The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About800527.tiff RESOLUTION RE : APPROVAL OF SECOND AMENDED COUNTY ROAD #17 ROUTE FOR THE PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY RAWHIDE ENERGY PROJECT TRANSMISSION LINE WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter , is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, on the 15th day of August, 1979, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado adopted a Resolution recommending that a route known as the County Road #17 route be the route used for the Platte River Power Authority Rawhide Energy Project Transmission Line, and WHEREAS, it is necessary to again amend said route as follows (amendments are underlined ) : Beginning at a point on the Weld-Larimer County line between Weld County Road 102 and Weld County Road 104 and then in a southeasterly direction for approximately two (2 ) miles parallel to and approximately 150 feet South of, the route of the existing 345 kV transmission line of the Federal government, to a point 80 feet West of the North-South centerline of future Weld County Road #17. From said point, the route shall run due South for approximately six ( 6 ) miles parallel to future Weld County Road #17 and 80 feet West of the section lines which are the centerline of future Weld County Road #17 to a point 50 feet South of the mid-section corner common to Sections 4 and 5, Township 7 North, Range 67 West. From said point, the route shall run East to a point 50 feet West of the section line of Section 4, Township 7 North, Range 67 West which is the centerline of Weld County Road #19 . Thence southerly, to connect with Platte River Power Authority' s existing 230 kV double circuit transmission line between Ault, Colorado and Fort Collins, Colorado. 800527 WHEREAS , the Board has studied said second amendment to the County Road #17 route and deems it advisable to approve the same . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado that the County Road #17 route, as again amended, for the Platte River Power Authority Rawhide Energy Project Transmission Line be, and hereby is, approved . The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 17th day of September, A.D. , 1980. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO 1 ‘7 (Aye) C.W. Kirby, Chairman ( co w. d: • hv8 (Aye) Leonard L. Roe, Pro-Tem ABSENT Norman Carlson,422.-71.1. Aye) Lyctibar -1,--"z114 �L� -97 VA S (Aye) .� ne K. St inmark ATTEST: ‘11114,1 C "T,+ i ' Weld County Clerk and Recorder and Clerk to the Board By: I rDeppty County Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 2 7 / County Attorney DATE PRESENTED: September 17, 1980 -2- PROOF OF i JLICATION THE EATON HERALD EATON, COLORADO STATE OF COLORADO, County of Weld, I ss. I, F. E. Kummer, do solemnly swear that I am publisher of the Eaton Herald; that the same is a weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in part, and published in the County of Weld, State of Colo- rado, and has a general circulation therein; that said newspaper has been published continuously and uninterruptedly in said County of Weld for a period of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement; that said newspaper has been admitted to the United States mails as ? :pr second-class matter under the provisions of the Act lie7hoptae, o of March 3, 1879 or any amendments thereof, and r pn eld that said newspaper is a weekly newspaper duly of(tbe17 a 4',Ault qualified for publishing legal notices and advertise- by tit* Platte t Litre to be' eted by tAl{ Slyer Power rl- ments within the meaning of the laws of the State ty ' of Colorado. tines gut oenmaps viro rt enpe port That the annexed legal notice or advertisement assessing the ,protect are;ah le at the Clerk to the Board et, unty was published in the regular and entire issue of Commissioners office. every number of said weekly newspaper for the hearingrdated July ned a7, ors Weld o 00 A.Ah1 to be held at the eld County period of consecutive insertions; and that CExhibition Building, at :Greeley, Exhib do the first publication of said notice was in the issue -Dated this 4th day of June 1976. of said ewspaper dated THE BOARD R COUNT$ C E CO COUNTY' / WE COUNTY COLORADO `-Gf_y-s4__ .k� A. D., 19 �. CoilNli'YE�Hp -'r t and th the last publication of said notice was in RECORDER t the iss a of said newspaper dated AND MERE; TO THD BOARD By: Jeannette entirely, -Deputy Published June E6, 1976:in The Eaton Herald. A. D., 19 In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand this /0 day A. D., 19/-D blisher Subscribed end sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Weld, State of Colorado, this 745/"`"2-day of ./. /� fliN bllc NM My commission expires ''V Commds on :I au v, PROOF OF 1 JBLICATION HIGHLAND TODAY AULT, COLORADO 80610 STATE OF COLORADO, County of Weld, ( ss. I, F. E. Kummer, do solemnly swear that I. am publisher of HIGHLAND TODAY; that the same is a weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in part, and published in the County of Weld, State of ,Colorado, and has a general circulation therein: that said newspaper has been published continu- ously and uninterruptedly in said County of Weld for a period of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement; that said - g : d• newspaper has been admitted to the United States Notto Iii'7iY#e8w t b- mails as second-class matter under the provisions h Nine, 10 Sid- of the Act of March 3, 1879 or any amendments Gouthe" Wife t Co 11 s - t thereof, and that said newspaper is a weekly n Etas to be atrn ed newspaper duly qualified for publishing legal the Platte River Power Author'. notices and advertisements within the meaning ofCopies\Of of t proposed the laws of the State of Colorado. ashes and aeA project v report ap�t g tots',iyro9eot. eport at�t�tq�WnCeIerp tya,Bea my That the annexed legal notice or advertisement Continiaeslo . g Cottoerped netwne attend the was published in the re ular and entire issue of hearing dated JulS+ 7, 36 at,10:00 every number of said weekly newspaper for the A.M., to be at the;-.. eld County Exhibition Building, at Greeley, Colorado. „ period of fl consecutive insertions; and that Dated this 4th day of the first publication of said notice was in the issue. gb or oil*t,876. 'E/C I> Rs or of said newspaper dated ktit otINTT C tpq, Wet'S.wLEE SHKH ..-.... M1�" ER 4 6 A. D., 19/ < - AhND RRCLLERIC TO THE-HOARD and that last publication of said notice was in Published Jeannette t26, 19764Th 76 M' Deputy the issue of said newspaper dated Highland Today. A. D., 19........ In witness/ whereof I have hereunto set my hand this ...., trJ..- day of . .