# Environmental Assessment

\



## Kotzebue Wind Installation Project Kotzebue, Alaska

U.S.Department of Energy Golden Field Office 1617 

### Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado May 1998

# Environmental Assessment

Kotzebue Wind Installation Project Kotzebue, Alaska

U.

### S

.

### Department ofEnergy Golden Field Office 

### 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado May 

### 1998

## Finding of No 

## Significant Impact Environmental Assessment
Kotzebue Wind Installation Project Kotzebue, AlaskaF'INDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT for KOTZEBUE 

### WIND INSTALLATION PROJECT KOTZEBUE, ALASKA

AGENCY: Department ofEnergy, Golden Field Office ACTION: Finding ofNo SignificantImpact SUMMARY: The DOE is proposing to provide financial .assistance to the Kotzebue Electric Association to expand its existing wind installationnear Kotzebue, Alaska. COPIES OF THE EA ARE AVAILABLE FROM: Deborah Turner DOEIGO NEPA Compliance Officer U.S.Department of ~ne& 1617Cole Boulevard Golden, CO 80401 (303) 275-4746 FOR FURTHER INli'ORMATION ON 

### THE DOE NEPA PROCESS CONTACT: Carol Borgstrom, Director Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance U.

### S. Department ofEnergy 1000 IndependenceAvenue, S. W. Washington, D.C. 20585 (202) 586-4600 or (800) 472-2756

BACKGROUND: Like many rural Alaskan towns, Kotzebue uses diesel-powered generators to produce its electricity, the high cost of which is currently subsidized by the Alaskan State government. In an effort to provide a cost effective and clean source of electricity, reduce dependance on diesel fuel, and reduce air pollutants, the DOE is proposing to fund an experimental wind installation to test commercially available wind turbines under Arctic conditions. The results would provide valuable informationto other Alaskan communities experiencing similar dependance on diesel-powered generators. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The EA for the proposed wind installation assessed environmentalimpacts to biological resources, land use, electromagnetic interference, coastal zone,air quality, cultural resources, and noise. The potential impacts from the wind installation could include some loss ofwildlifehabitat ftom constructing and operating the turbines, and increased bird mortality from collisions with turbine blades and towers. 

### All construction activities would be conducted while the tundra is frozen to minimize impacts to the tundra and permafrost layer. The small amount of displaced habitat would pose no significant impact to wildlife because of the abundance ofiiar habitat in the surrounding area. While occasional bird strikes are possible, it is considered unlikely because the wind site is not a migratory staging area nor within a migratory corridor for waterfowl or shore birds. The wind installation does not pose any land use inconsistencies, nor does it have the potential to impact local radio transmission or airport navigational systems. The wind turbines would not produce any air emissions, and actually would reduce air emissionsby displacing electricity produced from diesel generators. The existing site is located in an area devoid of cultural resources. Noise levels fiom wind turbine operation would be indiscernible fiom background noise in the area. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: No Action: With the no action alternativeKotzebueElectric Association would continue to produce electricity from diesel generators'and explore alternativeenergy technologies if and when funds are available. Because funding for wind energy projects outside the DOE are limited, the no action alternative would substantially delay, ifnot preclude, the opportunityto test a variety of wind turbines under Arctic conditions. DETERMINATION: Based onthe information inthe Environmental Assessment, DOE determines that the KotzebueWind InstallationProject does not constitute a majorFederal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, within the meaning ofthe National Environmental Policy Act. Therefore, the preparation of an environmental impact statement is not required, and DOE is issuing this Finding ofNo SignificantImpact. Issued in Golden, Colorado, this 

### / 

## 3 

# '* day of 

### /Id4 u 

### ,1998. f '



### U.S

.Department of Energy Golden Field OfficeManagerTABLE OF CONTENTS

.......................................... ACRONYMS 

### AND ABBREVIATIONS v

................................................. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES- 1

CHAPTER 1

...................................................... INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 National EnvironmentalPolicy 

### Act and Related Procedures

................ 1 1.2 Scoping

....................................................... 1

.................................................... 1.3 Background 2

............................................... 1.4 Purpose andNeed 2

CHAPTER 2

.............................. PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 5

................................................. 2.1 Proposed Action 5

.......................................... 2.2 Existing KEA Operations 5

............................................... 2.3 Project Description 6

................................................. 2.4 Project Location 7

....................................... 2.5 Construction and Installation 7 2.6 Wind Turbine Operation

.......................................... 10

........................................... 2.7 No Action Alternative 11

CHAPTER 3

.......................................... AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 13

