provisions of the Weld County Code, pertaining to Individual Sewage Disposal Systems. Response: Comment noted. 12. This facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Industrial Zone as delineated in Section 14-9-30 of the Weld County Code. Response: Comment noted. Page 6 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 • 13. Any vehicle or equipment washing areas shall capture all effluent and prevent discharges from drum washing and the washing of vehicles in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Water Quality Control Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Response: Comment noted. 14. All chemicals must be stored secure, on an impervious surface, and in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations. Response: Comment noted. 15. If applicable, the applicant shall obtain a stormwater discharge permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, Water Quality Control Division. Response: Comment noted. 16. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the State and Federal agencies and the Weld County Code. Response: Comment noted. Weld County Public Works Department Potential Haul Routes: As discussed in previous meetings with the applicant, Public Works will require (as a condition of a complete application)that the applicant provide written proof of the impacted entity that the applicant contact those organizations regarding surety road maintenance agreement or other requirements that may be improved regarding BP's use of road or other facilities maintained or owned by the following entities: • Kimball County, Nebraska • Laramie County, Wyoming • Department of Defense (US Air Force) • Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) The applicant has provided documentation through meeting notes, list of attendees and/or email, and additional requirements associated with their haul routes. Response: Comment noted. Batch Plant Sites/Substation Locations: Public Works indicated that each site would be site- specific. The applicant has provided three site locations for each of the three phases identifying locations of the batch plants, laydown areas, and staging areas, parking, construction trailers. All of these items need to be indicated on the plat drawing. Also, identify the approximate location of the substations, show topography, silt fencing, stormwater • retention areas these will need to have individual stormwater permits and drainage reports. Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 7 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 Response: As a follow-up to subsequent conversations with Weld County, Cedar Creek II, LLC is • submitting with these supplemental application materials a revised batch plant application, preliminary drainage report, and transportation study based on single project to be constructed to a capacity of 250 megawatts. The detail requested is included in these supplemental materials. Permits: The applicant is aware of the State and County permitting process for overweight/over width special transport permits. In addition, the applicant is aware of the permits required to use or cross Weld County rights-of-way, including transmission lines and buried cables. A right-of-way permit is required prior to installation and construction of any above ground or buried features in or crossing Weld County road rights-of-way. In many areas, the County has right-of-way on either side of the section line even where there is no maintained public built roads (section line access) Contact Amy Burry at 970-381-3779 for these permits or Leon Sievers at 970-304-6496, extension 3785 to verify existing County rights-of-way adjacent to County section lines. Response: Comment noted. Cedar Creek II, LLC will contact Amy Burry or Leon Sievers to verify existing Weld County rights-of-way adjacent to Weld County section lines prior to installation and construction of any aboveground or buried features in or crossing Weld County road rights-of-way. Road Maintenance Agreement: The Weld County Public Works Department will require the applicant to enter into a Road Maintenance Agreement for the designated haul route. The maintenance agreement implies that the applicant will be responsible for the maintenance of roads within the project area and bonding to insure repairs and maintenance are kept up to a high level of service. Response: Comment noted. Per conversation with Weld County on December 21, 2009, the road maintenance agreement will be completed following approval by the Board of County Commissioners. Traffic Study: A Traffic Study was not submitted by the applicant. The Traffic Study must address any impacts to the county roadways that will be utilized by the proposed project. Including but not limited to any modifications to the roadways that could potential affect general maintenance, school bus routes, or the traveling public. Response: Comment noted. A transportation study is included with the resubmittal materials. Storm Water Drainage: The applicant has indicated that a drainage report will be submitted with the final engineering drawings. Submittal of a drainage report with the final engineering drawings is not acceptable. Each batch plant and substation will need to have individual storm water permits, grading permits, drainage reports, and storm water detention. The drainage report for each batch plant and substation will have to address all the items listed in the preliminary and final drainage checklists that are included with each USR application. The drainage reports must also address how drainage will be handled at each lay down and staging area. • Page 8 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 • Response: Comment noted. A preliminary drainage report for the batch plant and substation for this initial 250-megawatt project is included with the resubmittal materials. The preliminary drainage reports must be submitted to Public Works prior to the Planning Commission Hearing. Public Works must have adequate time (approximately 28 days)to review the preliminary drainage reports and provide comments. Response: Comment noted. A preliminary drainage report is provided with the resubmittal materials. Grading Permits: The applicant has indicated that grading permits will be obtained from Weld County Public Works. Grading permits will be required for batch plants, substations, staging and lay down areas. It should be noted that a grading permit will not be issued until all issues including but not limited to those listed below have been resolved and a set of acceptable construction plans have been provided to Public Works. 1. An erosion control plan has been reviewed and accepted by Public Works. The erosion control plan is to include a State approved stormwater management plan, erosion control installation and maintenance details, and an acceptable grading plan. • Response: Comment noted. 2. A final drainage report for all batch plants, substations, lay down and staging areas have been accepted by Public Works. Response: Comment noted. 3. All batch plants, substations, lay down and staging areas must be identified and be shown on an acceptable map. Response: Comment noted. 4. Final construction drawings for all batch plants, substations, lay down and staging areas must be provided and accepted by Public Works. Response: Comment noted. 5. A final traffic study that has been reviewed and accepted by Public Works. Response: Comment noted. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 9 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 6. An improvements agreement must be signed and collateral for the entire project and for • individual sites must be posted. Response: Comment noted. Per conversation with Weld County on December 21, 2009, the road maintenance agreement will be completed following approval by the Board of County Commissioners. 7. Gravel stockpile locations for road repairs must be identified and stocked with gravel. Response: Comment noted. Per conversation with Weld County on December 21, 2009, the gravel stockpile locations for road repairs will be included within the road maintenance agreement. 8. Evidence showing that an on-call contractor has been contracted to handle emergency road repairs. Response: Comment noted. 9. Evidence showing that the applicant has received the required transportation and right of way permits. Response: Comment noted. 10. Evidence showing that the applicant has received the required access permits. • Response: Comment noted. 11. A map showing all approved haul routes. Response: Comment noted. Construction activities will not be allowed to begin until a grading permit has been issued. Response: Comment noted. Colorado Department of Wildlife BP has delineated 1000-ft wide corridors where turbines would be constructed after final decisions are made on turbine size and placement. BP has located the corridors to comply with recommendations for setbacks from nesting raptors, which is a chief concern for CDOW. Because of the size of the turbines and the blades, and the fact that the blades can "feather" to utilize wind from different directions, it is possible that a turbine placed at the edge of a corridor could have its blades extending into the buffer zone of a nest. CDOW requests: • that the turbines in their entirety be limited to the corridors. • a review of actual turbine locations before the plan is finalized. • Page 10 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 • Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC understands that the chief concern of the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW)to be the potential for the turbine blades to reach into the recommended setback buffers from raptor nests. To address this concern, Cedar Creek II, LLC will take into consideration the placement of the turbine in relation to buffers, the prevailing wind direction, and the likelihood for the turbine blades to extend into the setback buffer zone before the final placement of the turbines is decided. Other limiting factors that Cedar Creek II, LLC must also consider in turbine placement include safety setback restrictions, property line setbacks, and constructability factors among other things. In most cases, turbines will be placed so that no part of the turbine structure will extend into the recommended setbacks; however, in a worst-case scenario, a turbine blade could potentially extend into a 0.25 mile (1,320 feet) setback or a 0.50 mile (2,640 ft) setback by 114 to 135 feet depending upon the turbine selected. Cedar Creek II, LLC does not anticipate this being an issue in turbine placement but will continue consultation with the CDOW, including sharing an array of turbine placements. Because individual turbine locations will be evaluated considering the setbacks from raptor nests, we do not see the need to uniformly restrict the 1,000-foot corridors as they currently exist. The expansion project will require construction of about 20 miles of transmission line for Phase 1, a 230-kV line that would connect to the substation at Cedar Creek 1. The new line would cross one drainage and would come within 0.5 mi of a golden eagle nest. CDOW requests that: • • Construction of this section of line be performed in the period between July 15 and December 15. • a survey for sharp-tailed grouse and raptors be performed along the route for the transmission line route. This has been performed for the proposed wind facility site. Response: If project construction occurs during the nesting season, an additional raptor nest survey will be completed to confirm the location of active golden eagle nests and other raptor nests. To the maximum extent practicable, construction of the length of transmission line that falls within 0.5 mile of an active golden eagle nest will be timed to occur between July 15 and December 15. Should the construction of the transmission line occur during the golden eagle nesting season, additional consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)and CDOW will follow. Construction of the transmission line will comply with the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee guidelines of 2006 (Suggested Practices for Avian Protection on Power Lines: The State of the Art in 2006). Sharp-tailed grouse lek surveys were conducted in 2007 and 2008 from county roads. No leks were observed within the project area. The transmission line falls outside the sharp-tailed grouse range identified by the CDOW. Because we have already conducted the sharp-tailed grouse survey and did not find any evidence of the sharp-tailed grouse, we do not feel that another sharp-tailed grouse survey is warranted. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 11 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 The project would require an onsite batch plant for the concrete pads. • • CDOW recommends that any associated fluids be contained in tanks rather than open pits. Response: Storage facilities will include 50,000 gallons of water stored in 10,000- to 20,000-gallon plastic tanks; a 93,000-ton steam-heated aggregate storage area; and an 11,000-cubic-foot cement storage area in a combination of upright bins, as well as 4,200-cubic-foot storage bins. Diesel or propane fuel for a 15,000-to 20,000-gallon water heater will be stored on site. Typically, the concrete trucks are sprayed down with water prior to leaving the project site (turbine foundations sites) and the water will be allowed to run on the ground, which may result in a small amount of concrete collecting on the ground. As part of our rehabilitation of the batch plant area and the turbine foundation construction locations, we will remove any waste concrete on the ground and restore the land to conditions that were similar to the pre-construction conditions. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Specific Comments 1. pg. 10, Table 3—Transmission Line Route Evaluation; we are concerned that the proposed transmission line route crosses within 0.5 mile of golden eagle nests. Eagles have special protection under the BGEPA beyond the MBTA; for example, the BGEPA protects eagles from disturbance/anything that may impact the productivity/success of the nest, adults, . young, their foraging, etc. BP Wind Energy has indicated they are willing to implement construction timing constraints near these nests (see pg. 57 of the subject Application). However, the proposed transmission line route is less than 0.5 mile from one or more golden eagle nests, which does not adhere to the Colorado Division of Wildlife's (CDOW) recommended 0.5 mile buffer for golden eagle nests that the Service considers a minimum. Consequently, my staff has encouraged further discussion with BP Wind Energy in order for BP to avoid/minimize project impacts to these eagle nests. Response: The Cedar Creek II, LLC transmission line will be located 0.38 mile from the nearest golden eagle nest. This distance exceeds the recommended 0.25-mile surface occupancy buffer from active nests recommended in CDOW's Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for Colorado Raptors. This document also recommends a 0.50-mile seasonal restriction for human encroachment. Cedar Creek II, LLC will, to the maximum extent practicable as allowed by the construction schedule defined in the PPA, comply with the 0.50-mile seasonal restriction for human encroachment during construction of the transmission line. Consultation will continue with the USFWS to address appropriate management. 2. pg. 27, last paragraph. "The transmission line structure specifications would... "; there is no mention of Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC) guidelines being implemented for raptor protection. The Service strongly recommends that BP follow the latest APLIC guidelines, "Suggested Practices for Avian Protection on Power Lines: The • Page 12 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 • State of the Art in 2006",when constructing transmission lines as well as associated collection lines for the Project. APLIC guidelines were not followed for one or more collection lines on the Cedar Creek I Project, which resulted in electrocution of a golden eagle in July 2009. Response: The 2006 Avian Power Line Interaction Committee Guidelines will be followed for the construction of the transmission line and any aboveground collection line within the Cedar Creek II project boundary. 3. pg. 29, last paragraph, on gravel and water use; if the Project has a federal nexus, e.g., a USACE Nationwide Permit, and water for the Project would come from the Platte River Basin (for concrete, dust suppression, etc.), the USACE will need to formally consult, under section 7 of the ESA, with the Service for project impacts to listed species downstream in Nebraska. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC and/or our approved contractor will obtain all necessary permits, including Clean Water Act permits, if needed, prior to the start of construction. 4. pg. 30, Table 5 and pg. 31, Table 6—Projected Development Schedule; the tables indicate that construction would occur from March through October. The Service recommends that project activities occur outside of the nesting season (approximately February-July, and • later for burrowing owls) so as not to disturb migratory birds that may nest in or near the project area. If this is not possible, the applicant should conduct pre-construction surveys for all nesting migratory birds within suitable habitat in the project area, and time construction to avoid activities within appropriate buffer zone(s) of any active nests until after the young have fledged. Efforts to identify and avoid nesting birds, nests, and their young do not assure that project operations, as enabled by your approval of the subject Project,will not result in adverse effects to eagles and other migratory birds. The MBTA prohibits taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of all migratory birds (e.g., ground nesting birds, raptors, etc.), their eggs, parts, and nests, except when specifically authorized by the Department of the Interior. Unlike the ESA, neither the MBTA nor its implementing regulations (50 CFR Part 21) provide for permitting "incidental take" of migratory birds. Response: To the maximum extent practicable, construction will be timed to fall between July 15 and December 15. Construction of the project will be dependant on the timeline defined in a Power Purchase Agreement with a utility provider and cannot be defined until the power has been contracted. However, if construction must occur during the nesting season, Cedar Creek II, LLC will conduct surveys in advance of construction and will consult with the USFWS and CDOW to determine appropriate human encroachment buffers for sensitive species. 