•u-e-y A. D., 19.75 - Agar, Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Weld, Cclorado, this ._.. 1....(.l /L" ' day of Npµoitar�y Public My commission expires BEFORE THE PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS, DECEMBER 14, 1978 MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Our purpose is twofold: (1) to decide whether the Rawhide Energy Project Environmental Impact Analysis , as hereafter revised and supplemented, requires further revision or supple- mentation to constitute a reasonably complete and comprehensive analysis of environmental values and problems relating to the Rawhide Energy Project so as to afford this Board the necessary background and insight with which to make its ultimate decision with regard to that Project; and (2) to decide, if the Environ- mental Impact Analysis as revised and supplemented is found to be sufficiently complete and comprehensive, whether to formally adopt the Rawhide Energy Project for construction and operation. On November 16 , 1978 , after preliminary review by this Board, the draft "Rawhide Energy Project Environmental Impact Analysis" was released for public review and comment. Following published notice, two public hearings were held: One on November 29 in Loveland and a second on November 30 in Wellington, both Colorado municipalities in Larimer County. At the request of the Northern Colorado Resources Council , the period for public comment was extended to December 7, and all written comments received by that time have been considered by this Board in reaching its decision and are part of the record of these pro- ceedings. This Board hereby finds that, as revised and supplemented as set forth herein, the Environmental Impact Analysis is a compre- hensive and well-documented study providing sufficient analysis of environmental considerations and impacts to enable this Board to reach a decision on the Rawhide Energy Project. Further, for the reasons set forth below, this Board formally adopts the Rawhide Energy Project for construction and operation as the next source of base load electric energy for Platte River' s municipal custom- ers, Estes Park, Fort Collins, Longmont and Loveland. Our deci- sions are based upon our review and evaluation of the Environmental Impact Analysis and the supporting documents listed in the Bibli- ography thereto, as well as upon the public comments submitted to us both at the public hearings and in writing. Our reasoning is as follows : (1) Revision and Supplementation of the Draft Environmental Impact Analysis The draft Environmental Impact Analysis as prepared by Platte River' s staff and consultants and submitted to the Board and the public for review is comprehensive and thoroughly docu- mented. Some changes and additions to the November 16 draft of the Environmental Impact Analysis are desirable in order that this document adequately address all environmental issues pertinent to our decision. Many of these changes and additions have been suggested by Platte River' s staff, consultants , and Directors as a result of their continuing review and critique of that document. Other -2- suggestions have come from members of the public at the public hearings and in writing. We are grateful to them for taking the time and interest to contribute to our decision. The major changes and additions which we have instructed the General Manager to cause to be made to the Environmental Impact Analysis before it is published in final form are as follows : (i) Amend Figures 2-10 , 9-2 , and 9-3 by substituting color maps for the black-and-white maps submitted in the draft Analysis; (ii) Add to Appendix 2 the letter of R. W. Beck & Associates dated November 21 , 1978; (iii) Insert in Section 9 a new subsection "Changes in Rate Structure and Pricing. " (iv) Add revised Figure 2-14 , showing a new preferred Eastern transmission line route which would veer to the east just north of the Wellington Wildlife Management Area, and would follow generally the uncultivated slope near Black Hollow Creek to a junction with Weld County Road 19 approximately 41/2 miles north of Black Hollow Reservoir, and thence south to connect with an existing Platte River 230 kV line; and make appropriate related changes in the text of Sections 3, 4 and 9 . This Board received many comments , favorable and unfavorable, concerning the proposed Rawhide Energy Project and the Environ- mental Impact Analysis during the course of the November 29-30 hearings. We believe it will facilitate public understanding -3- of this Board' s decision if notice is taken of these comments. (2) Need for Additional Generation by 1985 Members of the public who appeared before the Board expressed differing opinions about the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Analysis in addressing the questions of need and the prospects for electric energy conservation. This Board finds that questions of need and the outlook for conservation are not issues which are germane to the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Analysis . There is no requirement under the terms and conditions of the Platte River-Larimer County Intergovernmental Agreement of August 25 , 1977 that the Environmental Impact Analysis address these questions.1/ The question of need for additional base load electric energy generating capacity by 1984-85 has been addressed by Platte River' s Board since 1976 , prior to the Intergovernmental Agreement, or the Environmental Impact Analysis or the scheduling of public hearings. Otherwise Platte River would not have pro- vided $150 , 000 to Larimer County to fund an independent study of the environmental aspects of the proposed Rawhide Project and the zoning of a site on which to build it. 1/ We recognize that in Sections 3 (c) and (g) of the Platte River-Larimer County Intergovernmental Agreement, Platte River has agreed to review and confirm future capacity and energy projections for the Larimer County Commissioners and to encourage conservation efforts in our municipalities . By doing so, we have not abdicated our jurisdiction over these questions to Larimer County. That County' s review process is confined by the Agreement to those functions they have traditionally and properly exercised. See Sections (1) and (2) of the Intergovernmental Agreement. The items set forth in Section (3) of that Agreement are outside of the review process set forth in the preceding two sections . -4- Need and conservation are issues this Board necessarily addresses in deciding what actions are appropriate in fulfilling our fundamental purpose -- the supply of the future electric energy requirements of Estes Park, Fort Collins , Longmont and Loveland. It is in this context alone that the issues of need and conservation are properly before this Board and we have con- sidered comments and testimony received on these subjects in that context. Part of our responsibility, as Directors of Platte River, is to establish -- from information submitted to us by Platte River' s staff and consultants as well as from data received from our own municipalities as municipal officials -- the need for additional base load generation. From our review of this material we are convinced that, in order to meet its supply obligations to the four municipalities, Platte River must design, finance and con- struct new base load generating capacity by 1985. A compelling summary of the information upon which we base this conclusion is included in the Environmental Impact Analysis , and the Appendices , as part of the description and history of the project. See pp. 1-4 , 1-5 , Appendices 1 and 2 , and Bibliography Documents Nos . 