Agenda - Council - 06/25/2013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Scoping Decision Document PUC Docket No. ET2/TL-11-915 Regulatory Background A high -voltage transmission line RPA for the project was filed by the applicant on October 4, 2011, and accepted by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (Commission) on November 4, 2011. The route permit will be reviewed under the alternative review process, pursuant to Minnesota Statues 216E (Power Plant Siting Act) and Minnesota Rules 7850.2800 to 7850.3900. Under the alternative permitting process the Commission has six months from the date the application was accepted as complete to make a decision on the route permit. The Commission may extend this time limit up to three months for just cause or upon agreement of the applicant (Minnesota Rule 7850.3900, subpart 1). Scoping Process Scoping is the first step in the process after application acceptance. The scoping process has two primary purposes: 1) to ensure that the public has a chance to participate in determining what routes and issues should be considered for study in the EA, and 2) to help focus the EA on the most important issues surrounding the route permit decision. The scope identifies potential human and environmental issues that will be addressed in the EA. The scope also presents an anticipated schedule of the environmental review process. Public Sconina Meeting Depaitinent of Commerce Energy Facility Permitting (EFP) staff held public information and scoping meetings on December 1, 2011, at Anoka City Hall in Anoka, Minnesota. The meeting provided members of the public an opportunity to learn about the proposed project and the state's high -voltage transmission line route permitting process, review the applicant' RPA, ask questions, provide comments, and identify potential impacts and route alternatives to be considered for the scope of the environmental assessment. Approximately 20 people attended the two meetings. A court reporter was present at the public meeting and transcribed questions asked and comments made by the public, as well as responses from EFP staff and the applicant. Six people provided oral comments and/or asked questions about the proposed project. Topics and issues raised by the public at the meeting included: transmission line structure construction and engineering, preferred route, regulatory framework, noise, tree removal, and parks. One route segment alternative was proposed at the meeting. Route Segment Alternative suggested Route Segment Alternative A — This route segment alternative is in the city of Anoka. As is represented in the attached Figure 2, this alternative would depart from the applicant's preferred route at 6th Avenue where it crosses railroad tracks, and instead parallel the railroad right of way to the northwest, then turn north along 4th Avenue, then turn east to join up with the applicant's preferred route at Garfield Avenue. Page 2 of 9