5. pg. 38, 21-3-330.B.5.1 —Wind Energy Facility; the 7th bullet says towers shall be located at least"150 feet from the tip of the turbine blade to escarpment features where raptor nests • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 13 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 have been indentified". The Service suggests this may be a typographical error and • instead should be a minimum, standard setback along the entire escarpment whether or not nests occur, as the 8th bullet describes greater setbacks (per CDOW) from identified raptor nests. Furthermore, the Service believes a 0.5 mile setback is likely inadequate for golden eagle nests and has expressed our concern to BP; my staff is currently engaged in discussions with BP Wind Energy in order for BP to avoid/minimize project impacts to golden eagles and their nests as well as other raptor nests. Response: To the maximum extent practicable and where Cedar Creek II, LLC is not limited by other land use constraints (e.g. property line setbacks), turbines will be sited 150 feet from the tip of the blade to the escarpment features where raptor nests have been identified. In many case, turbine setbacks, including their blade tips will exceed this distance. Cedar Creek II, LLC is sensitive to the protected status of the golden eagle and consequently has applied 0.50-mile buffers to active nests, as recommended by the CDOW and USFWS, as well as inactive nests that could provide alternate nesting in future years. Cedar Creek II, LLC will continue consultation with the USFWS to minimize impacts to eagles. 6. pg. 40, 21-3-330.B.6, Wind Energy Facility; this section said that 36 active and inactive raptor nests were identified, and CDOW's recommended setbacks were implemented. This does not appear to correlate with Appendix I—Cedar Creek II Environmental and Resource Study Executive Summaries, Avian Baseline Studies, which said that 28 active and 28 inactive raptor nests were documented at and near the Project during 2008. Because maps and other data providing specifics, e.g., on raptor species and nest locations, were not provided in the Application or separately to the Service, the Service is not able to comment fully on the Project's effects on raptors as well as other migratory birds. Additionally, as stated above, eagles have special protection under the BPEPA beyond the MBTA; for example, the BGEPA protects eagles from disturbance/anything that may impact the productivity/success of the nest, adults, young, their foraging, etc. Also, as stated on pg. 40, due to possible preconstruction shifting of individual turbines within the proposed 1,000 foot corridors, some of the wind turbines could be located 0.5 mile or less from one or more golden eagle nests,which does not follow CDOW's recommended 0.5 mile buffer for golden eagle nests that the Service considers a minimum. My staff has expressed our concerns to BP Wind Energy and encouraged BP to meet with the Service and discuss additional data collection and avoidance/mitigation measures that BP can implement for golden eagles nesting in or near the project area. Response: To clarify, raptor nest surveys were conducted in 2007 and 2008 within the Cedar Creek II project and a 2-mile buffer around the project boundary. A total of 28 active nests were identified within or in the vicinity of the project boundary. Only 16 active nests were located within the 38,000-acre project boundary in 2008. Of these, two were active golden eagle nests. The 1,000-foot corridors were developed based on setbacks applied to both active and inactive nests identified during 2007 and 2008 surveys. At a minimum, turbines will be located 0.50 mile away from the active and • Page 14 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 • inactive golden eagle nests. In most instances the turbines will be sited more than 0.50 mile away from eagle nests. 7. pg. 41, 21-3-330.6.6, Transmission Line; BP Wind Energy has indicated they are willing to implement construction timing constraints near these golden nests. However, the proposed transmission line route is less than 0.5 mile from the nests, which does not adhere to CDOW's recommended 0.5 mile buffer for golden eagle nests that the Service considers a minimum. Again, my staff is currently providing recommendations to BP Wind Energy so that BP can avoid/minimize project impacts to these eagle nests. Response: The transmission line, while within 0.50 mile of a golden eagle nest, complies with the CDOW's Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for Colorado Raptors which recommends a 0.25-mile surface occupancy buffer from active nests. Cedar Creek II, LLC will, to the maximum extent practicable, comply with the seasonal restriction for human encroachment of 0.50 mile during construction of the transmission line. Consultation will continue with the USFWS to address appropriate management. 8. pg. 49, 21-3-330.C.2—Vegetation /Wind Energy Facility; this section states that the Project would probably require a USAGE Nationwide Permit. If so, as stated above, if the Project plans to use water from the Platte River Basin (for concrete, dust suppression, etc.), the • USAGE will need to formally consult with the Service for project impacts to listed species downstream in Nebraska. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC and/or our approved contractor will obtain all necessary permits, including Clean Water Act permits, if needed, prior to the start of construction. 9. pg. 55-56,Wind Energy Facility; the bottom of pg. 55 said that escarpments within the project area as well as the occasional tree or shelter belt could provide suitable nesting habitat for raptors such as ferruginous hawk, prairie falcon, golden eagle, etc. However, BP has stated in meetings with my staff that these and other species/their nests have been confirmed in the project area. Then, the first paragraph on pg. 56 said another season of raptor nest surveys would be conducted prior to construction to locate new nests and "relocate previously identified nests". It was unclear what was meant by "relocate"; BP would need to apply for and be issued a take permit by the Service before an eagle nest can be lawfully removed/relocated or destroyed. Other raptors' nests can only be removed outside of the nesting season (before the first egg is laid and after the last fledgling has left the nest). On pg. 56, 1st bullet, the Service provided comments to BP last March 2009 on the draft environmental components for the subject Application,which included a recommendation that BP pursue additional consultation with the Service specific to project impacts to golden eagles/nests; in November 2009, BP contacted my office and further discussions are now underway. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 15 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 Response: To clarify, Cedar Creek II, LLC plans to conduct an additional raptor nest survey to re- • identify active nest locations within the project area prior to the start of construction. Cedar Creek II, LLC has no plans to remove raptor nests. 10. pg. 57.58, Transmission Line; regarding the proposed line, and raptors and risk of collision, "APLIC 2006" was cited at the bottom of pg. 57 but the paragraph does not state that APLIC guidelines will be implemented for raptor protection. The Service strongly recommends that BP follow the latest APLIC guidelines, "Suggested Practices for Avian Protection on Power Lines: The State of the Art in 2006", when constructing transmission lines and associated collection lines for the Project. Response: The 2006 Avian Power Line Interaction Committee Guidelines will be followed for the construction of the transmission line and any aboveground collection line within the Cedar Creek II project boundary. 11. pg. 58-60, Special Status Species—Wind Energy Facility, and Transmission Line; golden eagle was not mentioned although the species is afforded special protection under the BGEPA. Response: The Special Status Species section of the document was focused on discussing federally listed endangered and threatened species and Colorado Species of Special Concern. Cedar Creek II, LLC, however, is aware of and acknowledges that the 4111golden eagle is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act as well as the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). 12. Appendix F—Standard Construction Mitigation Practices, pg. F-3, #13; the Service believes that information collected to date on golden eagle use of the project area is inadequate for determining measures to avoid/minimize project impacts to golden eagles. My staff has encouraged BP Wind Energy to propose steps such as collecting additional data so avoidance/mitigation measures can be developed for BP to implement for golden eagles nesting in or near the project area. Response: Two years of avian use surveys and raptor nests surveys have been completed following the methods and standards developed by the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (2004). The data collected during these surveys, in addition to recommendations obtained from the CDOW and USFWS during meetings over the last 2 years have been and will continue to be utilized in siting project facilities to reduce impacts to wildlife species and their habitats. For example, 0.50-mile buffers have been applied to both active and inactive golden eagle nests. These 0.50- setbacks meet CDOW recommendations and also meet the minimum USFWS setback recommendations. The 0.50-mile setback from inactive golden eagle nests, which may provide alternate nesting locations in future years, has not been applied at any other regional project that Cedar Creek II, LLC is aware of. Cedar Creek II, LLC • Page 16 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 • will continue consultation with the USFWS; however, the collection of additional preconstruction data may be contingent on construction timelines. 13. Appendix I—Cedar Creek II Environmental and Resource Study Executive Summaries, Avian Baseline Studies; maps and other data providing specifics (e.g., on raptor species and nest locations)were not provided here, elsewhere in the Application or separately to the Service. Therefore, the Service is unable to comment fully on the Project's effects on raptors as well as other migratory birds. Response: The results of avian use and other baseline studies, as well as maps with nest locations, have been shared with the USFWS and CDOW over the course of the last 2 years during several meetings: Meeting Date Location/Description February 13, 2007 Meeting at Cedar Creek I construction trailer with USFWS and CDOW. September 19, 2007 Meeting in Fort Collins with USFWS and CDOW March 18, 2008 Meeting in Fort Collins with USFWS and CDOW September 15, 2008 Meeting in Fort Collins with USFWS and CDOW October 24, 2008 Cedar Creek II Site visit and driving tour with USFWS and CDOW • February 17, 2009 Meeting in Fort Collins with USFWS, CDOW and USFS April 28, 2009 Meeting in Fort Collins with USFWS, CDOW and USFS May 13, 2009 Cedar Creek II ATV tour with CDOW. USFWS was unable to attend. May 18, 2009 Follow up call with USFWS and CDOW to discuss ATV tour. November 9, 2009 Meeting in Fort Collins with USFWS and CDOW An additional meeting with the USFWS was held in Lakewood, Colorado, on December 11, 2009, following the submission of these USFWS comments. Further consultation will continue with the Ecological Service and Migratory Bird groups. 14. Exhibit 2: Evidence of Adequate Water Supply; see comment#3 above. Response: See response to question number#3 above. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 17 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 Recommendations from Services'Mountain-Prairie Region—Migratory Bird • Program 1. Take of any birds protected under MBTA that would result from construction of the Cedar Creek II Wind Project in Weld County is a concern. Of special concern are any birds on the Service's Birds of Conservation Concern list(USFWS 2008) that are known or likely to occur on the proposed project area. The company developing this wind energy facility should comply with MBTA and take all steps possible to prevent take of migratory birds protected under MBTA. Response: The Cedar Creek II project falls within the USFWS's Birds of Conservation Concern BCR 18 (Shortgrass Prairie) List(USFWS, 2008). There are 16 species of birds on this list, six of which have been observed, in relatively low density, during the 2 years of avian use and raptor nests surveys completed in the project area. If construction occurs during nesting season, additional surveys for ground-nesting species will be conducted and appropriate setbacks and/or timing restrictions may be applied as determined through further consultation with the USFWS. Any potential impacts to these species related to project construction will be limited to one, and at a maximum, two nesting seasons. To the extent that it is possible, construction will be initiated outside the nesting season. Cedar Creek II, LLC will take all reasonable steps to prevent the incidental take of migratory birds. 2. With regard to migratory birds we are especially concerned about any intact native habitat types for migratory birds present on the proposed project site that could be impacted by development. The highest priority(relative to habitat conservation) should be to avoid and minimize all types of impacts to these intact native habitats (primary concern for this project site would be intact native grasslands and any cliff or rock features). Response: The Cedar Creek II Project will be designed to minimize the project footprint to reduce impacts to the environment. As previously described, a setback of 150 feet will be applied to escarpment features, which are defined by high and sharply defined cliffs and rocky outcrops, that are not limited by other land use constraints. Cedar Creek II, LLC has attempted to reduce impacts to migratory birds as much as practicable following industry standard practices and recommendations provided by the CDOW and USFWS. Page 18 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 • 3. The project proponents should follow all applicable guidelines from the Service's 2003 Interim Guidance on Avoiding and Minimizing Impacts to Wildlife from Wind Turbines (Guidance) (http://www.fws.gov/habitatconservation/wind.html).This would include things like not placing wind turbines along ridge lines, mountains, or buttes that raptors use for flight corridors. Response: Where relevant, Cedar Creek II, LLC has adhered to recommendations provided in the USFWS guidance document cited above. For information regarding ridgeline/escarpment setbacks please see the response to question 5 above on page 14. 4. We encourage the project proponents for this wind energy development to do both pre- project and post construction studies on migratory birds to examine the effects the development has on migratory bird populations. These should be done using appropriate scientific methodology. Response: Two years of preconstruction avian use surveys have been completed within the project boundary following methods and standards that were developed by the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (2004). Additionally, 2 years of post- construction mortality monitoring will be completed during the operation phase of the project. • 5. For Golden Eagles we recommend that the project proponents put radio tags on this species before development and collect information on home range, foraging area use, flight paths, etc. This information would then serve as a basis for what the appropriate buffers should be for existing Golden Eagle nesting territories on the proposed project area. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC has consulted with the CDOW and USFWS and is complying with recommended buffers for golden eagle nests and feels that the currently proposed measures will adequately avoid or minimize impacts to golden eagles. Cedar Creek II, LLC understands the motivation of the agencies in requesting this study, but feels that the 2 years of study has provided sufficient information to develop a layout that balances the protection of wildlife with the realities of the competitive renewable energy market in a responsible manner. Were additional studies to be conducted, Cedar Creek II, LLC would prefer to conduct less invasive studies than capturing and radio tagging this protected species. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 19 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 6. Or, if telemetry cannot be done on Golden Eagles, then at a minimum project proponents • should have a qualified biologist make visual observations on nesting Golden Eagles. This method should be used to attempt to define key use areas including nesting area, foraging areas, perches, roost, etc. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC has made extensive efforts to identify potential impacts to wildlife species by conducting numerous studies utilizing qualified biologists and has shared the results of these studies with the CDOW and USFWS. Although only 1 year of pre- construction monitoring for wildlife and avian use is suggested, Cedar Creek II, LLC has conducted 2 full years of monitoring at considerable time and expense and has engaged the various wildlife agencies extensively in this process. Cedar Creek II, LLC is also implementing the recommended buffers/setbacks suggested by the CDOW and USFWS to avoid or minimize impacts to raptors, particularly golden eagles. Conducting additional studies may not be feasible due to potential construction schedule restrictions included in Power Purchase Agreement timelines. Should the project timing change and allow for further scientific study, Cedar Creek II, LLC will consult with the USFWS about the need for collecting additional data or conducting further studies. However, BWENA believes that the current proposed measures will adequately avoid or minimize impacts to golden eagles. 7. Survey the proposed project area for prairie dogs, ground squirrels, etc. that form the predominant raptor prey base for this area. Turbines should not be placed in areas with the highest densities of mammalian prey species that are receiving the greatest extent of use by raptors for foraging. Emphasis is on Golden Eagle, Ferruginous Hawk, Prairie Falcon, Short-eared Owl, and Burrowing Owl (assuming all occur on the proposed project area) but take of all raptor species is a concern. Response: The presence of a large scale raptor prey base is always considered by Cedar Creek II, LLC during project siting. During two years of surveys (avian use, raptor nests, grouse lek, wetland delineation and habitat mapping)across the Cedar Creek II project area, only one active prairie dog town was observed within the project boundary. Turbines will not be sited within this area. Additional aerial photograph analysis and on the ground surveys did not identify any new active prairie dog towns or other large scale prey sources 8. If power lines are going to be constructed as part of the proposed development they should be buried. If they are not buried then the proponents should follow all guidelines in the APLIC 2006 and APLIC 1994 publications to minimize bird electrocutions and bird strikes. Response: The 2006 Avian Power Line Interaction Committee Guidelines will be followed for the construction of the transmission line and any aboveground collection line within the Cedar Creek II project boundary. • Page 20 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments January 2010 • 9. Bald and Golden Eagles are also a concern given the new definition of disturb published by the Service relative to the BGEPA. Project proponents should not take any actions that would disturb Bald or Golden Eagles. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC takes compliance with all regulations and laws, including BGEPA, very seriously. A 0.50-mile buffer has been applied to all active and inactive golden eagle nests and turbines have been sited away from escarpment edge features. There are no bald eagle nests within the Cedar Creek II project boundary, nor were any bald eagles observed using the project area during the 2 years of avian use surveys. 10. Invasive plant species are a concern from the standpoint of maintaining intact native habitats present in the proposed project area.All appropriate measures should be undertaken by project proponents to prevent introduction and spread of invasive species. Response: A noxious weed management plan will be developed and implemented during project construction. References National Wind Coordinating Committee (NWCC). 2004. Wind Turbine Interactions with Birds and • Bats: A Summary of Research Results and Remaining Questions. Fact Sheet, Second Edition. November 2004. http://www.nationalwind.org/publications/default.htm USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2008. Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. 85 pp. Online version available at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPu blications/SpecialTopics/BCC2008/BCC200 8.pdf. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Page 21 Wind Energy Facility and 230-kV Transmission Line Weld County Use by Special Review Permit Application Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Concrete Batch Plant Attachment 5: Use by Special Review Questionnaire—Batch Plant Weld County Use by Special Review Permit Application Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Concrete Batch Plant • Site-Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review (USR) Questionnaire Cedar Creek II, LLC has previously submitted an application to Weld County for a permit to construct and operate the Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project(Project), which consists of a wind energy facility of up to 300-megawatts (MW), 230-kilovolt(kV)transmission line and associated facilities, as authorized by Title 24, Section 65.1-501 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS)and Title 21, Article 21-1 of the Weld County Land Use Code (the "1041 Application"). As further described in the 1041 Application, Cedar Creek II, LLC proposes to construct the 300-MW facility at one time or in up to three phases. In order to meet the drainage and transportation study requirements of Weld County, Cedar Creek II, LLC is proposing to build the first phase (Phase I) of the project in one 250-MW phase. When plans to construct the additional 50 MW are complete, an amendment to this permit will be submitted to Weld County. The submittal of this Use by Special Review (USR) Questionnaire is to request approval to install and operate one temporary batch plant as part of Phase I of this Project. The batch plant would occupy a portion of a 20-acre site that also includes a temporary construction laydown area, parking, operation and maintenance building, and substation—all components of Phase I. Appendix G of the 1041 Application (submitted to Weld County in May 2009) contains the USR Questionnaire that addresses the entire proposed Project. • For convenience of reference, this USR questionnaire includes copies of the following maps (11-by-17-inch format) included in previous submittals: • Attachment 1-A—Wind Energy Facility Plot Plan (shows location of batch plant and 20-acre general facility site) • Attachments 6-A through 6-E—Potential Haul Routes (also shows location of potential water sources) It should be noted that the required 24-by-36-inch copies of the above-listed maps were submitted previously. 1. Explain, in detail, the proposed use of the property. The proposed use is a temporary batch plant that will be erected to produce concrete for the construction of Phase I of the Project as described in this USR Permit Application. The 20-acre multipurpose site will consist of 3 acres for the batch plant operations; 5 acres will be used for soil storage and ingress and egress to this soil storage area; and the remaining 12 acres will be used as a substation, operation and maintenance building, laydown area, and parking. The footprint of these facilities will be located at the originally proposed Phase II Substation site as identified on Attachment 1-A. The batch plant will operate until construction is completed estimated to be approximately 7 months. The • concrete produced will be used to construct foundations associated with this Project, such as 1 Weld County Use by Special Review Permit Application Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Concrete Batch Plant wind turbine foundations. It is anticipated that Phase I will have a total of 120-200 wind • turbine foundations depending on the final selection of a turbine manufacturer or if the size of Phase I changes. Each octagonal shaped turbine structure foundation will be approximately 8-12 feet deep and will be approximately 45-60 feet across. Cedar Creek II, LLC plans to completely remove the batch plant following construction of Phase I and reclaim the land where the temporary batch plant was located. 2. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the intent of the Weld County Code, Chapter 22 (Comprehensive Plan). The Weld County Code, Chapter 22, Comprehensive Plan, has been reviewed and the proposed batch plant is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, including Land Use, Environmental Resources, and Natural Resources. Land Use The proposed batch plant location will not compromise the goals of agricultural land use or any other land use category given its temporary use and prompt reclamation following construction. The current use of the site and the surrounding area is dryland farming and grazing. While several portions of land within the Project area have been entered into the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), there are no CRP farmlands associated with the proposed batch plant location. The temporary nature of the proposed batch plant operation will allow agricultural uses to occur on the site in the future. The Project will not impact effective and efficient delivery or place undue strain on adequate public services or other land use amenities. Environmental Resources Areas of sensitive natural environments, including riparian areas, water bodies, and areas of potentially suitable habitat for threatened and endangered species, are not present on the proposed batch plant location. Proposed mitigation practices presented as part of the dust control plan will minimize impacts from dust generation and waste products. An erosion control/stormwater management plan will be developed and implemented to prevent or minimize sediment entry to the drainages within the overall Project area. Any impacts that do occur will be short term given the temporary use of the proposed batch plant. As a result of these proposed measures and practices, impacts to environmental resources such as air, water, waste, noise, and public health will be minimal. Natural Resources Natural resources will not be permanently impacted. Vegetation removed prior to batch plant operation will be reclaimed once construction has been completed. Wildlife may be temporarily displaced by batch plant construction and operation; however, this wildlife is expected to return to the site once operation of the batch plant ceases and the area has been restored. 41 Weld County Use by Special Review Permit Application Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Concrete Batch Plant • All areas of potential soil disturbance within the proposed batch plant location will be surveyed for noxious weeds before construction begins. A weed management plan will be developed that discusses both general and species-specific weed control methods. Noxious weeds will be managed in all surface disturbed areas. If herbicides are needed to control noxious weeds, they will be applied by a licensed contractor. A Cedar Creek II, LLC contractor will be responsible for monitoring, treating, and documenting noxious weeds throughout the life of the Project. 3. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the intent of the Weld County Code, Chapter 23 (Zoning) and the zone district in which it is located. The proposed concrete batch plant site is within the Agricultural Zone District. In accordance with Section 23-3-40 of the Weld County Land Use Code, concrete and asphalt batch plants are listed as an allowable Use by Special Review in an Agricultural Zone District. This USR application requests approval of the batch plant site within the Agricultural Zone District. 4. What types of uses surround the site? Explain how the proposed use is consistent and compatible with surrounding land uses. The proposed batch plant location is shown in Attachment 1-A. The batch plant will be within a 20-acre footprint that includes the laydown area, substation area, parking, operation and maintenance building, and soil storage. • The land uses surrounding the batch plant site are agricultural lands used for dryland farming and grazing, CRP lands, scattered residential properties, radio towers, and missile silos managed by the U.S. Department of Defense. The proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding land uses because the batch plant will be a temporary use and the 3-acre site associated with the batch plant will be returned to its original use following construction. Once construction of the associated wind energy facility has been completed, the batch plant will be disassembled and material stockpiles and water tanks removed. Aggregate base will be removed to original sub-grade, topsoil will be re-spread, and the area will be re-seeded with species appropriate to the desired land use of the area at that time in accordance with the reclamation plan. Though the site is not currently in agricultural production future agricultural production will not be precluded by the proposed use. 5. Describe, in detail, the following: 5a. How many people will use the site? There will be approximately 250 workers associated with the construction of the first phase of the project, although only 15 of the construction workers (or fewer)will operate the batch plant. Table USR 1 in Section 5b-c of the 1041 Application lists the types of employees who will use the batch plant site on a regular basis. • 3 Weld County Use by Special Review Permit Application Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Concrete Batch Plant 5b-c. How many employees are proposed to be employed at this site and what are • the hours of operation? Table USR 1 summarizes the number and type of employees anticipated at the batch plant site and the anticipated hours of operation. The number of employees and the hours and days of operation may vary depending on the construction requirements of the overall project. Table USR 1: Estimated Number and Type of Employees and Associated Shift Hours—Batch Plant Number of Employees Type of Employee Shift Hours 10 Concrete Truck Drivers Monday-Friday,6:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. 1 Plant Operator Monday—Friday,6:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. 1 Payloader Operator Monday-Friday,6:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. 1 Daytime Mechanic/Maintenance Person Monday-Friday,6:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m. 1 Swing Shift Mechanic/Maintenance Person Monday-Friday,2:00 p.m.-10:00 p.m. 1 Quality Control Technician/Quality Assurance Monday-Friday,6:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m. 5d. What type and how many structures will be erected (built) on this site? The batch plant will consist of one main structure that will house a 12-cubic-yard capacity concrete batcher machine capable of producing 150 cubic yards of concrete per hour. Storage facilities will include 50,000 gallons of water stored in 10,000-to 20,000-gallon plastic tanks; a 93,000-ton steam-heated aggregate storage area, and an 11,000-cubic-foot cement storage area in a combination of upright bins as well as 4,200-cubic-foot storage bins. Diesel or propane fuel for a 15,000-to 20,000-gallon water heater will be stored on site. The hot water will be used for cold weather batching and heating of aggregate material. 5e. What type and how many animals, if any, will be on this site? Not applicable. No animals will be on this site. 5f.What kind (type, size, weight) of vehicles will access this site, and how often? It is anticipated that 11 semi-truck loads of cement per day will be delivered by either 90,000- pound triple axle or 84,000-pound tandem tractor trailers. Aggregate is anticipated to be hauled prior to the commencement of operations. Based on a 250 MW phase, the anticipated daily hauling of the aggregate will be 100 loads spread out over approximately 75 days. Concrete delivery will be completed by ten 70,000-pound concrete trucks, with each truck delivering six to eight loads per day. An access information sheet is included with the 1041 Application materials. Preliminary haul routes for gravel and water into the proposed Project site are identified in Attachments 6-A through 6-E. The final haul routes will be identified by the contractor selected by Cedar Creek II, LLC once the specific sources of water and gravel have been identified. It should be noted that the actual routes may change during the construction process because there may be multiple sources of gravel and water. 4 Weld County Use by Special Review Permit Application Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Concrete Batch Plant • Employee commuter vehicles will total approximately 15 light duty trucks or passenger cars, each making one trip to and from the site per day. Additional vehicles include 10 water trucks per day hauling 6,000 gallons each, and one 68,000-pound fuel truck per day delivering fuel for vehicles and for the batch plant. The 20-acre site (of which the batch plant is a part) is large enough to accommodate personal and operational vehicles, including concrete delivery trucks. Parking for batch plant operators will also be accommodated within the 20-acre site. 5g. Who will provide fire protection to the site? Fire protection will be provided by New Raymer Fire Protection District. Cedar Creek II, LLC has already initiated consultation with the New Raymer volunteer fire department to discuss its concerns for a Project within its response area. All applicable fire laws and regulations, as outlined in CRS 31-16-601, will be observed during the construction period. Cedar Creek II, LLC will advise construction personnel of their responsibilities under the applicable fire laws and regulations, including taking practical measures to report and suppress fires. 5h. What is the water source on the property (Both domestic and irrigation)? During construction, water for the concrete batch plant, dust control, and drinking water will be trucked to the construction site by a construction contractor. For the existing Cedar Creek I Wind Farm, the construction contractor purchased water from landowners in • Wyoming and Nebraska and trucked the water to the Project site. It is expected that these sources will likely also be used for the proposed Project. Potential water sources in the area are identified on Attachments 6-A through 6-E. There will be no irrigation use associated with the proposed concrete batch plant. When the batch plant is no longer needed for construction activities, the land will be reclaimed. If any water is needed during the restoration process, Cedar Creek II, LLC will bring the water in by truck from the same sources that supplied water during construction. 5i. What is the sewage disposal system on the property? (Existing and proposed). No permanent sewage disposal system is required given the temporary nature of this facility. Sanitary portable toilets will be provided at the batch plant area with regular cleaning service. Permanent sanitary facilities will be built for the permanent operation and maintenance building. 5j. If storage or warehousing is proposed, what type of items will be stored? Storage will include 50,000 gallons of water stored in 10,000-to 20,000-gallon plastic tanks, a 93,000-ton steam-heated aggregate storage area, and an 11,000-cubic-foot cement storage area in a combination or upright bins as well as 4,200-cubic-foot storage bins. Diesel or propane fuel for a 15,000-to 20,000-gallon water heater will also be stored on site. Topsoil will be stored on approximately 5 acres of the site. • 5 Weld County Use by Special Review Permit Application Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Concrete Batch Plant 6. Explain the proposed landscaping for the site. The landscaping shall be separately • submitted as a landscape plan map as part of the application submittal. Not applicable. Disturbed areas will be seeded in accordance with the reclamation plan, but no additional landscaping is proposed. 7. Explain any proposed reclamation procedures when termination of the Use by Special Review activity occurs. Prior to operations, the batch plant area will be stripped of topsoil, which will be stockpiled for later use, and a layer of 8 to 10 inches of aggregate will be placed for operations. Once batch plant operations cease, the batcher will be disassembled, the stockpiles and water tanks will be removed, and the land will be reclaimed. The aggregate base will be removed to the original sub-grade, and original topsoil will be re-spread and re-seeded with species suitable to the previous land use. If any irrigation water is needed for restoration, water will be brought in by truck using the same sources for water supply as were used during the construction. 