2 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 9 , and 14 . The econometric model was not discussed because it is not material to the environmental issues. It is a forecasting tool which is in the process of development and is not yet refined to the point of dependability. To predict capacity and energy require- ments, such a model requires projections of population, income and other factors. None of these are supported by data as frequently -5- and as accurately collected as monthly meter readings which are carefully checked before wholesale power bills are paid. Platte River' s econometric model shows some promise, although it appears to overstate need. With more development it could be useful , but not as the principal method of forecasting. The authority to decide conclusively questions of need for the electric facilities of a municipally-owned utility is re- served, by Article XXV of the Colorado Constitution, to munici- palities. As representatives of the four municipalities which own Platte River, and as Platte River' s Directors, that respon- sibility remains with us unless our governing boards determine otherwise. Similarily, the Environmental Impact Analysis addresses in a clear manner the potential, as well as the limitations , of electric energy conservation. See pp. 9-18 to 9-20 , and Bibli- ography Documents Nos. 11 and 31 of the Environmental Impact Analysis. While electric energy conservation efforts are pre- sently underway in all four cities , it is our considered judgment that even the most drastic conservation efforts could not post- pone the need for additional base load generation by more than a few months beyond early 1985 . Man is mortal, and his vision of the future lacks the desir- able quality of certainty. It is therefore impossible to answer every "what if" question that is raised. We must project the four municipalities ' electric energy needs as best we can on the basis of past experience, discernible trends , and our con- sidered judgment. This is a very great responsibility which -6- the Board of Directors does not take lightly. At some point a firm and formal decision must be made. We are now at that point. This Board concludes that the need of Platte River' s four municipalities for additional electric energy generation by early 1985 has been established by an overwhelming preponderance of the evidence. We turn now to a decision of whether the proposed Rawhide Project is the appropriate solution to that need. (3) The Proposed Rawhide Project is the Lowest Cost Alternative Based upon the information set forth in Table 9D, Appendices 1, 2 , and in Bibliography Documents Nos. 6 and 14 of the Environ- mental Impact Analysis , this Board concludes that the proposed Rawhide Project is the lowest cost alternative available to Platte River in meeting the electric energy requirements of its four municipal system customers. The cost of producing delivered energy from the Rawhide Project is estimated to be 2. 1 mills per kWh below that of the next lowest cost alternative, which was examined in March 1978 . Based upon estimates of energy pro- duction from Rawhide, as shown in Appendix 1 , ranging from 920 million kWh a year in 1985 to 1, 242 million kWh a year by 1990 , this difference results in costs estimated at between $1. 9 million and $2 . 6 million a year lower than the next most eco- nomical alternative. (4) The Environmental Impacts of the Rawhide Project The environmental impacts of the Rawhide Project are described -7- in Section 5 of the Environmental Impact Analysis; Section 6 suggests possible mitigation measures that could be implemented; Section 7 lists the unavoidable adverse impacts of the Project; and Section 8 describes the irreversible and irretrievable com- mitments of resources that will be made if Rawhide is constructed and operated. Little comment was received at the public hearings , or thereafter, that the Environmental Impact Analysis was in any way inadequate in its treatment of these topics. Dr. Charles G. Wilber, Professor of Zoology at Colorado State University, who has extensive qualifications and experience with coal-fired power plant environmental analyses , testified that the Rawhide Environ- mental Impact Analysis was complete, "carried out in a competent manner" , and covered "the usual and necessary factors needed to arrive at a final decision with respect to the Rawhide Project. " Earl Hogan, a professional engineer who also is experienced in environmental issues related to major capital projects , agreed with that assessment. A few people shared the concern of Steven Roy who, while he could find no particular fault with the project, was simply opposed to the idea of such a facility anywhere near his property. The Board concludes that the environmental impacts of the proposed Rawhide Project are as slight as could realistically be hoped for from a project of this magnitude. The Rawhide Project as now proposed has been changed to further minimize impact wherever possible and in addition appropriate and effective mitigation measures will be implemented. The General Manager -8- is directed to pursue these mitigation measures prudently and diligently. Our conclusion is in large part a tribute to the thoroughness and care that was exercised by the environmental planners in iden- tifying potential sites for the Project. See Bibliography Docu- ments Nos. 3, 4, and 5 of the Environmental Impact Analysis. Due to the strength of those studies, adverse environmental impacts were identified and minimized at the outset, and this has been confirmed by the detailed environmental work that followed those first studies. See Bibliography Documents Nos. 10 , 12 , 13 , 16 , 18, 21, 24 , 25 , 26 , 29 and 30 of the Environmental Impact