............................................ 3.1 Biological Resources 13

.............................................. 3.1.1 Vegetation 13

................................................... 3.1.2 Birds 13

............................................... 3.1.3 Mammals 15

........................... 3.1.4 Threatened and Endangered Species 16

..................................................... 3.2 LandUse 16TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 3.3 CoastalZone

..................................................17

...................................... 3.4 Meteorology and Air Quality 18 3.4.1 Regional Climate

.......................................... 18 3.4.2 Air Quality

............................................. 19 3.5 Cultural Resources

.............................................. 20 3.6 Noise

........................................................ 20

CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS

......................................... 23 4.1 Biological Resources

............................................ 23 4.1.1 Vegetation

.............................................. 23 4.1.2 Birds

................................................... 23 4.1.3 Mammals

............................................... 24 4.1.4 Threatened and Endangered Species

........................... 24 4.2 LandUse

.....................................................25 4.3 Impacts to the CoastalZone

....................................... 26 4.4 AirQuality

.................................................... 26 4.5 CulturalResources/Human Environment

............................. 27 4.5.1 Environmental Justice

....................................... 27 4.6 Noise

........................................................ 28 4.7 No Action Alternative

........................................... 29

CHAPTER 5

............................................. CUMULATIVEIMPACTS 31

CHAPTER 6 REFERENCES

...................................................... 33

CHAPTER 7

........................ LIST OF AGENCIES 

### AND PERSONS CONSLJLTED 35TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) LIST OFFIGURES Figure

...................................... 1KotzebueWind Farm Project Regional Map 8

............................ 2 KotzebueWind 

### Farm Project Vicinity Map and Plot Plan 

### 9

LIST OF TABLES \ Table 1 Operation-RelatedNoise Level Estimates

....................................... 29

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A SCOPMGLETTERS APPENDIX B NOTICE OF WETLANDS INVOLVEMENT FOR 

### THE KOZEBUE 

### WIND FARM PROJECT APPENDIX C EA DISTRIBUTION LETTERS

### AND COMMENTS APPENDIX D LIST OF SPECIES

### JNKOTZEBUE REGION APPENDIX E NOISE

### AND ELECTROMAGNETICJNTERFERENCE ANALYSES

### This page lefr intentionally blank.

### ACRONYMS AND 

### ABBREVIATIONS

ACMP Alaska Coastal Management Plan ADOT Alaska Department ofTransportation AOC Atlantic Orient Corporation AWT Advanced Wind Turbine

CAA Clean Air Act CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

DOE 

### U.S.Department ofEnergy dB decibel dBA decibel, A-weighted

EA Environmental Assessment EM1 Electromagnetic Interference EE DOE'S Office 

### ofEnergy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

F Fahrenheit FAA Federal Aviation Administration

KEA KotzebueElectric Association KIC KikiktagrukInupiat Corporation kwh Kilowatt hour
mph miles per hour MW Megawatt
NAAQ National Ambient Air Quality NAAQS National Ambient 

### Air Quality Standard 

### NEPA National EnvironmentalPolicy Act

### ACRONYMS AND ABBREMATIONS (Continued)

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory

PCE Power Cost Equalization

USACE U.S.Army Corps ofEngineers USBIA U.S. Bureau ofIndian Afhirs USFWS U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The U.S. Department ofEnergy's Golden Field Office is considering providing financial assistanceto the Kotzebue Electric Association to expand its existing wind installation site near Kotzebue, Alaska. Like many rural Alaskan towns, Kotzebueuses diesel-powered generatorsto produce electricity,the high cost of which is currently subsidized by the Alaskan State government. In an effort to provide a cost effective and clean source of electricity,reduce dependance on diesel hel, and reduce air pollutants, the DOEis proposing to partially fund the development of an experimental wind installationto test commercially available turbines under Arctic conditions. The results ofthe testing would provide valuable informationto other Alaskan communitiesthat rely solely on diesel-powered generators.

The proposed action consists of installing, operating, and maintaining up to 20 wind turbines and support equipment on an existing 148-acre site south of Kotzebue. Support equipment would consist of storage sheds or a larger storage structureto house electrical equipment needed to operate the turbines. Wind derived electricity would return to KEA via an existing distributionline at the project site.
The potential environmental impacts fiom the proposed expansion could include some loss of wildlife habitat fiom constructing and operating the turbines, and the potential for increased bird mortality from collisions with the turbine blades and towers. All construction activitieswould be conducted in winter months (Novemberto April) to minimizeimpacts to the underlying tundra and permafrost layer. In addition, the DOE has evaluated potential adverse effectsto land use, the coastal zone, air quality, cultural resources, noise, and electromagnetic interference, and found that the proposed action would not adversely affect these environmental categories. The beneficial impacts from the proposed project include a decreased dependance on diesel he1 and a subsequent reduction in air pollutants.