8. Explain how the stormwater drainage will be handled on the site. Cedar Creek II, LLC understands that the batch plant will require a Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit from the CDPHE and a drainage report approved through the Weld County Public Works Department. Cedar Creek II, LLC plans to address best management practices to manage stormwater and minimize erosion from the construction and operation of the proposed Project through the CDPHE construction stormwater discharge permit process. The • batch plant is part of a 20-acre disturbance area that includes other facilities (substation, construction laydown area, operation and maintenance building, temporary parking area) that are part of the overall 1041 Application. Given the nature of the operation and site conditions of the proposed use, extensive stormwater management it is not anticipated. As discussed in Appendix F, Standard Construction Mitigation Practices, of the 1041 Application, an erosion control/stormwater management plan will be developed and implemented by the Engineering Contractor. The management plan will be based on detailed design information to minimize sediment transport or erosion to the drainages within the overall Project Area and meet the requirements of the CDPHE Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit. This permit will be obtained prior to construction and will be submitted to the Weld County Public Works Department as part of the grading permit requirements. Measures associated with this plan will be implemented during Project construction and any future maintenance activities associated with the Project. Stormwater runoff from construction will be handled in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 12 and CDPHE Water Quality Control Division permit discharge requirements. • 6 Weld County Use by Special Review Permit Application Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Concrete Batch Plant • Erosion mitigation measures will include the use of one or more devices such as temporary berms, slope drains, diversion mounds, or sedimentation basins, as appropriate. Silt fencing will be used to prevent sediment from entering wetlands or open water. Temporary drainage control will also be implemented as appropriate to aid in controlling erosion and sedimentation. 9. Explain how long it will take to construct this site and when construction and landscaping is scheduled to begin. Table USR 2 presents the expected construction timetable of the wind energy facility for Phase I of the Project. Areas will be seeded in accordance with the reclamation plan, but no additional landscaping is proposed. The assembly, operation and disassembly of the batch plant will take place over a 12-month timeframe (Table USR 2). Table USR 2: Overview of Project Construction Schedule—Temporary Batch Plant Project Component Anticipated Start Date Anticipated Duration Batch Plant Assembly,Operation,and June 12 months Disassembly 10. Explain where storage and/or stockpile of wastes will occur on this site. The total area for material storage, stockpile, and waste storage will be approximately • 0.50 acre within the 20-acre site. Dumpsters will be provided near the batch plant and used to dispose of solid waste materials generated during construction. Special arrangements will be made to haul oversize non- hazardous waste from construction materials (e.g., nacelle wrapping). To maintain a clean batch plant area, the general contractor will make arrangements for a waste disposal service to transport the waste to a licensed landfill. Typically, the concrete storage compartment of each concrete truck will be washed at each turbine location as soon as the concrete has been placed. Water, transported to the site in the truck's water storage compartment, will be sprayed into the concrete drum and the rinsate discharged to the ground at each foundation site. The constituents of the rinsate are not considered to be hazardous substances or wastes. • 7 alternativenergy bp 0 David Gonzalez BP Alternative Energy North America Inc. 700 Louisiana, 33r°Floor Houston,TX 77002 Direct: 713-354-2138 Direct Fax:713-354-2120 Email:david.gonzalez2@bp.com September 28, 2009 Chris Gathman, Planner III Weld County Department of Planning Services 918 10`h Street Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Use by Special Review Permit for a Wind Energy • Generation Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Resubmittal Dear Mr. Gathman, Your letter dated June 2, 2009 provided Cedar Creek II, LLC with a list of additional information requested by Weld County's referral agencies during the completeness review of the 1041 application materials. On behalf of Cedar Creek II, LLC, I'm pleased to provide you with four copies of the responses to these comments,including attachments, and one electronic copy of all materials. Please feel free to contact me at (713) 354-2138, or on my cell phone at (832) 434-9338, if you have any questions. Thank you very much for all of your assistance. Sincerely, David Gonzalez, P.E. • Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Response to Weld County Comments Introduction Cedar Creek II, LLC ("Cedar Creek"), a wholly owned subsidiary of BP Wind Energy North America Inc. (BPWENA) submitted a 1041 Permit application to Weld County, Colorado, on May 20, 2009, for the Cedar Creek II Wind Farm. On June 2, 2009, Weld County Environmental Health, Planning, and Public Works Departments provided completeness review comments on this application. After receiving the Weld County's review comments, Cedar Creek II, LLC began to work on the list of information gaps and benefitted from numerous conversations with Weld County staff. Weld County staff provided necessary direction for preparation of the enclosed supplemental information that supports the previous application submittal. Cedar Creek II, LLC is optimistic that this supplemental submission of information will address all of Weld County's requests. The following is a summary of all of the comments and Cedar Creek II, LLC's responses. Comments are printed in bold-face type; the responses follow in plain type. Environmental Health The Environmental Health Services Department did not request additional information. • Planning 1. The alternative transmission line routes (in different colors) shall be indicated on the Proposed Transmission Line Route (Figure 3). Response: Figure 3 (Attachment 1-A)has been revised to show the alternative routes in different colors as requested. Note that the location of the Phase 2 substation and transmission line route has changed slightly based on revised engineering since the 1041 permit application was submitted in May 20, 2009. Per direction of Chris Gathman, Weld County Planning Department, all of the maps from the 1041 Application have been revised and are included in this package (Attachments 1-A through 1-I). 2. The application indicates that the applicant has had numerous meetings/consultations with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Written evidence of these meetings/consultations (in the form of minutes or other documentation) shall be provided with the application. Response: Per subsequent conversation on June 10, 2009, with Weld County Planning and Public Works Departments, the Weld County Planning Department agreed that copies of the list of attendees and emails requesting confirmation that participants attending the meetings on the dates requested would be adequate to address this comment(see • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 1 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 Attachment 2a). Copies of the list of attendees who participated in the • various meetings held and/or emails requesting confirmation that the participants attended meetings on the dates the meetings were held are provided in Attachment 2b. 3. No evidence Surface Use Agreement(s) or Memorandum(s) of Understanding with on-site oil and gas companies was provided with the application. The applicant shall submit at a minimum Memorandum(s) of Understanding with the on-site oil and gas companies with the application. Response: Through requests for information from Project landowners (Attachment 3-A), Cedar Creek II, LLC identified one existing oil and gas operator, BEREXCO Inc., within the Project Area. A letter was sent to BEREXCO Inc. via certified mail on July 29, 2009 (Attachment 3-B)to notify the oil and gas operator of the proposed Project. A response from BEREXCO Inc., dated August 10, 2009, is provided in Attachment 3-C. In addition to contacting the landowners, Cedar Creek II, LLC hired R&R Engineers and Surveyors, Inc. to survey the proposed Project site to identify both above-and below-ground encumbrances that Cedar Creek II, LLC plans to avoid. If any oil and gas assets are identified (existing or abandoned and either above or below ground), surveyors hired by Cedar Creek II, LLC will identify the footprint of the asset along with any associated rights-of-way (ROW) or easements. Using this information, equipment will be relocated to avoid any existing oil and gas operating assets, easements or ROWs. Per subsequent request by Chris Gathman, Weld County Planning Department, a map showing the existing oil and gas operator is provided in Attachment 3-C. 4. Envelopes and labels for surrounding property owners shall be provided with the application. Response: Envelopes and labels for the surrounding property owners to Weld County are provided as Attachment 4. 5. No batch plant layout, location, or description is called out in the application. If the batch plant is not called out in this application, it will need to be addressed through a separate Use by Special Use Permit application. Response: Attachment 5 includes the batch plant Use by Special Review Questionnaire, layout, location, and description. Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 2 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Public Works Haul Routes As discussed in previous meetings with the applicant, Public Works will require, as a condition of a complete application, that the applicant provide written proof from the impacted entities that the applicant has contacted those organizations regarding any surety, road maintenance agreement, or other requirements they may impose regarding BP's use of roads or other facilities maintained or owned by the following entities: Kimball County, Nebraska Laramie County, Wyoming Department of Defense(U.S. Air Force) Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) U.S.Army Corps of Engineers The applicant has not provided the previously requested evidence of referrals and coordination with these organizations potentially impacted by the BP Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project, lacking the previously requested written verification, the application is incomplete. • Response: Attachments 6-A through 6-D show the preliminary haul routes proposed by Cedar Creek II, LLC based upon identified sources of water and gravel. Cedar Creek II, LLC plans to hire a general contractor to conduct the engineering and construction of the proposed facility. Typically, the construction is managed through the issuance of a numerous subcontracts. By identifying the most likely sources of gravel and water, Cedar Creek II, LLC was able to identify preliminary haul routes; however, the actual haul routes will not be identified until the contractors (and subcontractors) have been selected and the actual sources of gravel and water have been designated. Cedar Creek II, LLC has contacted Kimball County, Nebraska; Laramie County, Wyoming; Department of Defense (U.S. Air Force); and the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) regarding this Project on several occasions. Cedar Creek II, LLC met with Weld County and these agencies in a series of individual meetings from August 31, 2009, through September 2, 2009, to discuss the preliminary haul routes for water and gravel from sources in Laramie County and Kimball County into the proposed Project Area. A summary of action items and next steps resulting from these meetings are provided in Table 1. Copies of the agency-verified meeting notes are provided as Attachments 7-A through 7-E. Because of unforeseen circumstances, the • meeting notes in Attachment 7-C have not been verified by Laramie County. Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 3 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 Weld County Planning Department has agreed to allow Cedar Creek II, LLC to • provide this concurrence to the meeting notes (with any amendments)as soon as they are received from Laramie County. Table 1: Action Items Agreed to by Cedar Creek II, LLC and Agencies (August 31,2009,through September 2,2009 Meetings) Agency Action Item Weld County Planning and • Cedar Creek II, LLC will submit the draft procedure for the road Public Works Departments maintenance plan with the 1041 resubmittal materials. (August 31,2009) • The 1041 resubmittal materials will include all of the previously requested items as agreed to during the June 10,2009,conference call. Kimball County Public • Cedar Creek II,LLC will email Jerry Robbins(Director, Kimball Works Department County Public Works Department)a summary of this meeting for (September 1,2009) review and comment.Once Jerry has approved the meeting notes, Cedar Creek II, LLC will submit them to Weld County. • Cedar Creek II, LLC and Kimball County will meet to do the precondition survey and discuss the grading of roads prior to construction. • Cedar Creek II, LLC will email Mr.Robbins updates regarding the Project as it evolves. Laramie County Public • Cedar Creek II,LLC will email Don Beard(Director,Laramie County Works Department Public Works Department;dbeard@laramiecounty.com)a summary (September 1,2009) of this meeting for review and comment.Once Mr.Beard has approved the meeting notes,Cedar Creek II,LLC will submit them to Weld County. • Cedar Creek II,LLC and Laramie County will meet to negotiate the mitigation plan and do the precondition survey prior to construction. • Cedar Creek II,LLC will email Mr. Beard periodic updates regarding the status of the Project as it evolves. Colorado Department of • Cedar Creek II,LLC will email Doug Pearson(North Program Transportation Engineer,Colorado Department of Transportation Region 4; (September 2,2009) (Douglas.Pearson@dot.state.co.us)a summary of this meeting for review and comment.Once Mr. Pearson has approved the meeting notes,Cedar Creek II,LLC will submit them to Weld County. F.E.Warren Air Force Base • Cedar Creek II, LLC will email Bob Sleesman(Real Property, F.E. (September 2,2009) Warren Air Force Base)a summary of this meeting for review and comment.Once Mr.Sleesman has approved the meeting notes, Cedar Creek II,LLC will submit them to Weld County. • Cedar Creek II,LLC will send Joseph Elms(Community Planner, F.E.Warren Air Force Base)the requested geographic information system(GIS)shapefiles and will provide additional GIS data in the future. • Once engineering has been completed,Cedar Creek II, LLC and F.E.Warren Air Force Base personnel will meet to discuss the haul routes,cable crossings,and aboveground transmission line crossings in more detail. • Cedar Creek II,LLC will email Mr.Sleesman periodic updates as the Project evolves,including dates of Weld County hearings and public meetings. Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 4 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Cedar Creek II, LLC is aware that any construction activities involving "navigable waters of the U.S."will require an approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) prior to construction. Accordingly, Cedar Creek II, LLC has taken a great deal of care to site proposed turbines, roads, and electrical collection systems away from protected wetlands or to keep the combined acreage of impact to wetlands to a level that would allow the Project to qualify for a Nationwide Permit. In a similar manner, Cedar Creek II, LLC is aware that any repair work needed on low water crossings could delay or impact the proposed construction schedule since approval from USACE will be required prior to construction.Accordingly, Cedar Creek II, LLC and contract engineers will develop a construction plan and schedule that includes USAGE approvals if upgrades to low water crossings are required. Alternatively, Cedar Creek II, LLC may utilize any low water crossings as they are (without improvements)and simply avoid these low water crossings during and after storm events. Road Use and Maintenance Agreement The Weld County Public Works Department will require the applicant to submit and provide surety on a Road Maintenance Agreement for the designated haul rote. Within the maintenance agreement,the responsibility for maintenance of roads within the • project area and bonding to insure repair and maintenance are kept up to a high level of service. The submitted application packet contains no reference to such surety and does not contain written evidence that the applicant, lacking written verification, the submitted application is incomplete. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC is aware that a bonding requirement exists and is prepared to address this bonding/surety requirement as part of a mutually acceptable Road Use and Maintenance agreement to be negotiated between the Weld County Public Works Department and Cedar Creek II, LLC prior to construction. Furthermore, the applicant is fully prepared to post the mutually agreed upon security. Cedar Creek II, LLC's road maintenance plans prior to and during construction include (but are not limited)to the following: • Work with Weld County Public Works, Laramie County Public Works, and Kimball County Public Works Departments to document existing road conditions prior to construction. • Maintain an inventory of repair materials and keep front-loader equipment on the Project site so that damaged or impassable roads can be repaired expeditiously. • Maintain a mutually acceptable security so that Weld County may have the • option of repairing the roads without using county financial resources if Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 5 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • To prevent the road conditions from affecting emergency response personnel if road conditions degrade, Cedar Creek II, LLC will notify emergency response personnel (fire and ambulance) in New Raymer, Colorado; officials at Francis E. Warren Air Force Base; Laramie County; Kimball County; and New Raymer school officials who manage the school bus routes so that they can plan to use alternate routes and avoid any damaged roads. • If Weld County needs to notify Cedar Creek II, LLC or the construction contractor about a road issue, the chain-of-command list for notification is: 1. Project Manager for the Construction Contractor 2. Site Manager for BP Wind Energy North America 3. Project Manager for BP Wind Energy North America The names and phone numbers of the above individuals will be provided to the Weld County Public Works Department prior to the start of construction and after a construction contractor has been hired and a project team has been assigned. The details of these road maintenance and surety plans are intended to be part of the terms and conditions of a mutually acceptable Maintenance and Road Use Agreement between Cedar Creek II, LLC and the Weld County Public Works Department. Permits Weld County and the State of Colorado require overweight/over width special transport permits. In addition any construction the Right-of-Way will require a Right-of- Way permit. Please contact Amy Burry, Weld county Public Works, 970-304-6496, Ext 3764, to obtain all necessary permits associated with the USR project. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC is aware of the state and county permitting process for overweighUoverwidth special transport permits. Cedar Creek II, LLC met with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)to discuss the proposed plan to transport heavy equipment on State Highways 14 and 71 (see Attachment 7-D). The CDOT did not have any concerns with the proposed plans to bring in equipment provided Cedar Creek II, LLC complies with the state permitting requirements for oversized and overweight loads. In addition, Cedar Creek II, LLC is aware of the permit requirements to cross Weld County rights-of-way, including transmission lines and buried cables. An ROW permit is required prior to installation and construction of any aboveground or buried features crossing Weld County road ROWs; applications for ROW permits are heard by the Board of County . Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 6 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Commissioners. Cedar Creek II, LLC will submit all necessary permit applications for approval. The Department of Public Works also requires that a special transport permit be obtained for overweight/overwidth loads on county road ROWs. The permit is typically issued within 48 hours of receipt of a completed permit application. Cedar Creek II, LLC will submit all necessary permit applications for approval. Attachment 8 contains a list of the permits that may be required in addition to this Special Use Permit. Transmission Line Corridor In many areas,the County has rights-of-way on either side of section lines even though there is not a maintained public road built there. Contact Amy Burry 970-304- 6496, Ext. 3764 for this permit, or Leon Sievers, at Ext 3785 to verify existing county right-of-way. Additional right-of-way shall be required if using the county right-of-way or section lines for transmission lines. Response: Cedar Creek II, LLC plans to install the transmission line in the center of the ROW that has been acquired from private landowners. There is a possibility that county-owned ROW may be crossed by proposed collection lines or roads. • As discussed in the previous section, Cedar Creek II, LLC understands that a ROW permit is required prior to installation and construction of any aboveground or buried features crossing a Weld County road ROW. If use of county ROW is necessary, Cedar Creek II, LLC will obtain the required county approvals. Stormwater Drainage A Drainage Report was NOT submitted, this application is incomplete. Contact Clay Kimmi,Weld County Public Works, Drainage Division, at 304-6496, Ext 3741, to address erosion control/storm water management plan at batch plant sites, substations, and any other water quality location. Response: A drainage report will be submitted with final engineering drawings. Cedar Creek II, LLC understands that the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) Construction Storm Water Discharge Permit is a requirement of Weld County's grading permit application process and that provision of this permit to Weld County will be a condition of approval of the 1041 permit. Cedar Creek II, LLC understands that batch plants, substations, laydown areas, and staging areas will need to have individual stormwater permits and drainage reports. • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 7 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 Cedar Creek II, LLC plans to address best management practices (BMPs)to • minimize stormwater/erosion from the construction and operation of the proposed Project through the CDPHE construction stormwater discharge permit process. Attachment 8 contains a list of the potentially required permits in addition to this 1041 Permit. Traffic Study A traffic study was NOT submitted,this application is incomplete. A complete Traffic Study will contain, at a minimum, the following items: • Existing Conditions of the Roadway Network • Proposed Trip Distribution • Sight Distance Analysis at proposed project Access Points and along the Haul Route(s) • Identification of any deficiencies at Access Points and along the Haul Route • Identification of trip generation during the different phases of construction • Identification of Haul Routes for all sources of water, concrete, gravel, etc. • Identification of impacts to surrounding property accesses • Traffic Volume Analysis to determine Dust Abatement program for Haul Routes • A dust abatement program • A road repair contingency plan including material source and stockpile areas, identification of a contractor with appropriate equipment for emergency repairs, contact numbers for key decision authority personnel • Detailed Access and Haul Route maps It is anticipated that this project will require road intersection radius improvements, temporary construction easements, and Right-of-Way easements; however none of this information was including with this submittal. The submitted Access Information Sheet was vague and will have to be revised and resubmitted. The application indicates that it will take 160 semi-truck or oversized truck round trips to haul wind turbine components in the Questionaire, No. G-5, Table USR 2. In Public Works previous experience it has been determined that it take 7 to 8 loads to complete one turbine component,which would produce a much larger volume of trips nearing 1,600 round trips. The table needs correction. Please contact Janet Carter, Weld County Public Works Department, Traffic Engineer, 970-304-6496, Ext 3726 for any questions regarding the Traffic Study. 411 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 8 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Response: Traffic Study Preliminary transportation evaluations for the turbine components and the water and gravel haul routes are submitted as Attachments 9A and 9B. The preliminary transportation evaluations address the items identified by the Weld County Public Works Department as described below, including road intersection radius improvements and easements. Existing Conditions of the Roadway Network Prior to construction, Cedar Creek II, LLC will document the existing conditions of the proposed roads to be used. Cedar Creek II, LLC will conduct a road survey with representatives of the Public Works Departments of Weld, Laramie, and Kimball counties as applicable based on final site and road selection. Details of the photo-documentation will be developed during negotiations of a Road Use and Maintenance Agreement, although it could, conceptually, include video documentation along with core sampling to identify the type of materials present in the road base. In the attached transportation evaluations (Attachments 9A and 9B), photographs of areas of concern are identified as "waypoints."The waypoints are located along the potential haul routes and along identified Project access points. The transportation • evaluations identified potential safety issues associated with existing power lines, low water crossings, and existing cattle guards. Proposed Trip Distribution Table 2 provides a proposed distribution of truck traffic by month if the entire 300-megawattProject would be built at one time. Table 8 (page 46) of the 1041 Application submitted in May 2009 provided similar information. Sight Distance Analysis at Proposed Project Access Points and along the Haul Route(s) The transportation evaluations (Attachments 9A and 9B)summarize the results of the survey that was completed along roads that are proposed for use for delivery of equipment and supplies, including gravel and water, including identifying areas where there may be issues that require a detailed sight distance analysis. As determined to be necessary, Cedar Creek II will use some combination of the following techniques to protect public safety: • Signs will be posted. • Flag men will be used. • If large trucks are delivering loads in the area, escort trucks will be used to let oncoming traffic know that a large truck is in the area. • A speed limit of 40 mph for construction personnel associated with the • proposed Project will be enforced. Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 9 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 When final routes and access points have been selected, a more detailed sight distance analysis will be performed prior to the initiation of construction activities. Identification of any road deficiencies along the Haul Route The preliminary transportation evaluations identified several road deficiencies along the proposed haul routes. Some of the deficiencies identified included the need to: • Improve turning radiuses—Typically, we will work with our landowner participants to temporarily move fences so that we can increase the turning radiuses. Normally, we will return the fences and roads to their original condition after construction is complete and as previously agreed to with the landowner. • Take pre-cautionary measures around low hanging electrical distribution lines—Typically, we will install signage along the roads to make the truck drivers aware that there is a low electrical distribution line and hang bright colored flags from the lines to draw additional attention to the lines. If the lines represent a safety hazard, we will work with the electrical distribution company to raise the electrical lines where they cross county roads or entrances to our project site. • Evaluate cattle guards to ensure that they can withstand the weight of the heavy equipment and that the width of the cattle guards can accommodate the size of the delivery trucks. If the cattle guards cannot withstand the weight of the equipment or are too narrow, we will evaluate improving or replacing the existing bracing or support or perhaps temporarily removing the cattle guards. Once the specific haul routes have been selected, specific road improvements will be addressed in detail prior to the initiation of Project construction activities. Identification of Trip Generation during the Different Phases of Construction Table 2 provides an estimate of the trip distribution for a typical construction period. If Cedar Creek II, LLC builds this Project in phases (up to 100 megawatts per each phase), this estimate of traffic can be proportionately allocated based on the size (in megawatts)and location of the proposed Project phase. Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 10 co o co C C O ON o co o c) o m V C r m d o E N F vi e r Ni O M N 0 a o '- E d a oa c o a E y aV E 0 0 0 0 0 !� >'.Q 0 0) 0 lY E E 0 aly 7 N G C ` a o f 3 9 - > O j O o O 0 0 O 1" m5 OO) m 0) E N a O N 2 N N U C 0 T g 0.7.3 01ea 0 0 0 U ._ Cto e E m m LL O T m 0 N a I-. o 0 0 0 0 0 w .C CID . a m 0 r' V r r N C O 3 to O O 0 0 0 0 $ CO CO 0 ^) 0 r)o v e = r N 0 2 in OM (0 00 0 O O L c0 .- v r- K r C .- r N 0 2 Q co O O O O O O o o M CO CO CO 0 O co oi • .C 00 r r N N O Ly O O O co O O O o CO CD CO CO t0 M c0 (D K 0) 0 O) = r r — N C7 0 2 N O o 0 0 0 0 0 5 O CO CO O M M t0 M c0 c0 C O) 0 0) C r r r N M 2 .0 o O 0 O 0 O C• L en co rn CO CD 0 r r Ni O - .0 U co 1O H N Y o) o 0 ` -ovi F = 17) 0 - 0) O v) • o a O on m N C N Cr) .• 1) N LL d v N d a 0 a c d co in 2 Q 0 .0. 0 0 0 tU C N in ry a L 0 = o � L" ?i C) C O• o o) a 0 a 0 c E x m E. F 0.,a. 0 -� o T o o F • N .2 U `. 0 a) T T W GJ V N C d �_ L 1 a m m c s o o O co F C7 . = 0 `� 0. Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Identification of Haul Routes for all Sources of Water, Concrete, Gravel, etc. Preliminary haul routes for sources of water and gravel are provided in Attachments 6-A through 6-E. As mentioned previously, Cedar Creek II, LLC identified likely sources of gravel and water and has proposed preliminary haul routes to the Project site. Once a contractor has been hired and sources of gravel and water have been determined, the haul routes into the Project site will be selected. Please note that for a Project of this size and scope, it is likely that several sources of gravel and water will be used throughout the duration of the Project. Therefore, the proposed haul routes may change over the construction period. Identification of Impacts to Surrounding Property Accesses The preliminary transportation evaluations identified several preliminary issues and concerns associated with property access. Cedar Creek II, LLC will use a variety of techniques to prevent deliveries of equipment and supplies from creating any access issues for the landowners of surrounding properties, including the following: • Assign staff to open and close gates during construction so that trucks do not have to wait on county roads to enter the Project site • Install gates far enough from county roads so that trucks are not waiting on county roads • Implement the mutually agreed upon Maintenance and Use Agreement with Weld County so that roads are repaired expeditiously • Traffic Volume Analysis to Determine Dust Abatement Program for Haul Routes As discussed during the August 31, 2009, meeting with Weld County Public Works (see Attachment 7-A), Cedar Creek II, LLC is aware that a Traffic Plan will be a condition of approval of the 1041 Application and will be needed when negotiating use of Weld County right-of-way and roads. Dust Abatement Program As discussed during the August 31, 2009, meeting with Weld County Public Works (see Attachment 7-A),the Weld County Public Works Department would like Cedar Creek II, LLC to spray magnesium chloride on county roads within 300 feet of private driveway entrances to control dust. Cedar Creek II, LLC suggested restricting speeds to 40 mph to further control dust. A road repair contingency plan including material source and stockpile areas, identification of a contractor with appropriate equipment for emergency repairs, contact numbers for key decision authority personnel Cedar Creek II, LLC's plans for road maintenance both prior to and during construction of the proposed include plans to negotiate a mutually acceptable Road Use and Maintenance Agreement with Weld County that will provide for the following: • Inspection of the roads prior to use (including a possible core sample) • An obligation to keep an inventory of road repair material as well as equipment to haul and distribute repair materials on the Project site. This requirement will • improve response time and return damaged roads to acceptable conditions more expeditiously. Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 13 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Maintaining a mutually acceptable security deposit in a mutually acceptable form . so that Weld County will have the option of repairing the roads without using county financial resources if Cedar Creek II, LLC does not make necessary repairs within the agreed upon timeframe that is defined in the Road Use and Maintenance Agreement. • If road conditions degrade or become unusable, Cedar Creek will notify the emergency response personnel at the New Raymer Volunteer fire department who provide both ambulance and fire response. • If Weld County needs to notify Cedar Creek II or its construction contractor about a road issue, the chain of command for notifications is: 1 Project Manager for the Construction Contractor 2 Site Manager for BP Wind Energy North America 3 Project Manager for BP Wind Energy North America The names and phone numbers of the above individuals will be provided to the Weld County Public Works Department prior to the start of construction but after a construction contractor has been hired and a project team has been assigned. Detailed Access and Haul Route maps Preliminary access points and haul routes are identified in Attachments 6-A through 6- E. Detailed information on the final haul routes will be provided once specific sources of gravel and water have been identified and a specific contractor has been hired and prior to Project construction. Access Information Sheet The Public Works Department indicated that Cedar Creek II, LLC should revise the Access Information Sheet to refer to a detailed drawing within the application because the standard sheet that was submitted was vague and difficult to follow. Figures showing the proposed haul route access are included as Attachments 6-A through 6-E. Number of Trips The reference to 160 semi-truck or oversized truck round trips that was provided in Table USR 2 of the application was intended to be a monthly number for each 100- megawatt phase and not a total Project number. To complete construction, Cedar Creek II, LLC calculates that a total of 1,920 round trips would be needed (160 round trips x3 phases x4 months = 1,920 total trips). Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 14 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Other Requested Items Several additional requests for information by Weld County Public Works Department were made during subsequent conversations. These items are identified and addressed below. Gravel Truck Estimates Table 3 includes the estimate of the total number of gravel trucks per phase. Table 3:Typical Construction Traffic—Gravel Truck Estimates Number of Round Trips Maximum Length of Activity (approximate) Equipment Weight Time Hauling gravel,cement,and 1,300 Heavy trucks and semis 40 tons 4 months aggregate Traffic Plan Cedar Creek II, LLC understands that a Traffic Plan will be needed prior to construction. Cedar Creek II, LLC also understands that submittal of a traffic plan will be identified as a condition of approval of the 1041 Application. Dust Abatement As discussed during the August 31, 2009, meeting with Weld County(see Attachment 7-A), Cedar Creek II, LLC will work with the Public Works Department to develop a Dust Abatement Program. • • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Page 15 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments • September 2009 Attachment 2a: Meeting with Weld County Planning and Public Works Department—June 10, 2009 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line • Conference Call Summary Date of Conference Call: June 10, 2009 Subject: Discussion of Comments received from Weld County on Application for Use by Special Review of proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Conf. Call Participants: BP Wind Energy North America, Inc: David Gonzalez Bridgette Miranda Sandra Thornton EDAW/AECOM: Rachel Miller Sarah Jensen Weld County Planning: Chris Gathman Weld County Public Works David Bauer Janet Carter Amy Burry Don Carroll Purpose of the Conference Call: To discuss the comments received from Weld County (dated June 2, 2009) so that BP Wind Energy North America ("BPWENA") can • better clarify the specific changes that are necessary for the re-submittal of the Cedar Creek II Wind Farm 1041 Permit application to meet County Completeness requirements. The Applicant plans to use the information generated during this phone call to amend our permit application and re-submit our application. Summary: The following summary provides BPWENA's understanding of agreements reached and clarifications made during the call. The documentation provided is intended to guide BPWENA in responding to Weld County's comments and in providing a complete application for the re-submittal package. Accordingly, BPWENA requests that Weld County provide notification of any County concerns regarding the course of action presented below that is intended to constitute a complete 1041 application. Review of Letter from Chris Gathman to David Gonzalez dated June 2, 2009 1) BPWENA agrees to provide the alternative transmission line routes in different colors in accordance with the request received from Weld County. 