Analysis. (5) The Socio-Economic Impacts of the Rawhide Project The socio-economic impacts that are anticipated as a result of the construction and operation of the Rawhide Energy Project are fully described in Section 5 and the accompanying Bibliography of the Environmental Impact Analysis; mitigation measures and monitoring are addressed in Section 6 ; Section 7 lists unavoidable adverse impacts; and Section 8 notes the irreversible and irre- trievable commitments of resources that would be made to the project. Some witnesses at the public hearings felt that the Environ- mental Impact Analysis was inadequate in its treatment of "second- ary impacts. " Robert Thompson, Wayne Ude and Cliff Bymaster voiced this viewpoint. These arguments are premised on the assumption that, because a future electric energy project will serve an in- crease in population, the project is the cause of that population -9- increase. We do not agree with that premise. There is no power plant near Fort Collins , yet it is growing faster than any city in Colorado; there is a very large power plant very near Glenrock, Wyoming yet there is little growth there. Marin County, California also has demonstrated that growth is not dependent upon the exist- ence of adequate utility capacity. Other members of the public were concerned that Platte River ' s water rights, under its agreement with Fort Collins and Water Supply & Storage Company, might prove inadequate in drought years. Their concern was that under such conditions agricultural water rights might be condemned to supply the project' s shortfall in water supply. Eugene Schneider, Cliff Bymaster, and Bill Burt expressed this view. Reports from consulting hydrologists , as well as the exhibits which are part of the Rawhide water reuse agreement, show that chances are remote that additional water will be needed in a dry year beyond the regulating capability of the 13, 600 acre feet of water to be stored in the Rawhide cooling pond. See Environmental Impact Analysis Bibliography Documents Nos. 17 and 28 . Moreover, Platte River has , or will have, back up sources of supply -- in- cluding any excess water supplies of its member municipalities and its Windy Gap entitlement -- that could be called upon in a drought. If needed, eligible water for Rawhide could be pur- chased or leased on the open market. It is the position of this Board not to condemn agricultural water rights , but this position does not preclude the purchase of water at an equitable price to be bargained for with a willing seller. -10- Two witnesses, Patricia Grant and Wendell Nelson, were con- cerned that the impacts of increased traffic would not be ade- quately mitigated. This Board appreciates their concern. At this time, however, we do not perceive that the impacts of the Rawhide Project alone will justify improvements to the county road network that go beyond improving Buckeye Road from I-25 past the Rawhide site to a junction with County Road 78 , as described in the Environmental Impact Analysis . Platte River will constrain the heavier trucks from using roads other than I-25 and the Buckeye Road segment to Rawhide as a condition of its construction contracts . And it may be that other methods of traffic control will prove effective in mitigating these traffic problems as a less costly alternative to upgrading. All feasible alternatives will be explored as part of Platte River' s ongoing obligation to mitigate such impacts. (6) Transmission Line Impacts and Alternatives (a) General The transmission line impacts and methods of mitigating them are discussed in Sections 5 and 6 of the Environmental Impact Analysis. These topics are reviewed in greater depth in Bibliography Documents Nos . 15 and 20 of the Environ- mental Impact Analysis . Most of the concerns pertaining to transmission lines that were raised at the public hearings are adequately addressed in the Environmental Impact Analysis. Most witnesses were primarily concerned with the effects the -11- transmission lines might have upon them in their indi- vidual circumstances . Nearly all of these kinds of impacts were discussed in the Environmental Impact Analysis . There was some concern expressed as to the effects of the lines on persons with heart pacemakers. While there appears to be no problem for new pacemakers with trans- mission lines of the voltage proposed for Rawhide, some older pacemakers may possibly be affected. The Board has therefore attempted to accommodate this concern, and others, in recommending an alternative eastern transmission line route. See discussion below. (b) Western Transmission Line Route Only two non-specific objections to the Western route were made by the public. Questions posed at the hearings were answered to the satisfaction of the questioner at that time. The various impacts of the alternative western routes have been considered and the Board is satisfied that the Western route of least impact has been selected, as shown in Figure 2-14 . (c) Eastern Transmission Line Route At the Wellington hearing, several people voiced objections to routing the Eastern transmission line along the Larimer-Weld County line road, especially in the more -12- heavily populated section south of Cobb Lake. These objec- tions alleged a variety of impacts to the County Line route, most of them stemming from the heavier population in the area. Platte River' s Board and management have been parti- cularly well served in evaluating this problem by the letter from Janice and Eric Wilkinson, which was submitted to us on December 4 , and the letter of Mrs. Roger Vermeer, submitted December 6 . Comprehensive and analytical state- ments such as these have real value, and together with other competent testimony are instrumental in reaching a decision to change the routing of the Eastern transmission line away from the County Line Road to the alternative routing here- inafter discussed. The Colorado Division of Wildlife has also voiced its concern in regard to the County Line route' s impact upon the Wellington Management Area. The Division would prefer that Platte River parallel existing lines through the area rather than open a new route. These objections must be weighed against the agricultural impacts cited by those opposed to the alternative Weld County routes. After conferring with staff and consultants, it appears to this Board that by routing the Eastern transmission line along the right-of-way of the existing Bureau of Reclamation 345 kV line, for a part of the distance, and down the un- cultivated slope near Black Hollow Creek to join with Weld County Road 19 , and thence south to Black Hollow Reservoir, -13- most of the cited agricultural