ES- 1

### This page leff intentionally blank.CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 National Environmental Policy Act and Related Procedures This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared in conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 

## $5 4321, et seq.); the Council

on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementingthe procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1 508);the U.S. Department ofEnergy's (DOE) implementing procedures for compliance with NEPA (10 CFR Part 1021);Executive Order 1 1990,Protection of Wetlands; and the Department of Energy Compliance with Floodplain~Wetlands Environmental Review Requirements (10 

### CFR 1022). This assessment evaluates the potential individual and cumulative effects of the proposed KotzebueWind Turbine InstallationProject on the physical, human, and natural environment. This document is intended to provide informationto the U.S. Department ofEnergy and other public agency decision makersto assist in making informed decisions in connectionwith the proposed project. This document reflects DOE'Sindependent evaluation and decision related tothe potential environmental impacts associated with this proposed experimentalwind installation in Kotzebue, Alaska.

1.2 Scoping Federal, state, local, Inuit tribal, and other potentially interested organizations were sent scoping letters concerningthe proposed action to assist the DOE in identifling potential issues. Appendix A containscopies ofthe scopingletters,the list ofrecipients, and the responses received. Additionally, a sitevisit was conducted duringNovember, 1997,to view the proposed site and meet with Inuit tribal, state, and local organization representatives. The main areas of concern that have been expressed are potential impactsto avian (bird) species, potential impacts

on migratory patterns oflocal animal populations, potential hazards in the local air space, visual aestheticsregarding the turbines, continued dependanceon petroleum based fbels, and a reduction in air emissions from petroleum he1combustion.

In accordance with EO 1 1990,Protection of Wetlands, and the Department of Energy Compliancewith Floodplain/WetlandsEnvironmental Review Requirements, a Federal RegisterNotice was posted on February 17, 1998. This notice requested comments from interested parties and stated that the Wetland Assessment requirements would be incorporated into the EA associated with this project. A copy of the Federal Register notice is contained in Appendix B.

1.3 

### Background Like many rural Alaskan towns, Kotzebue operateson electricityproduced from dieselpowered generators. The high cost of diesel fuel is currently subsidized by the Alaskan State Governmentthrough the Power Cost Equalization Program (PCE) which helps reduce the cost of electricityin rural communitieswhere diesel-fired generatorsprovide a majority ofelectrical needs. Because of the potential loss ofPCE funds, the cost ofelectricity in Kotzebue could increase by as much as 30 per cent for residential customers.

In an effort to find a cost-effective solution to increased electricity costs, Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) and the State ofAlaska have begun investigating the use of wind power to help supplant electricity derived from diesel generators. The knowledge acquired fiom this initiativewould ideally be used to assist small Alaskan communitiesin operatingtheir own wind installations. Through a combination ofKEA and State funding, KEA was able to purchase and install three wind turbines in 1997. 

### In order to increase both the number ofturbines and the knowledge for operatingwind and diesel power plants, KEA has approachedDOE for additional funding.

1.4 

### Purpose and Need The DOE GoldenField Officemission includes assisting organizationsin advancing the development and commercializationofenergy efficiency and renewable energy technologies such

as wind-generated power. In an effortto provide a cost effective and clean sourceof electricity, reduce diesel he1dependence, and reduce air emissions, the DOE proposes to partially fund the development of an experimentalwind installationlocated in Kotzebue, Alaska. The proposed wind installationis intended to test commercially availableturbinesin extreme Arctic conditions inorder to evaluate turbine performance and reliabilityunder awide range oftemperatures, precipitation events, and strong Arctic winds. This information would be useful in applyingwind power technology to other Alaskan villages experiencing similar dependance on diesel-powered generators.

### lhis page left intentional@ blank.

### CHAPTER 2 

### PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES

2.1 

### Proposed Action The Department ofEnergy's Golden Field Office is consideringproviding financial assistanceto the Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) to expand its existingwind installation site

near Kotzebue, Alaska, north ofthe Arctic Circle. The proposed action would reduce consumption of petroleum-based helsby harnessing wind energy as an additional source of electricalpower production. The existing diesel generatorswould be kept on line for supplemental electrical power as needed.