2) The conference call participants discussed what is needed to constitute proof that BPWENA met with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. BPWENA offered to provide copies of the list of attendees during the meeting or to send an e-mail requesting confirmation that the participants attended meetings on the dates requested. The Weld County Planning Department concurs that either of these alternatives will be adequate to address this comment. • 3) BPWENA asked what was needed to comply with Weld County's request for MOU with the on-site oil and gas companies. The Planning Department clarified that there were not looking for MOU's with the owners of the mineral rights but • instead were looking for MOU's with the existing operators of mineral rights. Amy Burry from the Weld County Public Works Department offered to help us identify who was operating within our project boundary. BPWENA will contact Amy Burry to identify who are the operators within the proposed project site boundaries. BPWENA will provide evidence that the operators within the proposed project site boundaries were contacted. The County agreed that proof that mineral operators have been notified of the proposed project would suffice for application completeness. MOUs would be required prior to construction. 4) BPWENA agreed to provide envelopes and labels for the surrounding property owners to Weld County with the resubmitted application materials. 5) BPWENA acknowledged that the information in the batch plant was missing and that BPWENA would make a decision on whether to move forward with the Batch Plant permit within a day or two and inform the planning department and Public Works department of their decision. BPWENA discussed the possibility of some of their facilities (such as the Batch plant) might be relocated (from the location presented in the application Plot Plan). Chris Gathman explained that there would be a risk that if the change in location was deemed a major modification to the original permit application, another County hearing process/approval might be required. BPWENA plans to include the batch plant layout, location, and description in an appendix to the 1041 application re-submittal materials. Review of Weld County Public Works Memo dated June 1, 2009 Traffic Study/Haul Routes . The Public Works Department requested that we conduct a detailed Traffic Study that includes haul route information before the permit application would be deemed complete. BPWENA expressed concern over the need to provide detailed engineering plans that will not be available until we have hired a general engineering and construction contractor noting that BPWENA cannot hire a general contractor until we have obtained the Use by Special Review permit (1041 permit) which will influence the contractor's scope of work. The Weld County Public Works Department observed that perhaps it is too early to consider a Use by Special Review permit application and that the department, at this point in the process, would like to see preliminary conceptual information. The department indicated there could be some flexibility in providing detailed information, but that a preliminary traffic study with as much information as possible is a requirement for the 1041 application. To help balance these competing interests, the Applicant will submit a revised application that addresses the issues raised by the Weld County Public Works Department. The preliminary traffic study will address the following issues: • Preliminary locations (figures and discussion) of any "new" roads that provide access to the Project's proposed turbine strings from the County Roads. • The development of a Sight Distance Analysis that analyzes the safety issues associated with the proposed access points from the County's Roads. • • Safety issues associated with existing power lines, low water crossings and existing cattle guards. • A description of any proposed mitigation needed to overcome any issues identified (such as improving turning radiuses, having to raise or re-string electrical wires, improving bridge or improve cattle guard crossings). • Identification of preliminary haul routes for gravel and water. • Traffic volume analysis that incorporates traffic associated with gravel and water. • Dust Abatement measures. • Identification of potential impacts to surrounding property access. • Provision of typical turning radius information. • Identification of gate locations and setbacks from roads or provide plans to demonstrate that there will not be any staging operations along the County roads. • Inclusion of letters from Kimball County, Nebraska, Laramie County, Wyoming, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), and the Department of Defense indicating that these entities have reviewed the preliminary route plans and that these entities have provided a list of necessary requirements regarding the proposed project's use of and the preliminary estimated effects to area roads. • Additional discussion of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's permitting and approval process for haul roads if road improvements to low water crossings impact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's jurisdiction. • Document preliminary coordination with CDOT regarding the proposed use of • oversized or overweight vehicle use on Highway 71. Road Maintenance Agreement The Weld County Public Works Department has requested that we amend our permit application to address the following topics: • Amend the permit application to discuss that a bonding requirement exists and that BPWENA is prepared to address this bonding/surety requirement as part of the pre-construction process. • Amend the permit application so that BPWENA addresses the plans for emergency road maintenance, including ability to respond within 24 hours and provide a chain-of-command contact list for emergency response. The Public Works Department will provide BPWENA with sample text for use in the application. BPWENA will amend the permit application in the res-submittal package to address the topics mentioned above using the template provided by the Public works Department. Permits The Public Works Department asked BPWENA to amend the permit application to indicate that the Applicant is aware of the permitting process for overweight/overwidth special transport permits (with both State and County). In addition, the permit application needs to address the permit needed to cross any County rights-of-way (including the proposed transmission line). Furthermore, if the proposed wind farm's buried cables • cross any County road rights-of-way, BPWENA will need to address this issue in the permit application. BPWENA will revise the permit application in the re-submittal package to include this information. Transmission Line Corridor The Weld County Public Works Department asked that BPWENA amend our permit application to better describe our transmission line right of way and our intentions to build our transmission line within that right of way. The Department would like BPWENA to clearly state whether our intent is to crowd one edge of the right of way or to put the transmission line in the center of the right of way. In addition, the Department would like the permit application to address any County rights of way and to address any County road (and associated right of way) crossing issues as well as issues associated with underground transmission lines. BPWENA will revise the permit application to demonstrate an understanding of these right of way issues and processes. Storm water Drainage The Public Works Department asked that BPWENA amend the permit application to demonstrate an understanding of the County's stormwater drainage permit application process. Also, the department asked that BPWENA provide plans to address best management practices (BMPs) through the use of silt fences, hay bales in drainage swales, etc. to minimize stormwater/erosion from the construction and operation of the proposed project. The State of Colorado will require a construction stormwater discharge permit stating that the project will not discharge to a watercourse without proper BMPs. The department requested that BPWENA add a discussion to address these permitting requirements. The discussion items will become conditions of approval prior to construction. BPWENA will revise the permit application to provide such a discussion for the re-submittal package. . Access Information Sheet The Public Works Department indicated that BPWENA should revise the Access Information Sheet to refer to a detailed drawing within the application since the standard sheet that was submitted was vague and difficult to follow. BPWENA will revise the Access Information Sheet to refer to a detailed drawing in the application, and will revise the text to include the information requested by the department. Other Discussion Topics Before the phone call ended, the Applicant clarified that the reference to 160 oversized trucks that was provided in the application was intended to be a monthly number for each 100-MW phase and not a total project number as implied in the Memo from the Public Works Department. As a result, our total traffic estimates are for approximately 1,920 trucks and do not need to be amended. I Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Attachment 2b: CDOW/USFWS Meeting Minutes Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line `_Al CDmMon} ey C DO C.3 3i fin .cjtwr cnley@Sfete.cc QCAV,k 6)iv Aei u AE d,u\A„ Ito10e z _ ad. grey er2►Ig�—G7�J^ C2braC> 5a6cf: Aol..noh i\11 ��h-RILL. // VtF Peon G1eJCY1/4 tlik a L 4. V/tel rt. Sit)( ..co, v., 54.A/by Vasec' /'///tt t ti( (i✓9 5c vi4_ Va Aiifret u. (too Pc;t7a_1 C0CX -o y -r-(o rca l@ 5-67-le Co . C, >Ya u iY P sq ://' C 14 e,�J y54/09;€ cc-ti c.° ° 7 cin-,ve 6io,ri`: Cr7w clovc.Ghrk3c,, C 5 kk. . tr: :II, v hckri GI)e()., ( ) Es ►" 030o3 u R,cei-- Inc. Corte a (J �Rc So,, wc_si otr,c(surc� oz,-4- ,nc . c-0v,^, 1 2A 1324cr0 C P6919C l2ere . giAl4PC 1�.�{ rem, • c.,�Y `�`rti 33c �J 4. icie fcy),�, ),,t ' (.C , U/ 0 I �6iU+�CACio „� C,tlC. y 1 � ._ t i \� Q ✓C4� { �JJ 1 .C1 : t 1 ` i ... l RV,< ! ;,) ,,, ) I1 s j i-, .,., ),-- ,)C_3, -'' .(o'^ j h %, . K., A%-e/C.,,a:.S .. 'c Cc _r1 �r/yC•\ .,//J- ,.C ?_3 (_ir IC-3, , l' C`Yi. Lk l' CI, (1' l,l) I .t A_/ ,_l R J 445 /Q43 I►z1 otrian A . {Toy .-Po VLo.n@ . ' 06. US . J,..reel e'giq/6 cJew(E ) Set IcUt A=). .ca rt 97091-4,1/4 7 gE &Jk 13a? A11 13 P 'Rc 'Mc' a t3EAHO 6 1 cam "JJ--H9- w 2 ci tii:� i (14 (LAvHi1.,,,k,n 6 0 it• t�'arrl ,i tciw1k v)<ry cis /wit, .i J f'"A�J t c' S m polio Michael-.cm ril,e ifity. co .a5 Da (() Erle/�_e4 (A)EST Li)erickscndrdest-me, GA" &6)6iy-nA0 0 if C'4- vi6 s' b.- lJ0 -, 411 Me €-\\NThi--)\{\\ CbO , • 0SFwj -'3- Uj- 5 -io C` , J c. _,-, CQ(6 cis- (re ek ., 1 , , i 138 1 05 7 FlCr .i L _ C1(VI rk c--& `C\`E M 1 re :Ck (i '") I _ 5 ci - ` I `6 0 I bc-,c;Ce e,in ,r-:_Nc,(Qt)bl 1 l ,, / n _ .% . ; .. ., , Al- r:, , 2 \ ( r ^ S Y qh0 4'�3-iag3 -boy tD. an@s he _co Tin •tsy vec,.j G1ryt-, 61-cc 3t7 , i3to to—In-9? ,5�a•✓a(7_ va,.iw lv� i4��r C. v 0UNIlfv p In/r 1 PH qlc - 3k-Ib 7c..,cy elittiti.Tltitti� �P.5 •rica , Jensen, Sarah rom: Florian, Troy[Troy.Florian@state.co.us] ent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 8:56 AM To: Miranda, Bridgette H.; Greenman, Celia Subject: RE: Cedar Creek II Meeting Confirmation Update This sounds about right. Troy Florian Colorado Division of Wildlife District Wildlife Manager-Ault 317 W Prospect, Ft. Collins CO 80526 (970)443-1993 From: Miranda, Bridgette H. [mailto:Bridgette.Miranda@bp.com] Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 9:50 AM To: Greenman, Celia; Florian, Troy Subject: Cedar Creek I I Meeting Confirmation Update Hello Celia, Troy, at s ounty. Within our application we noted the many meetings we had with you to discuss our project plan and siting strategy. Weld County has requested that we provide documentation demonstrating that these meetings occurred. As you are aware there were a few meetings where we did not collect sign-in sheets and we wanted to memorialize within this email each Cedar Creek II meeting the CDOW participated in. September 19, 2007-- meeting in Fort Collins (sign-in sheet attached) March 19, 2008 -- (sign-in sheet attached) September 15, 2008 -- Fort Collins. October 24, 200S -- Cedar Creek II Site Visit (Troy Florian attended) February 17, 2009 -- Meeting in Fort Collins April 28, 2009 -- Meeting in Fort Collins (sign-in sheet attached) May 13, 2009— Cedar Creek II Site Visit (Troy Florian attended) «CC2 Agency Meeting Sign-In Sheets.pdf» If you could, please respond to this email confirming the attendance of CDOW at these meetings. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, liBridgette Miranda 1 Bridgette Miranda Environmental Affairs BP Wind Energy • 700 Louisiana Street, 33rd Floor Houston, TX 77002 Office: 713.354.4801 Cell: 281.650.5246 bridgette.miranda@bp.com I 2 Jensen, Sarah rom: Greenman, Celia [Celia.Greenman@state.co.us] ent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 9:53 AM To: Miranda, Bridgette H. Subject: RE: Cedar Creek II Meeting Confirmation Update See below. Celia Greenman Northeast Energy Coordinator Colorado Division of Wildlife 6060 Broadway Denver, CO 80216 303-291-7327 From: Miranda, Bridgette H. [mailto:Bridgette.Miranda@bp.com] Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 9:50 AM To: Greenman, Celia; Florian, Troy Subject: Cedar Creek II Meeting Confirmation Update Hello Celia, Troy, you are aware BP Wind has been working to finalize our 1041 permit application with Weld County. Within our application we noted the many meetings we had with you to discuss our project plan and siting strategy. Weld County has requested that we provide documentation demonstrating that these meetings occurred. As you are aware there were a few meetings where we did not collect sign-in sheets and we wanted to memorialize within this email each Cedar Creek II meeting the CDOW participated in. September 19, 2007-- meeting in Fort Collins (sign-in sheet attached) March 19, 2008 -- (sign-in sheet attached) September 15, 2008 -- Fort Collins. attended October 24, 2008 --Cedar Creek II Site Visit (Troy Florian attended) attended February 17, 2009 -- Meeting in Fort Collins attended April 28, 2009-- Meeting in Fort Collins (sign-in sheet attached) May 13, 2009-- Cedar Creek II Site Visit (Troy Florian attended) «CC2 Agency Meeting Sign-In Sheets.pdf» If you could, please respond to this email confirming the attendance of CDOW at these meetings. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, likridgette.9liranda Bridgette Miranda Environmental Affairs BP Wind Energy • 700 Louisiana Street, 33rd Floor Houston, TX 77002 Office: 713.354.4801 Cell: 281.650.5246 bridgette.miranda@bp.com II I Jensen, Sarah rom: Sandy_Vana-Miller@fws.gov ent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 4:08 PM To: Miranda, Bridgette H. Cc: troy.florian@state.co.us Subject: Re: Cedar Creek II Meeting Confirmation Importance: High Hi Bridgette, sorry it's taken me awhile to get back to you; I needed to review my Cedar Creek file first. To answer your question below; yes, I participated in every meeting (either in person or via phone) & site visit that you list below. In addition, I also participated in a conference call that you hosted on May 18, 2009. My notes from that call said that we all would discuss micrositing of turbines this month?, prior to BP finalizing this in Oct. '09? I think that follow-up discussion on this topic with the CDOW is important. Thanks, Sandy Sandy L. Vana-Miller Wildlife Biologist / Platte River Specialist USFWS, ES, Colorado Field Office P.O. Box 25486, DFC (MS 65412) Denver, Colorado 80225-0486 303-236-4748, fax 303-236-4005 • "Miranda, Bridgette H." <Bridgette.Miranda@bp.com> wrote: To: "Sandy Vana-Miller/R6/FWS/DOI" <Sandy Vana-Miller@fws.gov> From: "Miranda, Bridgette H." <Bridgette.Miranda@bp.com> Date: 09/03/2009 12:49PM 49PM Subject: Cedar Creek II Meeting Confirmation Hello Sandy, As you are aware BP Wind has been working to finalize our 1041 permit application with Weld County. Within our application we noted the many meetings we had with you to discuss our project plan and siting strategy. Weld County has requested that we provide documentation demonstrating that these meetings occurred. As you are aware there were a few meetings where we did not collect sign-in sheets and we wanted to memorialize within this email each Cedar Creek II meeting the USFWS participated in. September 19, 2007 -- meeting in Fort Collins (sign-in sheet attached) March 19, 2008 -- (sign -in sheet attached; it was noted that you had participated by phone) September 15, 2008 -- Fort Collins October 24, 2008 -- Cedar Creek II Site Visit February 17, 2009 -- Meeting in Fort Collins •April 28, 2009 -- Meeting in Fort Collins (sign-in sheet attached) 1 If you could, please respond to this email confirming your attendance at these meetings. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Bridgette Miranda Bridgette Miranda Environmental Affairs BP Wind Energy 700 Louisiana Street, 33rd Floor Houston, TX 77002 Office: 713.354 .4801 Cell: 281.650. 