impacts can be avoided. The remainder can be fairly compensated when right-of-way is acquired. Accordingly, the Board has directed that the route selected for the Eastern transmission line be as shown in revised Figure 2-14 . (7) Water Pipeline Impacts No testimony or comment was received criticizing the Environmental Impact Analysis ' treatment of the impacts of the water pipeline. See pp. 5-34 , 5-35 and 6-il. It does not appear to this Board that such impacts are significant. Disruptions attributable to construction will be temporary and the pipeline will be underground. (8) Alternatives to the Rawhide Project Alternatives to the Rawhide Project are discussed in Section 9 of the Environmental Impact Analysis and accompanying documents. (a) Alternative Generating Methods Testimony was offered by Dr. Stuart Krebs to the effect that alternatives to the Rawhide Energy Project were not addressed adequately in the Environmental Impact Analysis . Based upon our review of the Environmental Impact Analysis, this Board does not believe Dr. Krebs ' criticism is well taken. The considerations of alternative generating methods -- including those of nuclear power and cogeneration which were specifically mentioned by Dr. Krebs -- are discussed in Section 9 of the Environmental Impact Analysis. See pp. -14- 9-12 to 9-17 and Table 9D. These subjects are explored in greater detail in Bibliography Document No. 19 and are dis- cussed in Bibliography Documents Nos . 1, 2 , 6 , 7 , 9 and 14 of the Environmental Impact Analysis . / (b) Alternative Projects Based upon its review of the Environmental Impact Anal- ysis as well as the testimony and comment submitted by the public, this Board has reached the conclusion that environ- mental and socio-economic impacts of the proposed Rawhide Project will be minimal. While it would unduly prolong this memorandum to discuss in detail each and every factor that has led us to that conclusion, it is appropriate to point out the features of the Rawhide Project proposal that make it not only acceptable, but superior, in comparison with available alternatives . Because various factors are inter- related, and may vary from one alternative to the next, it is not possible to definitely designate one alternative as 2/ It is appropriate to emphasize at this point a basic feature of the Environmental Impact Analysis that seems to have escaped some readers of the document. The preface to the Environmental Impact Analysis reads as follows : "The accompanying Environmental Impact Analysis is based upon . a large number of reports . . . contain (ing) literally thousands of pages of information . . . In order to present this information . . . without . . . (being) excessively long and burdensome . . . a substantial amount of summarization has been necessary. Accordingly, the references listed in the Bibliography should be considered an integral part of the environmental analysis and should be consulted when additional information is desired. " Zemphasis added) -15- environmentally preferable. It is possible, however , to evaluate all aspects of the Rawhide Project in order to determine whether initial indications from siting and other studies were successful in identifying an environmentally acceptable project. These aspects are catalogued below: First, the Rawhide site is located near the area it will serve . The lengths , and therefore the impacts , of trans- mission lines are thereby minimized. Rawhide is only 18 miles from Fort Collins , Platte River' s largest municipal customer, and only 28 miles from Loveland, approximately the load center of the Platte River system. See Figure 2-1, 2-14 , pp. 5-27 to 5-33 and 9-11 of the Environmental Impact Analysis. Second, the Rawhide site is located on remote, relatively unproductive land. There is no cultivated acreage on the Raw- hide site, and that site shows evidence of overgrazing in the past. Thus impacts on individuals and agriculture are mini- mized. See p. 5-16 of the Environmental Impact Analysis. At the same time, the Rawhide site is close enough to the labor forces of major metropolitan areas that socio- economic impacts are minimized. Mr. John Donlon of the Colorado Building and Construction Trades Council advises that "manpower requirements for the power project will be easily met from the surrounding areas . . See pp. 5-21 to 5-27 of the Environmental Impact Analysis. The air quality characteristics of the site are very favorable. Platte River' s consultant, Don S. Packnett, Staff Meteorologist of Stearns-Roger has stated, "In fact, -16- at Rawhide, and from the standpoint of air quality mainten- ance, you may have just about the best site for a coal-fired power plant in Colorado. " See pp. 5-13 to 5-16 and Bibli- ography Document No. 32 of the Environmental Impact Analysis . While some wildlife will be affected by construction and operation of the Rawhide Project, the overall impact of that project is expected to be favorable. The 460 acre cool- ing pond will generally be ice-free and will provide a habitat for warm water fish and migratory birds which does not now exist. See pp. 5-8 to 5-12 of the Environmental Impact Analysis . Water for cooling purposes will be provided by sewage effluent from Fort Collins , which can be transported to and impounded safely at the Rawhide site. This innovative plan for the use of return water flow from a sewage treatment plant to provide power plant cooling will make water do double duty in this arid region. See pp. 2-11 to 2-15 , 5-2 to 5-5 and 5-34 to 5-35 of the Environmental Impact Analysis . Dr. Harold Hagen expressed the concern that the growth of vascular water plants (such as water lilies) in the Rawhide cooling pond would increase water consumption beyond that al- ready projected for plant operation. Based on studies prepared by Black & Veatch, the growth of such rooted plants will be limited to shallow areas of the cooling pond around the shore- lines. The turbidity of the cooling pond, along with the control of the carbon content in the water from the sewage treatment plant, are expected to limit the growth of these -17- vascular plants to an acceptable level. See pp. 2-17 thru 2-19 , Table 2H, pp. 9-5 thru 9-7 and Table 9B. Coal trains can move to the site with a minimum of dis- ruption to Front Range cities and other populated areas . Coal deliveries will average 2 to 4 trains per week, compared to 4 trains per day which now pass the Rawhide site. See p. 2-21 of the Environmental Impact Analysis. The technology proposed for the Rawhide Project is the best practical technology available. Coal-fired power plants are a proven form of electric energy production technology; other technologies are at least a decade in the future. See pp. 9-12 to 9-15 and Bibliography Document No. 19 of the Environmental Impact Analysis . Finally, the Rawhide Project is the lowest cost alter- native. At Rawhide ' s projected level of operations , savings are estimated at $1. 