2.2 

### Existing KEA Operations KEA is a nonprofit rural electric system cooperativethat serves about 1,200retail customersin Kotzebue, Alaska. Both the power plant and administrative offices are centrally located in Kotzebue. Like many rural Alaskan towns, Kotzebue operates solely on electricity produced from its diesel-powered generators. KEA currently maintains six generatorswhich are capable ofproducing 11.18megawatts ofelectricity. KEA's operating load ranges from a low of 1.7MW to a high of 3.7MW, with an average of 2.5 MW. The average cost to
consumersis $19.96 cents per kilowatt hour 

### (kwh).

Under normal conditionsKEA operates only one or two ofits generators; the remaining generatorsprovide redundancy. During periods of low electrical load 

## - as in the summer months and most winter nights 

## - one generator runs continuously while the second is used as needed. Under heavy loads, KEA operates two generators simultaneously. Data from the last five years indicates that KEA consumes an average of 1,392,850 gallons of diesel he1per year with an average efficiency of approximately 14kwh per gallon ofhel. KEA's power output for 1997
was approximately 20 million kwh.

Under a separate project hnded by KEA and Alaska's Division of Energy, KEA installed three Atlantic Orient Corporation (AOC) turbines in the Spring of 1997. 

### As the wind turbinesystem is relatively new, KEA's focus has been on collecting performance data and debuggingthe electrical equipment and mechanical systems.

2.3 Project Description The proposed project would consist ofinstalling, operating, and maintainingup to 20 wind turbines and ancillary equipment on an existing 148-acre wind installation sitenear Kotzebue, Alaska, herein referred to as the project site.

The goal ofthe proposed project is to provide between one and two MW ofwind derived electricity tothe KEApower grid. Theproposed turbines would most likely consist oftwo and threebladed units. Specificcandidateturbines might includethe AOC 15/50,the Advanced Wind Turbine (AWT) 27 or 26, and theNew World Polar 100. Thepower ratings for the three turbines are 50 kW, 275 kW, and 100kW, respectively. Total wind turbine height varies for each model but ranges fiom approximately 107to 186feet. While the three turbines vary in size, power rating, and spacing requirements, they share similarities in installation and operation procedures.
Support and ancillary equipment would consist of either insulated storage sheds (control sheds) or a larger storage structuretohouse breaker panels, tools, and other equipment required tooperate and maintain the wind turbines. The structures would be skid orpiling mounted to preclude adverse effects totheunderlyingtundra. If control sheds areused they would consist of preassembled shipping containers measuring approximately 8 feet (ft) wide x 8 

### A high x 20 ft long. Each shed would house equipment to control three tofourturbines. 

### If a pile mounted building is used it could potentially be 28 

### ft wide x 40ft long tohouse the majority of the equipment.

The wind generated power would be fed into the KEA grid via an existing 7200 volt (V) distribution line installed in March of 1996to support the existing wind turbines. This line has the capacity tocarry 4 MW of electricity and would not require upgrading as a result ofthe proposed project.2.4 Project Location The 148-acreproject site islocated approximately 4.5 miles south of Kotzebue, Alaska. KEA leasesthe site fromthe Kikiktagruk Inupiat Corporation (KIC), the local Inupiat Eskimo corporation that ownsthe land. The site is rectangular, measuring approximately 1800

### fi by 3600 

### ft. (Figures 1 and 2). The project site isroughly 0.5miles fromthe coast and approximately 50 feet above sea level. Access to areas south of Kotzebueis via a dirt road that leads from Kotzebue to a U.S. Air Force White Alice Communication installation, then continues south along the coast. Under a separatebut related action, KEA applied for, and received, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE) approval for an access road that would extend fromthe Air Force property to the project site (USACE, 1997a).The road would be 0.7 mile long by approximately 18

### fi wide and would consist of a geofabricunderlayment placed over the tundra followed by 6000 cubic yards (yds3)of silty sand and 2000 yds3of coarse gravel for the road bed.

2.5 Construction and Installation KEA would procure the turbines in two phases between 1998and 2000. In 1998, seven additional AOC Model 15/50turbines would be purchased and installed. After a period of operating those units, it is anticipated that additional turbines would be chosen based on turbine availability and experiencesfrom the first phase ofoperation.

Wind turbine construction and installation would occur in stages and consist ofinstalling pilings, and assembling and raising the turbines and towers. Thetower foundations would consist of freezebackpilings placed in the permafrost which serve to anchorthe towers to the ground. Freezebackpilings are a standard construction component in Alaska and are specially engineered to prevent significant temperature changesin the permafrost, thus preventing heaving. Piling excavation would consist of augeringthree 16-to 22-inch diameter holes per tower, approximately 25 to 30 

### ft deep. After foundation preparation, the towers would be raised and the turbines and blades installed.

Construction is expectedto take place in the winter months (Novemberto April) to minimize impactsto the tundra and permafrost layer. Heavy equipment needed to complete this project would most likely consist of equipment for transportingthe hardware to the site, boringEXISTING 7200 V DISTRIBUTION LINE SECTION 26 