5246 bridgette.miranda@bp.com [attachment "winmail.dat" deleted by Sandy Vana-Miller/R6/FWS/DOI] 2 Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Attachment 7-A: Meeting Notes—Weld County Planning and Public Works Departments Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line • Meeting Notes — Weld County Planning and Public Works Departments Date: August 31, 2009 Subject: Update on 1041 Permit Application status and response to comments Meeting Participants: BP Wind Energy North America, Inc.: David Gonzalez Jamie Gray EDAW AECOM: Sarah Jensen Weld County Planning: Chris Gathman Weld County Public Works: David Bauer Janet Carter Amy Burry Don Carroll Purpose of the Meeting: To discuss comments received from Weld County (dated June 2, 2009) and BP Wind Energy North America (BPWENA) progress addressing these comments to date. Summary: The following summary provides BPWENA's understanding of topics discussed and agreements reached during the meeting. • Agency Coordination to Date • BPWENA has discussed the project with the following agencies to date: CDOW, The Nature Conservancy, US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Forest Service. ▪ Documentation of the CDOW and USFWS meetings will be provided with the 1041 resubmittal materials. Haul Routes/Road Maintenance Agreement • David Gonzalez presented the preliminary haul route map for the overall routes and for Weld County. • The Public Works Department would like to see an estimate of the number of gravel trucks in a separate table. BPWENA will include this in the 1041 resubmittal materials. • BPWENA will outline a draft road maintenance agreement in the 1041 permit application. Topics will include: o Store repair material on the project site. o Store front loader equipment for repairing roads on site. o Post financial assurance in the form of a letter of credit or performance bond ($500K suggested by Public Works). o Build contingency/flexibility into the agreement if BPWENA's contractor chooses to use different routes. o Identify contingency haul routes in case the proposed haul route is not in service. o Work with Public Works jointly to document existing road conditions. • BPWENA has developed a transportation plan which will be part of the 1041 • resubmittal materials. Prior to submittal of these materials, David Gonzalez will email the transportation plan to Public Works. • Traffic Plan • A traffic plan will be needed when negotiating use of Weld County right-of-way and roads. • This will be a condition of approval of the 1041 application. Emergency Response Plan • The emergency response plan can be combined into the road maintenance agreement. • Emergency response notification must be coordinated with the U.S. Air Force, local schools, the fire department, the police department, and neighboring counties. Written Verification from Adjacent Entities • BPWENA is meeting with Kimball County, Laramie County, F.E. Warren Air Force Base, and CDOT over the next few days. • Public Works asked BPWENA to discuss their haul routes with Laramie County, Kimball County, Francis E. Warren Air Force Base, and the Colorado Department of Transportation. • Following these meetings, Public Works asked BPWENA to provide a summary of each meeting that provides the issues discussed and what issues are to be resolved in the future. Dust Abatement ▪ Public Works would like BPWENA to spray magnesium chloride 300 feet around existing houses close to the road to control dust. ▪ BPWENA suggested restricting speeds to 40 MPH to control dust. • BPWENA and Public Works will discuss uncontrolled intersections in conjunction with the traffic plan at a later date. Public Works recommends installing stop signs at key intersections. Storm Water Management Plan • This will be a condition of approval to be obtained prior to construction. • The batch plant, substations, laydown areas, and staging areas will need to have individual stormwater permits and drainage reports prior to recording the USR plat. Public Works will require a grading permit and drainage report. • BPWENA should acquire the permit from Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and submit the permit to Weld County Public Works. Regarding Public Works Department Comment on Conditions of Approval for Overlapping Project Phases ▪ Public Works will require that approval be obtained for each individual project phase at the time of construction. • This does not require a new 1041 permit for each phase. • Public Works is amenable to overlapping construction of phases. Interconnection with the Cedar Creek I Substation • BPWENA is still working out the details with the substation owner. • If an amendment to the existing 1041 is required, it would be approximately 6 months timeframe for this process (same as the 1041 process). • . BPWENA will submit a preliminary site plan with feasible proposals to the Planning Department. The Planning Department will then advise BPWENA on the permitting processes for each proposal. • In general, staying within the existing USR boundary will be the shortest permitting timeline. Action Items/Next Steps • BPWENA will submit the draft procedure for the road maintenance plan with the 1041 resubmittal materials. • BPWENA will submit a draft road maintenance agreement with the 1041 resubmittal materials. • The 1041 resubmittal materials will include all of the previously requested items as agreed to during the June 10, 2009 conference call. Timeline • Construction may commence in late spring 2010 if financing is secured. • PSCo is issuing their decision to issue power purchase agreement for this project in late November. Other Discussion Items • Public Works identified Colorado State University as a potential buyer of power as their Maxwell Ranch wind project is currently unfunded. • • Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Attachment 7-B: Meeting Notes—Kimball County Public Works Department Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line • Meeting Notes — Kimball County Public Works Department Date: September 1, 2009 Subject: Proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Haul Routes on Kimball County Roads Meeting Participants: BP Wind Energy North America, Inc.: David Gonzalez Jamie Gray EDAW AECOM: Sarah Jensen Kimball County Public Works: Jerry Robbins Dave Hottell Purpose of the Meeting: To discuss BP Wind Energy North America'a (BPWENA) preliminary haul routes for water and gravel from sources in Kimball County into the proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm in Weld County, Colorado. Summary: The following summary provides BPWENA's understanding of topics discussed and agreements reached during the meeting. • The proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm is approximately 30,000 acres, includes approximately 30 private landowners, and will produce up to 300 megawatts at full capacity. BPWENA will sell power to an utility in the region; this will further define the size of the project and the date of service. To date, BPWENA has met • with The Nature Conservancy, the Audubon Society, U.S. Forest Service, F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Laramie County, and Weld County regarding this project. This project would have a batch plant on site to produce concrete. BPWENA has identified water and gravel sources in the region and preliminary haul routes into the proposed project area. • David Gonzalez presented the preliminary haul route map for the overall routes and for Kimball County. • The proposed haul route through Kimball County (via County Road 37 and U.S. 30) is approximately 2 miles. Kimball County prefers the haul route as laid out on the map; the alternative haul route using County Road 36.5 impacts more homes. The school and emergency services use County Road 36.5 more often so the presented route is much better. ▪ BPWENA will bid out the general contract. Subcontractors will identify the sources of gravel; not all potential sources have been identified on the map. • Kimball County does not require permits for use of county roads. • Heavy loads are harder on the roads in the winter. Dust is hard to control in winter. Water spraying can be done to control dust starting in mid-April. • The County Commissioners want BPWENA to keep the road in the same condition. BPWENA and Kimball County agreed to do a joint precondition survey of the roads intended to be used for transport of materials. • Kimball County's main concerns are traffic, dust, wear and tear, and that trailers be covered while going through the City of Kimball to prevent rocks from leaving the trucks. ▪ Kimball County would like for the contractor to blade the roads occassionally; this • will be discussed at a later date. Timeline for Construction . • PSCo is issuing their decision to issue power purchase agreement for this project in late November. • Construction may commence in May or June 2010 if financing is secured. • If BPWENA does not win the PSCo bid, Tri-State will have a solicitation next year which would push construction out 2 to 3 years. Action Items/Next Steps • BPWENA will email Jerry (kchd71(c�embargmail.com) a summary of this meeting for review and comment. Once Jerry has approved the meeting notes, BPWENA will submit them to Weld County. • BPWENA and Kimball County will meet to do the precondition survey and discuss blading of roads prior to construction. • BPWENA will email Jerry updates regarding the project as the project evolves. Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Attachment 7-C: Meeting Notes—Laramie County Public Works Department Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line • Meeting Notes — Laramie County Public Works Department Date: September 1, 2009 Subject: Proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Haul Routes on Laramie County Roads Meeting Participants: BP Wind Energy North America, Inc.: David Gonzalez Jamie Gray EDAW AECOM: Sarah Jensen Laramie County Public Works: Don Beard Purpose of the Meeting: To discuss BP Wind Energy North America'a (BPWENA) preliminary haul routes for water and gravel from sources in Laramie County into the proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm in Weld County, Colorado. Summary: The following summary provides BPWENA's understanding of topics discussed and agreements reached during the meeting. • David Gonzalez presented the preliminary haul route map showing the overall routes for the project as well as a haul route map for Laramie County. • David Gonzalez explained that BPWENA prequalifies its potential contractors based on their safety records. BPWENA expects its general contractor to perform at a higher safety standard than the industry average. • • Laramie County does not have an existing permitting process for county roads. • BPWENA and Laramie County agreed to do a joint precondition survey of the roads intended to be used for transport of materials. • Regarding a mitigation plan for road damage, Laramie County does not expect BPWENA to bring existing roadways to a higher quality, but would like BPWENA to repair existing roadways to their previous condition after the construction is complete. • Laramie County expressed concern regarding the water and gravel truck traffic depending on the time of year and road conditions. The freeze-thaw cycle is from November to March. • Regarding emergency services, volunteer fire departments are located in Pine Bluffs, Carpenter, Burns, and Albon. • County Road 164 was impacted during the Cedar Creek I project. The gravel source contractor may choose to use this road. 164 will have overlay by the end of the year. • If the supplies are coming out of Cheyenne, Laramie County suggested that the trucks enter the project area via State Highway 214 out of Carpenter. • Existing gravel sources near Cheyenne that were not included in the map are: o Knife River—Joe Stevens o Simons —Tim Gentleman • Prior to construction when a more definite haul route for gravel and water has been developed, BPWENA and Laramie County agreed to meet again to discuss a mitigation plan for the sprecific Laramie County roads that are impacted (if any). • • Laramie County stressed that the responsibility for damages should not be . handed down to the subcontractor; BPWENA should maintain responsibilty during the buildout. • Laramie County suggested that BPWENA require intended haul routes from the subcontractors during the bidding process. That will help BPWENA with the precondition survey and help determine the end cost. • The State of Wyoming does not need permits for state highways if the loads are within the legal hauling limits. Action Items/Next Steps • BPWENA will email Don (dbeardelaramiecountv.com) a summary of this meeting for review and comment. Once Don has approved the meeting notes, BPWENA will submit them to Weld County. • BPWENA and Laramie County will meet to negotiate the mitigation plan and do the precondition survey prior to construction. • BPWENA will email Don updates regarding the project as the project evolves. Timeline for Construction • PSCo is issuing their decision to issue power purchase agreement for this project in late November. • Construction may commence in May or June 2010 if financing is secured. If BPWENA does not win the PSCo bid, the timeline for construction would be pushed back. Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Attachment 7-D: Meeting Notes—Colorado Department of Transportation Region 4 411 Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line • Meeting Notes — Colorado Department of Transportation Region 4 Date: September 2, 2009 Subject: Proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm use of Colorado State Highways Meeting Participants: BP Wind Energy North America, Inc.: David Gonzalez Jamie Gray EDAW AECOM: Sarah Jensen CDOT: Doug Pearson Gloria Hice-Idler Purpose of the Meeting: To discuss BP Wind Energy North America'a (BPWENA) proposed use of State Highway 14 and 71 for the delivery of equipment into the proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm in Weld County. Summary: The following summary provides BPWENA's understanding of topics discussed and agreements reached during the meeting. • David Gonzalez presented background information about the project and the • preliminary haul route map. The existing Cedar Creek I project is 32,000 acres and the proposed Cedar Creek II project is approximately 30,000 acres and involves approximately 30 landowners. A permit was submitted to Weld County in May to develop a utility scale wind farm with a capacity of up to 300 MW's project in up to 3 phases. • Weld County requested that BPWENA identify potential gravel and water sources and haul routes into the project area in addition to the haul routes for the equipment. BPWENA has laid out the haul routes with safety issues in mind. • BPWENA met with Teresa Carrillo in the Denver office about 3 months ago. The loads are below the design standards of the state highways. Teresa suggested that BPWENA visit with the Greeley office as well. Weld County also requested that BPWENA visit with the local CDOT office to address any concerns about the project. • BPWENA asked Doug if there are any culvert or bridge concerns and Doug replied that he wasn't aware of any on Colorado State Highway 71 or 14 near the project. BPWENA has CDOT maps with bridge limits and the loads are below the bridge limits. • CDOT did not have any concerns regarding the use of state highways by the Cedar Creek I project. • Teresa will issue the overweight/overlength permits. The Greeley office will issue permits for improvements to the county road/state highway intersections. Gloria said CDOT approval would be a maximum of 45 days from the time of submission of this permit. • Regarding the timeline of construction, BPWENA sumbmitted a bid to PSCo for a power purchase agreement. If they win the PSCo bid, construction could begin • early next summer. • BPWENA is working with Weld County Public Works regarding use of the roads. . CDOT is a referral agency for Weld County projects. • This project will provide many benefits to the region. • BPWENA has met with Weld County, Laramie County, Kimball County, F.E. Warren Air Force Base, U.S. Forest Service, The Nature Conservancy, and the Audubon Society regarding this project. • BPWENA's contractors will be responsible for obtaining the CDOT permits. • David said that Doug and Gloria should feel free to contact us with any questions regarding the project. Action Items/Next Steps • BPWENA will email Doug (Douglas.Pearson(a�dot.state.co.us) a summary of this meeting for review and comment. Once Doug has approved the meeting notes, BPWENA will submit them to Weld County. Weld County 1041 Permit Application Response to Weld County Comments September 2009 • Attachment 7-E: Meeting Notes—F.E. Warren Air Force Base Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Wind Energy Facility and 230kV Transmission Line • Meeting Notes — F.E. Warren Air Force Base Date: September 2, 2009 Subject: Proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Haul Routes on Military Roads Meeting Participants: BP Wind Energy North America, Inc.: David Gonzalez Jamie Gray EDAW AECOM: Sarah Jensen F.E. Warren Air Force Base: Rock Hussey Joe Elms Bob Sleesman Purpose of the Meeting: To discuss BP Wind Energy North America'a (BPWENA) preliminary haul routes for water and gravel from sources into the proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm in Weld County, Colorado and to discuss the military approval process and timing. Summary: The following summary provides BPWENA's understanding of topics discussed and agreements reached during the meeting. • David Gonzalez presented background information about the project and the preliminary haul route map for the overall routes and existing missle sites. The • project would use 130 to 150 turbines up to 420 feet tall from ground to blade tip. The turbine strings have been set back 2,000 feet from existing missle sites. • The FAA requires lighting of turbines at the perimeter of the project site. Joe would like turbines close to the missle sites to be lit as well. Bob would like David to send a copy of the FAA permit for each turbine and the military will coordinate with the FAA. • Potential gravel and water sources have been identified. The heavy equipment will likely come into a Gulf port and be trucked to the project site via 1-25. • BPWENA will be entering into a road maintenance agreement with Weld County. This will include the following: o Visual survey of haul routes with Weld County o Core samples of roads o BPWENA will keep an inventory of materials on site o BPWENA will keep front loading equipment on site o BPWENA will respond quickly in the event of road damage. If BPWENA cannot respond in a timeframe acceptable to Weld County, Weld County can pull from a letter of credit or performance bond. • Rock expressed concern over the loads and number of trips of the concrete trucks. Rock would prefer that the trucks do not use military primary roads. David explained that the proposed haul routes were designed with safety in mind; empty trucks will be traveling downhill. Rock is not concerned about road damage caused by the turbine delivery trucks. ▪ Regarding batch plant locations, Rock would prefer that the batch plant be sited on Highway 71 or at the intersection of County Road 135 and County Road 120. • Regarding the latter, this area is not within the project boundary and BPWENA does not have control of this land. The batch plants are sited to be centrally located within each phase with access to existing roads. It is less costly to site . the batch plant in the project area than to site it on State Highway 71. • BPWENA plans to impose a 40 MPH speed limit on employees and truck drivers. Rock pointed out that if haul routes were designed so that trucks had to pass each other, they would slow down. Rock suggests that Weld County post a reduced speed limit and enforce it. • F.E. Warren is currently paying about $120,000 per mile to put 4 inch surface aggregate on the roads. Damage to roads depends on the site conditions. BPWENA will do a full geotechnical report of the turbine access roads. Rock recommends putting between 12 and 18 inches of base coarse on the roads. • BPWENA submitted a proposal to PSCo for a power purchase agreement and expects to hear back by the end of November. BPWENA is working to finalize the turbine array. Environmental studies are ongoing and should be finished by mid-November to early December. BPWENA will meet with the military again in late 2009 or early 2010 to discuss final plans and share shapefiles of the final turbine locations. • The benefits of this project include: o Lease payments to approximately 30 private landowners o Property taxes to Weld County o Environmental benefits • BPWENA has discussed this project with Weld County, Laramie County, Kimball County, U.S. Forest Service, The Nature Conservancy, and the Audubon Society. • Regarding decommissioning, the lease terms are for 40 years and provide for restoration. The lifetime of the