9 million to $2 . 6 million a year compared to the next lowest cost alternative. See pp. 9-16 to 9-18 , Table 9D, Appendices 1 and 2 , and Bibliography Documents Nos. 1, 2 , 6 and 14 of the Environmental Impact Analysis . (c) Conclusion On the basis of the information presented in the Environ- mental Impact Analysis and supporting documents , this Board finds that construction of a 230 MW (net) coal-fired electric generating unit at the Rawhide Project site, for operation commencing early in 1985, is the best alternative available to Platte River to meet the electric energy needs of its four -18- municipal electric system customers , after all environmental, economic and technological factors are taken into account. (9) Miscellaneous Some people felt that there was insufficient time given to the public to review the Environmental Impact Analysis . In response to that concern the Board extended the period for written comment until December 7 . The Board has received several written comments since the November 30 hearing and prior to December 7 , all of which have been considered by this Board. Two such comments deserve further attention in this memorandum. One from Duane Boes , on December 3, questions need and sug- gests that a "ten percent growth factor in use per capita" under- lies projections by Platte River' s consultants. This is not the case. R. W. Beck & Associates projects growth in energy require- ments at 9% per year. Since population growth projections for the four municipalities are averaging about 5% per year, this leaves a factor of only 3. 8% per year growth in per capita use. Mr. Boes states that he considers Platte River' s sale of temporary surplus power and energy to be "unfair competition with private industry" . Rather than competition, such sales or exhanges are in fact cooperation, since the likely utility will be Public Service Company or Pacific Power & Light, or Tri-State who also have their customers ' energy needs to meet. Such oper- ating relationships established with other utilities are benefi- cial in that Platte River can look forward to similar purchases or exchanges in the future. -19- A letter from Dr. Robert P. Thompson suggests that estimated cost increases for Rawhide have resulted "not from inflation nor environmental delays but from problems in engineering and financ- ing" . This is pure fallacy. It is precisely inflation which has produced the estimated cost increase; engineering has never posed a problem and we have done no financing for the construction of Rawhide. Contrary to Dr. Thompson' s assertion, the Environmental Impact Analysis does in fact discuss impacts on air quality of all three Rawhide units operating at 750 MW. See p. 5-13 and Table 5B. Data in Table 5B are based upon "worst case" meteorology, but the text does not say so. We thank Dr. Thompson for calling this to our attention and have ordered a correction. (10) Further Findings of Fact From the record before this Board, including the Environ- mental Impact Analysis, its Appendices and Bibliography, related engineering studies of the Rawhide Project, public comment there- on, expert opinion available from staff and consultants , and the experience and expertise of this Board' s members , it is found as a fact that: (a) Platte River Power Authority ("Platte River" ) is a municipally-owned utility and a political subdivision of Colorado, established pursuant to Section 29-1-204 , Colorado Revised Statutes 1973. It is engaged in the supply of electric energy at wholesale to its four municipality owners , Estes Park, Fort Collins , Longmont and Loveland ("Municipalities" ) , pursuant to uniform -20- contracts dated September 5 , 1974 and running to June 30 , 2014 . (b) Article XXV of the Colorado Constitution reserves to municipalities all decisions relating to and auton- omous control over the facilities of their municipally- owned utilities . With respect to the need for, and the design and timing of, new electric generation and trans- mission facilities, this decision-making function has been delegated, by the municipalities which own and control Platte River, to the Platte River Board of Directors. (c) Capacity and energy projections prepared by Platte River' s staff and consultants show that by 1985 all energy resources now available to Platte River to perform its energy supply obligations to the Muni- cipalities , and from its share of the Yampa Project, will be fully utilized, and that an additional source of base load electric energy generation is needed. (d) The costs of delivered energy from alternative sources of base load generation located in Colorado, have been analysed and compared in the net delivered capability range of 70 MW to 236 MW. A coal-fired generating unit of a net capability of 230 MW, located near Platte River' s load center will provide delivered energy at the lowest cost. (e) The Rawhide site in northern Larimer County, about 18 miles north of Fort Collins , is one of minimal environ- mental impact, is capable of supporting coal-fired -21- generation up to 750 MW while meeting air quality standards, and is readily accessible to rail delivery of coal and cooling water supplies . (f) The estimated cost of a 230 MW (net) proposed coal- fired power plant at the Rawhide site is $255 . 5 million, based upon construction for commercial operation in January 1985 . This estimate allows for an estimated inflation rate of 6% a year and includes administrative and engineering overheads , fuel and spare parts inven- tory and interest during construction. (g) The estimate of $255 . 