## 1

-



## -N- 

# I

0 

# i

500 1000 1500 

# -

SCALE 1" = 1000' 

# 7'~~~"" 1
TURBINES 

## I I

- 

### - - -

34 

### I 

## I I I 

## I I 

## I - 

## . - - - 

## I
KEA WlND FARM SITE 

## I I I 

## I 

## I

I 

## I I SECPION 35 

## I I

LJ DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY KOTZEBUE WlND FARM PROJECT --- -------

A IOCATION MAP Located In 17N. 18W, Kateel R~ver Meridton. Alaska Kotzebue Record~ng Dtstr~ct 

### VlClNlTY MAP AND PLOT PLAN

J08 No 30822-112
"LE Nwr VICMAP DCs(;N/ TWQIPSOU C*CWECIII)(C DRWl CWYn DATE 3/96 nwRC IU) 

### 2 

# -the piling holes, and raising the tower and turbine assembly. The equipment would be operated intermittently as the schedulefor installing the turbines spanstwo years. Construction experience from installing the three existing turbines indicates that it takes approximatelyone week to install

one AOC turbine. Because of their larger size, it is expected that installing the AWT and New Polar units may take longer.

In additionto existing KEA employees, it is anticipated that contract laborersmay be needed for wind turbine construction and installation. These laborers would be supplied by the local labor force and would not require relocatingworkers for this project. Based on experience from installing the AOC turbines, it is reasonable to expectthat a manufacturer's representative would assist with initial installation and troubleshooting, particularly for the AWT and New World Polar turbines. This is not expectedto last for more than a couple ofweeks and would not require permanent relocation for that individual.

2.6 Wind Turbine Operation Wind turbines, like gas and hydroelectric turbines, are designed to convert rotational energy into electricitythrough the use of a generator. Some of the design featuresfor the selected turbinesinclude: wood-epoxy blades, redundant brakes, the abilityto rotate with the prevailing wind direction, and a design life of 30 years. The speed at which these turbines start spinning (cut-in speed) is approximately 9to 11miles per hour (mph), while the maximum speed at which they shut-down (cut-out speed)is between 50 and 70 mph depending on the specific model. All the turbines are designed to withstand a maximum wind speed of 133mph. The tower assembly may consist of a solid tubular construction, or latticed. Electricityfrom the wind turbines is directed via insulated surface cable to the control sheds, the distribution line, and to the KEA grid. The effective coordination of diesel and wind power is a complex process. One goal ofthis project is to gain enough operationalknowledge to effectively manage the energy contributions from the wind turbines and the diesel generators.

Routine maintenance on the wind turbine equipment would be based on manufacturerspecific recommendations,but is anticipatedto occur every three to six months or after severe events (e.g. extreme wind). Maintenancewould essentiallyconsist of inspectingthe turbines andtowers to ensure the integrity ofthe componentsand fasteners, and changing out gearbox oil. The frequency of oil changes is dependent on the type of oil. Conventional oils require changing approximately once per year, while synthetic oils need changingless frequently (every 5 years). The AOC 15/50 gearbox containsapproximately 9 gallons of oil, while the AWT-26 gearbox holds approximately 15 gallons (AWT, 1997). KEA personnel would collect the oil in approved containers and dispose of it at KEA in an existingwaste oil burner.

2.7 No Action Alternative \ Under the no action alternative, KEA would continueto produce electricity from diesel generators and explore alternative energy technologiesif and when the funds are available. Current funding for wind energy projects outside ofthe 

### DOE is limited and, consequently, projects ofthis magnitude are often timesimpossible, especially in remote regions. The no action alternative would substantiallydelay, ifnot preclude, both the opportunitytotest a variety of wind turbines in Arctic conditionsand gain experiencein managing dieseVwind hybrid facilities.

### This page left 

### intentionally blank.CHAPTER3 

### AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

3.1 Biological Resources In the fall of 1997, a biological assessment was conducted to characetrizethe vegetation, birds, and mammals at the proposed project site, and to evaluatepotential impactsto these resources from expanding the wind installation. The assessment and results are contained in the report, "Biological Assessment of the KotzebueWind Farm Site, Kotzebue, Alaska" 

### @&My 1997). The following is a summary ofthe existingflora and fauna based on personal observation and consultation with both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Alaska Department ofFish and Game.

Kotzebueis located on the very north end of the Baldwin Peninsula, approximately 30 miles north of the Arctic Circle. Kotzebue is within theNorthwest Region ofAlaska and is characterized by continuous permafrost, numerous lakes and ponds, treelesscoastal tundra, and wet and moist tundra. The low-lying terrain and shallow permafrost result in poor drainage of surfacerunoff and produce extensive areas ofwetland habitat.