turbines is approximately 20 to 25 years. There is potential to replace the turbines at the end of their useful lives if demand in the region warrants. • Rock stressed the need for roads to be maintained for national security. • Once the engineering is finalized and the haul routes are more firm, BPWENA will meet again with F.E. Warren. • F.E. Warren will need an emergency contact for the project. • The timeline for construction could begin as early as next May or June. If BPWENA does not win the PSCo bid, construction could be pushed back 2 to 3 years. • Regarding power reliability, the power produced from the Cedar Creek II wind farm would go to the Keensberg Substation near the Denver metro area and would not affect the power supplied to F.E. Warren AFB. • Regarding cable crossings, Toby Harder will work with BPWENA to obtain consent to cross the military cables. Military personnel must be on site when crossing cables. Bob will send David the specifications regarding crossings of buried cables and overhead lines. • The next community meeting will be scheduled when BPWENA begins discussions with landowners regarding the turbine locations. It will likely be held in New Raymer. The Weld County Planning Commission hearing will likely be in early December. BPWENA will notify the military of these meetings. • Regarding the military approval process, Bob will need the legal descriptions for the cable crossings and copies of the leases. The timeframe for approval is between 6 months and 2 years. For Cedar Creek I, F.E. Warren gave interim approvals for portions of the project. . • Rock would like to be notified if BPWENA plans to trench across primary roads; these roads would likely be bored. • . BPWENA will provide Joe coordinates of the Cedar Creek I and Cedar Creek II boundary areas and the existing turbine locations at Cedar Creek I. • Regarding turbine encroachment on airspace, Joe would like to have the coordinates of the turbines. Additional items that will require further discussion include additional turbine lighting around the military assets and warning balls on the aboveground transmission lines. Action Items/Next Steps • BPWENA will email Bob Sleesman a summary of this meeting for review and comment. Once Bob has approved the meeting notes, BPWENA will submit them to Weld County. • BPWENA will send Joe the requested GIS shapefiles and will provide additional GIS data in the future. • Once engineering is finalized, BPWENA and F.E. Warren will meet to discuss the haul routes, cable crossings, and aboveground transmission line crossings in more detail. • BPWENA will email Bob updates as the project evolves, including dates of Weld County hearings and public meetings. • • CO J D 9- ' O UN C aa.t "- r tn •-- ._ W Z 2 �, COa O ` u 7 u �, o L mco W C � ;� ox / 1 CO Q 'D 47 Q V CO r+ 4 W O O d > -a--) N O O C Vic = N55 �/ N ca 0 CO t0 O C O p 7 `c i W iL173 II oce o to �o �° m m `O 0 0 y r U W a Z V) v P W _W �, co LL a n o v v a g e m L ; 3 N s m U O O O S O c c U w a ? O O O B ti c C H g v' I i L T 3 C O c C O .- N co E U U U m N 8 CO N y a> y W W - W - = - W Win Cl") nc 0 c c 3 a N N E w ' ■i�� (� m can v� 'v' o ,e Y a m �a cc � n n rn r m o u g 8 E m la 9 E F� W Q w C7 C7 S y y a a t5 m L o o m $ a o hi• d^ar '�.. !; Lc Q C .a m Tull Z- t3 �, W U U O1 N W3 W m .- N c7 _Oi L o a @ O 3 ° �� `� ♦` C • c `c c cn c ca — m `m _ c c `c w in W W W C 5 S S >. 0 3 , 3 4.41 _ W w. L 2 a W m E m E a — W m m m c m 0 c - a (n • o E$o e Q V O �O TQ a° a° a° i a a° a` c� U w a° a° a° a` r a a vii s co _�a " fl Q. - Z a 13 LL a �� g 8e aid n n LL L G O co 3 W �.a — d N0. , Eca- p Vm yam oa- e £ v W O 11ciII11 sNiIll id og c5 a . . x $ 4. ■ a a F- z a = 3 ?;ci% 1z= LTC etas — — 1 r y Sti u 5i I w u - 5 e - $ R I _41. F.k-rQ ? let IP I j 1 — ` 0'u a9 - -- �• te { .- ••ao l •xa J Cn 3 II lull*. il O ' p - . . . '' R ti J -LA= Vti • u ' • ;!•t f.tl '. - ,• I - �I __I _ `� C II- O 1 I • I i ff f lay --N— —� V 1 L H ‘1116;lire• _ lik =« • a IsallaallS _ 1..•� 1 *en �RJtt I al.an u • •• y I 4 r t i le ' \ • • I ■ 1 1590 — __ . _- — • • I 4 ixa; =I = i /cst --., S9`I' ` Ire ' , i —1 at as . • ■ I � . u iOP 1 e i. e 5 J 771 $i tit a� i ;jat, 1 SS 'i 5'II Fi �. 4 S� "l C ! ill, E I — — •� - - __-✓--r •. ul I .f' • ! 0►1 W _! on�q I ea ea lei g ( � II r m 63 • I fc &ti• [ • i c 0 ! ,, i, • . • • 4, • fli • ■ ,1 . ). Gina )t{I .■.J ■ • a a i a r w/ a a ■ ■ ■ r • _�A �a.-• Li r_■ t ;t ll� i11 • .. 5• 4 • 4 wi.1J ■ ■ ■ � , a +� • ttl• INI • • .,:stI I • ■ r opt a ___ Pi 4 a• ii .---_1.0.t a ' , t•._ t -...t -- - ul,i K17PJ - - - �_ •_ III Key'II • , • - ; • • ' 1 -arm -a ' III 1 ��p ■ U6 f • r it ply tluT a • ■ -•- - l . 0 •■ .-. a ■ r • � ; _ - _. Rte" ..r7 a • A. .. - - . _ ■ e ar ■ a •�.� - "�' ---T----r__;ir MQ • Ii 4• tt r _tc+a, �.ailis I , • illasra" • u tiitq r— • ■ � • m1 � f- ■ '"rIl - : • - '• • • � t� I • ttb • ...■ i r a a 1�7 •u>■D —bt�f itt_ °� 7yy ■ j ' • — �n 1 y� .vr■ f � tf'a ari aaiaaara asa aR.• r.--' - ��'� • tit 113 1 n - / • J _ .. is� ■ . s i -a se - .aa I- N. li 1 I �.t u f ■ • u poa twno�l ■ • o. �. Rt so •L 1 I` 4.. • ■ . . - �I ii . I 1' �f J • 4■ • 411 U3 ati as 41 •Lw 1 h r • • il 1 — • - - - -- — -- it t a w..3 —11-co- • 4q , o .c I ,�— Ia , • "' 4' i • a. i iii :rein•t■t• { nun J ; — 4E3 a !It'i� m a bf l :s a g a —. 4 ) of as v t $ s- , 1 ±_a I - "•\m r I' ■ ■ • is Ile a a • Ia*II I3 :I Y . a ■ a a-a/R>b •. a a a a a, ■• ti I 2f j 1 I ; it . 1st • - - •- 7 __■ ■ •• r.,,,i1 7 \• ■ • 5I I II ■ l "' a • Pisani roallir I irilcr • w ■ f 1. • I' • c • rw. <y r � 1. •4 ■• ? . , .. ; it-) .. to a ��■■ , ; ■tf ".=: F ` l't fi t . k•. . \`�' ai A 1 j •r Y �,� GV{N �' u • N H7 cc,r .. . - - • la OS .. . •• 4 tit Ha a I IlLair .. •I SS h3 _ • .---". st••t w■a larw d�1 _ J --ti ba M_as r — I s� I • S ■ I tro■0I a �/� I • es1 t om . 5 I ► is u3--- . ( I if sa -� V i > JI_; j. L-------- -nlia-- _ ---R 1 • _ ■ B 3 _ -.fa, u / 1.4:13� — a k• 5 et u�l sV b, P _ 'WC-Rt.-WI>u s' h-- 4a u� t L aI 1 a SD • I t 4 d t • I n113 ■ • Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Project Cedar Creek II, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of BP Wind Energy North America Inc. Wind Energy Generation Facility and 230kV Transmission Line Application Submitted to Weld County for Areas and Activities of State Interest • Prepared for: bp Prepared by: I I) 1\v AECOM May 2009 • bp BP Wind Energy 0 David Gonzalez BP Alternative Energy North America Inc. 700 Louisiana.33rd Floor Houston,TX 77002 Direct: 713-354-2138 Direct Fax:713-354-2120 Email:david.gonzalez2®bp.com May 20, 2009 Mr. Chris Gathman and Mr. Kim Ogle Weld County Planning Department 918 10th street Greeley, Colorado 80631 • Subject: Submittal of the 1041 Use by Special Review Permit application for the Proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm Dear Chris and Kim, On behalf of Cedar Creek II, LLC, I'm pleased to submit our 1041 Application for a "Use by Special Review" Permit for the proposed Cedar Creek II Wind Farm. We would like to make the application review process as efficient as possible, so please let Bridgette Miranda or I know if you have any questions or if you need any additional information on our proposed application. Bridgette can be reached at (713) 354-4801 and I can be reached at (713) 3542138. Finally, I'd like to thank you both for all of the time and assistance that you have provided to help us prepare this permit application. We look forward to working with you and the members of the other stakeholder agencies as you review this application and prepare our Use by Special Review Permit. Sincerely, David Gonzalez, P.E. • I , SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW(USR) PROCEDURAL GUIDE SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS: x One original application form plus nineteen copies-(additional copies may be required, on request of the Department • of Planning Services) x Twenty copies of the Special Review plat map(24"X 36")-see attached page eight for map requirements x One 8-1/2"x 11"reduced copy of the(24"X 36")Special Review plat x One 8-1/2"x 11"Photo Mechanical Transfer(PMT)if required, or electronic copy of map x One original Special Review Use questionnaire plus nineteen copies x One original Weld County Road Access Information Sheet plus nineteen copies x Two copies of document showing evidence of adequate water supply(e.g.wellpermit or letter from water district) q x Two copies of document showing evidence of adequate sewage disposal (e.g. septic permit or letter from the sanitary sewer district) x One copy of deed or legal instrument identifying applicant's interest in the property n/a One original Certificate of Conveyances form and any attachments, completed within thirty days of the application submission date x Two copies of Soils Report(soils reports are available from local soil conservation service offices) x One copy of affidavit and certified list of the names, addresses and the corresponding parcel identification number assigned by the Weld County Assessor of the owners'of property(the surface estate)within five hundred feet of property being considered. This list shall be compiled from the records of the Weld County Assessor, the Weld County Website,www.co.weld.co.us.,or a person qualified to do the task, and shall be current as of a date no more than thirty days prior to the date the application is submitted to the Department of Planning Services. • n/a One original Emergency Information Sheet(for Commercial only) n/a Notice of Inquiry if located within an Intergovernmental Agreement(IGA)boundary x Application fee n/a Investigation fee, if required (fifty percent of permit fee) n/a Special Review plat recording fee($11.00 first page+$10.00 each additional page) n/a Preliminary Drainage Report n/a Preliminary Traffic Study n/a Flood Hazard Development Permit(FHDP) n/a Geologic Hazard Development Permit(GHDP) Packets shall be bound with either paper clips or binder clips(no substitutes) in the order listed below. Applications bound in any other fashion may be returned to the applicant without review. Packet 1 will contain -one original of the all of the above Packet 2 will contain-one copy of the following: application, questionnaire, map,one copy of water district letter or well permit, one copy sanitary sewer district letter or septic permit Packets 3 -19 will contain -one copy of the following: application, questionnaire, map, one copy of the Road Access Info sheet • Updated 06-15-08 _1_ SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) PROCEDURAL GUIDE APPLICATION FEE HEARINGS/MEETINGS PROCESSING TIME $ 1,200.00 Planning Commission 60 days Board of County Commissioners 60 days - Single family dwelling units (other than those permitted under Section 23-3-20.A) - Expansion of a non-conforming use - Home business - Animal boarding as permitted in Section 23-3-40.Q. - Bed and breakfast facility -Oil and Gas storage facilities - Mobile home for caretakers -Accessory buildings with a gross floor area larger than set forth in Section 23-3-40.P Composting Facilities $2,415.00 Confined Animal Feeding Operations: $2,415.00 Less than or equal to 1000 Animals Units* $ 500.00 Up to and including each additional1000 Animal Units Non - 1041 Major Facility of a Utility $5,000.00 1041 Facilities as defined in Chapter 21 of the Weld County Code $10,000.00 All other Use by Special Review Permits $2,500.00 $ 11.00 Plat recording fee 5- 7 days 'Animal Units as defined in Section 23-1-90 of the Weld County Code PURPOSE The purpose of this packet is to provide information to the applicant regarding Weld County's Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit process. INTENT AND APPLICABILITY The purpose of this packet is to provide general information to an applicant about the Use by Special Review application process. It is not intended to be a substitute for the specific requirements of Weld County Code, Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4. It is the responsibility of the applicant to be knowledgeable of the specific requirements of the Weld County Code, Chapter 23, Article II, Division 4, for the Use by Special Review application process. -2- Uses by Special Review are uses which have been determined to be more intense or to have a potentially greater impact that the Uses Allowed by Right in a particular zone district. Therefore, Uses by Special Review require additional consideration to ensure that they are established and operated in a manner that is compatible with • existing and planned land uses in the neighborhood. The additional consideration of Uses by Special Review is designed to protect and promote the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the present and future residents of Weld County. The Department of Planning Services is responsible for reviewing and processing the application in accordance with Section 23-2-210 of the Weld County Code. The Planning Commission will consider the application in accordance with Section 23-2-220 of the Weld County Code. The Planning Commission will provide a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners concerning the application. The Board of County Commissioners will consider the application in accordance with Section 23-2-230 of the Weld County Code. It is recommended that the applicant attend all hearings scheduled for consideration of the application in order to present the proposal and answer any questions. The applicant is also encouraged to communicate with the Current Planner assigned to process and review the application once it has been submitted in order to keep up to date with any developments pertaining to the application. PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE Any person wanting to apply for a USR shall arrange for a pre-application conference with the Department of Planning Services. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS: It is the responsibility of the applicant to meet the application requirements outlined in Section 23-2-260 of the Weld County Code. No Special Review application shall be assigned a case number to be reviewed until all required items on the Special Review submittal checklist have been completed and submitted to the Department of Planning Services. • A Use by Special Review permit map shall be submitted and delineated on reproducible Mylar materials approved by the Department of Planning Services. The dimensions of the map shall be 36 inches by 24 inches. The Use by Special Review Permit Map shall include certificates for the property owner's signature, the Planning Commission, and the Board of County Commissioners. The map shall contain a vicinity map and plot plan as described in Section 23-2-260.B., of the Weld County Code. Please refer to the attached Use by Special Review Permit Map Checklist for additional information. An applicant for a Use by Special Review permit shall demonstrate compliance with the Design Standards outlined in Section 23-2-240 and with the Operation Standards outlined in Section 23-2-250 of the Weld County Code. In the event of an unfavorable recommendation by the Planning Commission, the Office of the Clerk to the Board will send a letter to the applicant. The letter will give the applicant thirty days to notify the Clerk to the Board as to whether they wish to proceed with a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. The applicant will be billed for the legal advertising costs associated with the Board of County Commissioners' Notice of Public Hearing and notice of approval of the Site Specific Development Plan. SIGN POSTING The Department of Planning Services will be responsible for posting a sign on the property under consideration in a location readily visible from the adjacent roadway(s). The sign will be posted at least ten days preceding the hearing date, both for the Planning Commission hearing and again for the Board of County Commissioners' hearing. The sign will be provided by the Department of Planning Services. The sign will be posted adjacent to and visible from a publicly maintained road right-of-way. In the event the property under consideration is not adjacent to a publicly maintained road right-of-way, second sign at the point at which the driveway (access drive) intersects a publicly maintained road right-of-way will be posted. The sign posting will be evidenced with a photograph. • VESTED PROPERTY RIGHT A form of vested property right will be established for a three year period upon the effective date of the Board of County Commissioners'final or conditional approval of a Special Review permit. The vested right runs with the -3- property and gives the landowner the right to undertake and complete development of the Special Review permit. Weld County may attach terms and conditions to the Special Review permits as may be reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. Failure by the landowner to abide by any of the terms and conditions will result in a forfeiture of the vested property right. Approval of a vested property right shall not constitute an exemption from or waiver of any provisions of Weld County's regulations pertaining to the development and use of • property. INVESTIGATION FEE An additional fifty percent of the permit fee shall be added to the cost of the Special Review permit application fee when the use is started without a Special Review permit. The payment of the investigation fee shall not relieve any persons from fully complying with the requirements of the Weld County Code, Chapter 23, nor from any other penalties. • • -4- APPLICATION ASSISTANCE AND OFFICE LOCATIONS Weld County Planning and Zoning Weld County Public Roads • Department of Planning Services Weld County Department of Public Works North Weld Building 1111 H St 918 Tenth St Greeley CO 80631 Greeley CO 80631 (970)356-4000 x3750 (970)353-6100 x3540 Web link-www.co.weld.co.us/departments South Weld Building 4209 CR 24.5 Longmont CO 80504 Colorado Highways (720) 652-4210 x8730 Colorado Dept. of Transportation 1420 Second St Web link-www.co.weld.co.us/departments Greeley CO 80631 (970) 353-1232 Weld County Building Inspection Web link-www.dot.state.co.us Department of Planning 918 Tenth St Greeley CO 80631 Weld County Septic Permits (970)353-6100 x3540 Weld County Dept of Public Health and Environment 4209 CR 24.5 1555 N 17 Av Longmont CO 80504 Greeley CO 80631 (720)652-4200 (970)304-6415 Web link -www.co.weld.co.us/departments Web link -www.co.weld.co.us/departments Water Wells Soil Conservation Districts Division of Water Resources Big Thompson (Fort Collins) - 970-493-1638 1313 Sherman St Boulder Valley(Longmont)-303-776-4034 Rm 818 Centennial - 970-522-7440 x3 Denver CO 80203 Fort Collins - 970-221-0611 (303) 866-3581 Morgan - 970-867-9659 x3 Platte Valley(Brighton) -303-857-6721 Division of Water Resources Southeast Weld (Brighton) - 303-659-7004 x101 810 Ninth St West Adams (Brighton)-303-659-2080 2nd Floor West Greeley - 970-356-8097 x3 Greeley CO 80631 Web link-www.cacd.us (970) 352-8712 Web link-www.water.state.co.us Geological Colorado Geological Survey Division of Minerals and Geology 1313 Sherman St Rm 715 Denver CO 80203 (303)866-2611 Web link-www.geosurvey.state.co.us • -5- Hello