5 million for the Rawhide Energy Project includes , as part of said project, the necessary railroad spur for coal delivery, the necessary pipeline for cooling water supply and two (2) 230 kV electric transmission lines of double circuit capability to carry the output of the power plant to load centers . (h) Engineering of the first generating unit and the other components of the Rawhide Energy Project has already commenced, and it is anticipated that the first 230 MW (net) generating unit can be available for commercial operation in January 1985 . To meet that schedule it is necessary that zoning for the site be approved by April 1979 and acquisition of rights-of-way for the water pipe- line be commenced immediately thereafter. (i) Commencing in 1985 the output of the Rawhide Project will be used by Platte River to meet the increasing electric energy requirements of the Municipalities. -22- Prior to the time that the full capacity of Rawhide is used for this purpose, the remaining capacity which is temporarily surplus to the then current needs of the Municipalities will be sold to, or exchanged with, other electric utilities. (j ) The cost of electric power and energy from the Rawhide Energy Project will be higher than the cost of power and energy from existing sources currently available to Platte River, and from a 140 MW share of the Yampa Project scheduled for commercial operation by July 1979 . However, beyond these sources Platte River does not have available to it a more economical source of base load power and energy than Rawhide to meet its supply obligations beyond 1985 . (k) Platte River proposes to finance the construction of the Rawhide Project by the issuance of tax-exempt municipal revenue bonds , secured by the revenues obtain- able from the Municipalities and other utilities from the sale of power and energy to them. (1) Coal for the first 230 MW (net) unit of the Rawhide Project will come from the Antelope Mine in Wyoming pursuant to a contract between Platte River and the Antelope Coal Company executed October 19 , 1978 . Coal quantities are 800 , 000 tons a year. The coal has a nominal heat content of 8500 Btu per pound and a sulfur content of 0 . 29%. -23- (m) Pursuant to an Intergovernmental Agreement with Larimer County, dated August 25 , 1977 , Platte River has pre- pared an Environmental Impact Analysis of the Rawhide Energy Project. This analysis has been made available to the public and has been the subject of review and comment at two public hearings in Platte River' s service area: (i) at Loveland on November 29 , 1978 and (ii) at Wellington on November 30 , 1978 . Provision was made to receive written comments until the close of business on December 7 , 1978 . This Analysis , as supplemented or revised to reflect appropriate comments , has been approved by this Board. (n) The construction, operation and maintenance of the Rawhide Energy Project will not duplicate the facil- ities of any other municipality, public utility or the United States . (o) There is a need for the construction, operation and maintenance of the Rawhide Energy Project, including its related electric transmission and water pipeline facil- ities . (p) Platte River is and will be financially and otherwise able to construct, operate and maintain the Rawhide Energy Project. (q) A conscientious effort has been made to minimize the environmental impact of the proposed Rawhide Energy Project. That impact will be as slight as could reason- ably be expected for a project of this magnitude and is acceptable when balanced against the need for, and -24- the benefits derived from, the electric energy to be generated by such a facility. (r) The Rawhide Energy Project complies with the mandate of the United States National Energy Policy that electric utilities , wherever possible, utilize coal for the generation of electric energy. (s) As revised and supplemented, the Environmental Impact Analysis provides the necessary background and insight which are essential to our decision whether to formally adopt the Rawhide Energy Project. In this Board' s judg- ment, the Environmental Impact Analysis complies in every respect with the guidelines contained in Attach- ment "A" of the Intergovernmental Agreement of August 25, 1977 between Platte River and Larimer County. (11) Conclusions This Board concludes that: (a) Utilizing the best available technology there is not a dependable , cost-effective alternative to a coal- fired generation facility which can meet the future electric energy needs of the Platte River municipal- ities, commencing early in 1985. The Rawhide Energy Project is the most environmentally acceptable and cost-effective site-specific alternative for a coal- fired generation facility available to Platte River. (b) The needs of Platte River ' s municipal electric system customers and the public convenience and necessity -25- require that Platte River construct, operate and main- tain the Rawhide Energy Project and the related electric transmission and water pipeline facilities as the next source of base load electric energy generation for the four municipalities of Estes Park, Fort Collins , Longmont and Loveland. (12) Order Therefore in consequence of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions, the Board of Directors of the Platte River Power Authority does hereby authorize and direct the General Manager as follows ; (a) To prepare and present to the Board an appropriate resolution embodying the substance of the Findings and Conclusions of this Memorandum of Decision and the remainder of this Order; (b) To assemble and distribute an appropriate number of copies of the Rawhide Energy Project Environmental Impact Analysis, as revised and supplemented by this decision; and (c) To prepare and serve upon Larimer County the Notice of Completion as specified in the Intergovernmental Agreement of August 25, 1977 , together with a copy of this Memorandum of Decision, the Environmental Impact Analysis , and any other documents required by said Intergovernmental Agreement. -26- Dated this 14th day of December 1978. FOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY AT 2,E5-T„' 2 Robert L. Dekker �\ rry T of er Secretary hairma The following Directors concur in this decision: Bilderback, Case, Dekker, Marchand Patterson, Russell, and Tregent -27- • PLATTE RIVtR POWER AUTHORITY TIMBERLINE & HORSETOOTH ROADS • FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525 Telephone: (303) 226-4000 Board of Directors January 30 , 1979 Cable. "PLATTRIVER J.D. Bilderback Stanley R.Case Robert L. Dekker Jean M. Marchand E. George Patterson,Jr. Jack E. L. Russell Harry B.Tregent Jerry Trotter General Manager Albert J. Hamilton Commissioner Norman Carlson, Chairman Weld County Board of County Commissioners P. O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80632 Dear Mr. Chairman: The Platte River Power Authority ("Platte River" ) is a political subdivision of the State of Colorado and a wholly-owned instru- mentality of the municipalities of Estes Park, Fort Collins, Longmont and Loveland (the "Municipalities" ) . Platte River was established pursuant to C.R.S. 1973 Section 29-1-204 in order to supply the electric generation and transmission requirements of the Municipalities. Under Article XXV of the Colorado Constitution, Platte River is exempt from the jurisdiction of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission. It is thus the function of the Platte River Board of Directors to determine what facilities