3.1.1 Vegetation The site is in an area comprised mostly ofmoist tundra and wet tundra. Moist tundra is

common in foothills and better drained sites, and covers extensive areas throughout the region. This plant community is characterizedby diverse plant species and varies from an almost continuousand uniformly developed tussock tundra to dense stands of dwarf shrubs. Wet tundra communities occupy much ofthe lowland areas, with vegetationusually dominated by grasses and sedges. Wet tundra communities are often interspersedwith small lakes and ponds.

3.1.2 Birds The varied habitats in Northwest Region of Alaska support an abundance ofbird life, including several Asiatic speciesthat frequentthe area. A site reconnaissance to support the biological assessmentwas conducted in October, 1997, after most ofthe migrant birds had left the area, and only two resident bird species were observed in vicinity ofthe site.Waterfowl use ofthe area surroundingthe sitewould be expected to be primarily for nesting in the wetlands and small lakes in the area (D&M, 1997). However, the lack of open water habitat such as lakes or ponds at the project site is likely a limiting factor as far as nesting in the immediate area. Small lakes and ponds are found approximately 0.25miles to the north and east ofthe site. The site is not within a major migration corridor and there are no major waterfowl staging areas in this portion ofthe Baldwin Peninsula. Most migratory bird movements are to the east in the Kobuk River delta within the Selewik National Wildlife Refbge and farther offshore for spring movements of seaducksand Brant.

Common shorebirds in the Kotzebue area include over 30 species ofmigrants and breeders. No major shorebird staging areas or migration corridorshave been documented near the project site. The nearest shorebird staging area is the Kobuk River delta, approximately 20 miles to the north. During spring migration, much of the shoreline habitat near the project site is still iced-in and little habitat is available. Fall migration is much more protracted and shorebirds have a wider variety ofhabitat to use and are not as concentrated.
Raptors are generally uncommon in the Kotzebue area. The only common speciesis the Northern Harrier, a summerresident which breeds in the area. Other species which could potentially be seen during spring and fall migration in the area include Rough-legged Hawks, Golden Eagles, Merlins, and Gyrfalcons. Snowy Owls are uncommon winter residents in this region, but migrate in higher numbers during winters when populations of their main prey species (lemmings) undergo population crashes.

Common passerines (perching birds) in the vicinity ofthe project site includeboth resident speciesand species which migrate to the northwest region to breed during the short Arctic summer. Resident passerine species are few and include only Common and Hoary Redpolls. Summerbreeders include Wilson's Warbler, Yellow Warbler, and Northern Waterthrush. However, most ofthese species nest in habitats with a higher shrub component.

The Willow Ptarmigan is one of the common resident species in the area. Numerous ptarmigan tracks were observed in the low shrub-willow communitiesjust west ofthe project site
14during the site reconnaissance. These birds are residents ofthe area but may undergo shifts in distributiondepending on the season. The Common Raven is also a resident ofthe area and a nest was documented on an old building adjacentto the project site. 

### Bank Swallows are also common, especially along the coast. Glaucous Gulls, Arctic Terns, and Long-tailed and Parasitic Jaegers would also be expected to occur near the project site. The Sandhill Crane is also a regular breeder and migrant in the project area.

3.1.3 Mammals The Northwest Alaska Region supports approximately 20 species ofterrestrial mammals and many ofthese are found on the Baldwin Peninsula. Smallmammal species which are most likely to occur in the immediate vicinity ofthe project site include masked and tundra shrews, snowshoehare, tundra redbacked vole, brown and green-collared lemmings, meadow vole, Alaska vole, and tundra voles @&M, 1997).Least and short-tailed weasels are also found in the general

area.
Large mammals includebrown bear, Arctic fox, red fox, coyote, wolf, muskox, and caribou, and occasional feral reindeer. Fox tracks were observed at the site during the reconnaissance. Thesepredator/scavengersare common in the general vicinity ofthe site throughout the year. Coyotes and wolves would be expectedto be less common in the area.

The Baldwin Peninsula is within the winter range ofthe Western Arctic Caribou Herd which currently numbers approximately 463,000 animals. Animals from this herd are known to
occur in the vicinity of the project site for short periods oftime during the spring and fall as caribou are migrating and a few animals spend the winter on the BaldwinPeninsula. Most caribou range considerabledistances and use large geographic areasto forage during the winter months.

Muskox from herds on the SewardPeninsulato the south are occasionally observed in the vicinity of the project site.3.1.4 Threatened and Endangered Species There are no Northwest Alaska Region plant species listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1972. However, there is one species of oxytropewhich occurs in the general vicinity of Kotzebue that is considered a species of interest. This small legume has been documented along the sides of gravel roads and building pads in the general vicinity of the site. The habitat ofthis species, well-drained gravel or stony soil, does not naturally occur at the site since most ofthe site is wet tundra.

The Baldwin Peninsula is within the range of the Arctic Peregrine Falcon which was delisted in October 1994. This falcon does not nest in this region but can pass through the area during spring and fall migration.

The coastal areas around Kotzebue Sound and the Chukchi Sea are within the range ofthe Spectacled Eider and Steller'sEider, both listed as threatened species under the ESA. The Steller7s Eider was listed on June 11, 1997. Thesebirds are not known to nest in the Kotzebue region (only known to nest near Barrow, approximately 330 miles north) and would be primarily migrants. Migratory movement of these seaducks is typically offshore, but they may migrate over land or use coastal habitatsto feed or rest

. The North American population of Spectacled Eiders has declined over 90 percent in recent years.

There are no threatened or endangered terrestrialmammals in this region.

3.2 Land Use 

### IUC owns approximately 8,790 acres ofland in the Kotzebue area. The 148-acre project site leased to KEA represents approximately 1.7%ofthe proximate 

### IUC land (Reeve 1997). While there are no formal land use guidance plans in existence, consultationwith 

### IUC has indicated that the wind turbine project does not conflict with any other intended land uses for this

area. Using the site for wind energywas describedby 

### IUC as "the highest and best use ofthe land" (D&M, 1997). There are some existing facilities and structures that are worthy of discussion asthey are either in the vicinity of the wind installation site or could be potentially impacted by wind turbine operation.TheRalph Wien Memorial Airport is located immediately south of Kotzebue and approximately4.5 miles northwest of the project site. The airport occupies approximately 1,805

acres of State-owned land, most ofwhich is the Kotzebue Lagoon. The State is currently updating the airport's Master Plan as not all aviation operations are fully compliant with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. In updating the plan, the State is evaluating alternatives for modifjllng and redeveloping portions of the airport. The preferred alternative consists ofmodifications and upgradestothe airport at its existing location. However, one alternative is to relocate the airportjust south and east of the'project site. Accordingto the Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT), implementing this alternativeis considered extremely unlikely because of the high cost associated with building a new facility and developing infrastructureneeded to access this location (ADOT, 1997).

KOTZ-AM radio in Kotzebue operates a 700 kilohertzradio tower that is approximately 320 feet tall and located approximately 1000feet to the west of the project site. Less than a mile to the west of the project site is the abandoned U.S. Air Force White Alice Communications stationwhich was used to relay communicationsto remote military installations and villages. Also, in 1996Kotzebue opened a new solid waste landfill approximately 2 miles northwest ofthe project site.

3.3 Coastal Zone The Alaska Coastal ManagementProgram (ACMP) is administeredby the Division of Governmental Coordinationto ensurethe protection and enhancement ofhabitats and resources in its coastal areas. The ACMP identifies several categories of habitat including estuaries, wetlands and tideflats, and rivers, streams, and lakes. Resourcesinclude air, land, and water, as well as historic, prehistoric, and archaeological resources.

The USACE 404 permit process triggers a review for consistency with State and Federal regulations governing Alaska's coastal zones. The USACE has determined that the wind installation expansion is not subjectto the 404 process (USACE, 1997b). Additionally, the access road permit application was reviewed by the Alaska Departments of Natural Resources, Environmental Conservation, and Fish and Game, and the Northwest Arctic Borough CoastalDistrict. These agencies determined that the proposed accessroad is consistent with the ACMP provided that modifications concerning adequate drainage, minimizing erosion and loss to wetlands, and fill requirements would be implemented (DGC 1997).

3.4 Meteorology and Air Quality 3.4.1 Regional Climate Northwest Alaska is characterizedby long cold winters and short cool summers. Kotzebue is bounded on the north and west by the Kotzebue Sound and east by the Hotham Inlet, known locally as Kobuk Lake. Thesebodies ofwater produce a maritime type climate when the water is ice-free (roughly late May to late October). During this period, cloudy skiesprevail, fog occurs, daily temperatures are relatively uniform, relative humidity is high, and westerly winds predominate. When the water surrounding the peninsula is frozen, the climate approaches that of a continental type, exhibitinglarge daily temperature ranges, low humidity, and moderate rainfall. The continental climate becomes more pronounced as the ice cover advances across the sound to the Arctic Ocean.
Local topographyis nearly uniform with a general low relief. There are no significant terrain barriers in the immediate area to impede surface air flow or produce pronounced local variation in temperature and precipitation. The mountainous Seward Peninsula to the south, however, does deflect some low pressure systemswhich originatein or beyond the Bering Sea
area and move toward the Kotzebue region.