should be constructed by Platte River in meeting the Municipalities' convenience and necessity. On December 14, 1978 , Platte River' s Board of Directors formally adopted the Rawhide Energy Project, in northern Larimer County, as the next source of electric energy generation for the four Municipalities. A copy of the Board' s decision accompanies this letter. Platte River' s petition for rezoning of the Rawhide site is currently under consideration by Larimer County. In order to interconnect the Rawhide Project with Platte River ' s system, two 230 kV transmission lines will be required. Approxi- mately 11 miles of one of these transmission lines is proposed to pass through western Weld County, as shown by the solid line on the eastern half of the attached map (entitled "Alternate Transmission Routes, Figure 9-3" ) . The broken lines on the map indicate the alternative routes that were also considered by the Board. The decision to follow this Weld County route was reached by the Platte River Board because, after due consideration of public comment received at two public hearings on November 29 and 30, 1978 , the Board concluded that this route caused the least number of adverse impacts. PLATTE Commissioner Noi in Carlson, Chairman ik RIVER Weld County Board of County Commissioners POWER January 30, 1979 AUTHORITY Page 2 Several Weld County landowners appeared at the Platte River hear- ings in opposition to the eastern transmission line route recom- mended earlier by the Platte River staff. This earlier route would have followed the Larimer-Weld County line. These Weld County land- owners, who felt that their homes and agricultural activities would be unduly affected by the "County-Line" route, indicated that they felt these concerns would be minimized by following a route further to the east. In light of this public testimony, Platte River' s Board, as part of its December 14 decision, agreed to seek Weld County' s approval for the alternative eastern route shown on the attached map. The purpose of this letter is to ask for review of the proposed transmission line route by the Weld County Planning Department staff, the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. In addition to the documents already mentioned, we are including 20 copies of the following which you may find useful : (i) "Rawhide Energy Project Transmission Line Siting" , (ii) "Supplement Rawhide Energy Project Transmission Line Siting" , and (iii) excerpts from the "Rawhide Energy Project Environmental Impact Analysis" that pertain to the transmission lines. The two transmission siting reports discuss in detail the methodologies employed in evaluating the various alternate routes. The excerpts from the environmental analysis set forth potential environmental impacts of the line as well as steps to be taken in mitigating such impacts. Platte River' s staff has been in contact with your Planning Depart- ment and we have been advised that the Planning Commission may be able to schedule a hearing in regard to this matter in about 45 days. Once a firm date for that hearing is established, Platte River will undertake to publish an appropriate advertisement announcing that hearing, and to make appropriate presentations to the County in regard to this transmission line. We look forward to working with you on this matter. Very truly yours, PLAT E RIVER POWER A THORITY Al ert . amilton General Manager /kr Enclosures FISCHER,BROWN, HUDDLESON AND GUNN ATTORNEYS AT LAW WARD H. FISCHER WILLIAM H.BROWN ELEVENTH FLOOR,FIRST NATIONAL TOWER POST OFFICE DRAWER U CHAS.R.HUDDLESON WILLIAM C.GUN N FORT COLLINS,COLORADO 80522 STEVEN B.RAY AREA CODE 303/4132.1056 W. PAUL ECKMAN September 9, 1980 ,.`\ Mr. Bill Kirby, Chairman l�glZ Weld County Commissioners �E��;" "\`' ,g5S Weld County Courthouse 915 10th Street \'‘ Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Platte River Power Authority Rawhide Transmission Line Dear Bill: Enclosed you will find a proposed Resolution that I believe adequately describes and amends the previous Resolutions concerning the route of the Rawhide transmission line. This Resolution should cover the meetings with the Weld County Commissioners with Platte River on August 18, 1980 and with the Parkers' attorney on September 8, 1980. I have amended the route as it crosses the northerly boundary of Parkers' property, then proceeding southerly to the existing pole location, with the centerline of the easement to be 50 feet from the east section line of Section 4 (apparent center line of County Road #19) as I believe the County Board has now agreed. However, if you have any questions or problems with the enclosed Resolution, please feel free to call me and we will make any appropriate changes. In view of the several hearings and meetings that the Weld County Board has had to have regarding Platte River's transmission line, I express on behalf of Platte River and myself my appreciation for the patience and accommodation of the Board shown to Platte River. Most importantly, we certainly appreciate the fairness that the Board has shown Platte River in its decisions at those hearings and meetings. If you would, please convey our appreciation to the other, members of the Board. Very truly yours, d, Qudeon CRH:ajh enc. cc: Mr. Bill Slimak (enc.) Mr. Roy Rohla (enc. ) 4 , /r • i a o j c „.,,,. / _\14 „:„.if— '' 9'.\''ill I4 � \v / I•s 1 •A •v: ,::- \ v v,-. 1 "� W N \N\,a4CN • .l i 14xM M:A\R y�,�aNx4N .. r ' im S „d W M 0 „«Nill ci\\ ' �r,'�eII VA _If \\ �� \ i H i 1 „ 44",,,, wit =„ „ii 1�t .4 1 iii 7"7.. R .a LMT N ;`...! _ �� \ gyp,. i� r moll 41.--• a • A .6,4.‘,,,saft �• R 4 4 141' , `" :: i \ ` .. tNM,,. •' w M Gs.. r uni fit' I' . Ill I t•:,,,,,.. l, ,,,,;‘,..,Lill Ala - - ,44,1I4V.,Arrk _,..„1.„,,,i,voi, �,i` ` �® ill-1r �, Q N M.g 149 pd\tN\C \ �"� N•",�' '''''retil' -''4:A \ ''l 9 • v"�\ �v! iiN k w I I ■ • � • . ' win . 1� �� ,..\-0,,f,:,„:.,;,,, ..0 1 , (J 451,, vrifz4 4 .'P-i4::. 01110., .L- vWa�"' bw., �S,. � .� • I. g 1 w fl i'M„ r >• o 44I I sa�ow f : * y � iir G 1 1 '�� r '''4f' X4,, i � „ rav r 9 N„ 9 � „N , ,, ' '"" r l \` a � " " „0„4„0„,.m..1" G `: �� y ,_I� r1 `It • �`�' .K•••-- w + .GM�ti .„,446,"‘,.:,,'\404,444, .. \\a�`C\'M�\ w�\�pC q tl `\ I it r'., ,,, I is...." •....esuisr a„r �� •`ww"'^"`amv✓� �M,�+ +` \, ..,..",, ,,,.:.,0,,,„,„4,011.;:,,,,0040,, , .„0„0/ff. x "✓✓„� �,Nvq^'� �' ',h L ....... ttif- � w",al^i vile. \�,;y ,- - ice_ _ r r v�� „ ,� u • , ■ t�d'wl I �l �� V I ,>. ' "yam tIN •*''''''''' •�G �' M \,N� \� 14. �^Jf 1 �R.�'�. �OfOt M9 x„ 4 N 11\ Np A G ,A�\ Pii ya� as �l'"v�v \'vu hSv �3�w " 1 JJ Proximity of buildings to Possible Mimtransmission line along roads: r public and Reserved Hello