Kotzebue's mean annual precipitation is 9.20 inches which includes an average of47.5 inches of snowfall. Average temperatures range fiom -9" Fahrenheit (F) in January to 59" F in July, with extreme temperaturesranging from -52" 

### F to 85" 

### F. Wind direction and speed change throughout the calendar year. From Decemberto March, the prevailingwind direction is easterly;from May to August the prevailing direction is westerly. The average annual wind speed is 13 miles per hour (mph) with an averagewind speed range from 11.0mph in May to 14.6mph in November. Peak gusts have reached speeds of 72 mph (NOAA, 1994).The available wind power for a given area is a hnction of average wind speed and is measured in watts per square meter. Accordingtothe "Wind Energy Resource Atlas ofthe United States," Kotzebue is classified as a Class 6 overall wind regime and a Class 7 winter regime 

### (KEA, 1997).

3.4.2 

### Air Quality In 1970, Congress passed the Clean Air Act (CAA) which established air quality programs to regulate air emissions from stationary,mobile, and other sohrceswhich pose a risk to human health and the environment. The CAA gives the EnvironmentalProtection Agency authority to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for pollutants such as sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxides, ozone, aswell as others. Ambient air quality is primarily a result ofthe type and amount ofpollutants emitted intothe atmosphere. Areas ofthe country that have attained the NAAQ standards for a particular pollutant are considered attainment areas, while those areas that exceed the standards are considered nonattainment areas. Ifthere is insufficient information to classiG an area as attainment or nonattainment, the area is designated as unclassifiable for a pollutant or group of pollutants. In 1990the CAAunderwent major amendments to expand its list ofregulated chemicals and tighten regulations on such topics as acid rain, ozone depletion, and air toxins.
Alaska's Department of Environmental Conservation implements air quality regulations through its Division of Air and Water Quality. Within this division there are two air programs: Air Quality Maintenance which regulates 

### air pollution emitted from industrial facilities, and Air Quality Improvementwhich is responsible for mobile sources ofair contaminants, air quality monitoring, and radiation issues. To better manage air quality, Alaska is divided into four air quality control regions. Kotzebue is located in the Northern Alaska Intrastate Air Quality Control Region. While this region is considered in attainment for all criteria pollutants, Kotzebue is an
area where no air monitoring has been conducted and is therefore designated unclassifiable.

There are two major stationaryair sourcesin the Kotzebue region: the Red Dog mine, located approximately80 miles north of Kotzebue, and the KotzebueElectricAssociation located in Kotzebue proper. KEA recently received a Prevention of SignificantDeterioration (PSD)permit for modifications made toits plant. Air quality modeling indicatesthat KEA's emissions

are well within State standards for criteria air pollutants (Envirometrics, 1997).KEA currently operates one to two turbines at a load of approximately 80to 100 percent per year.

3.5 Cultural Resources Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 requires Federal agenciesto take into account the effects oftheir undertakings on historic properties. The identification and evaluation of cultural resource properties within the accessroad portion of the proposed project site are described in a Class 3 U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian AEairs (USBIA) cultural resource report (USDOI, 1995).This report was commissionedby the USBIA Area Roads to determine potential impacts to cultural resources from constructingvarious roadways in the Kotzebue area. This report is considered germane to the proposed project since one ofthe roadways addressed in the USBIA report is within close proximity to the proposed access road. 

### As described in the report, a records search was conducted to determinethe nature and extent of prior archaeological investigationsin the area, and assesstheir findings. 

### As may be expected in this arctic landscape, previously recorded archaeological sites were sparse. Subsequent pedestrian surveys did not identie any unrecorded sites. However, two previously recorded sites (Kotzebue ArchaeologicalDistrict [AHRS #KTZ-0361 and the Kotzebue White Alice Communications Site [AHRS#KTZ-0371 located approximately 3 miles northwest and 0.75miles west from the project site, respectively) and one archaeologically sensitive area were located in the Kotzebue area. The report concluded that no cultural resources were identified within the area affected by the various proposed roadways.

The proposed access road was the subject of a USACE 404 permit application as described in Section 3.3. As noted within the Permit Evaluation and Decision Document, no historic properties were associated with the access road site and no comments were received from the StateHistoric PreservationOffice (USACE, 1997~).

3.6 Noise Noise may be defined as any sound that annoys or disturbshumans or tends to cause an adverse psychological or physiological effect on humans (L.ipscomb, 1978). Sound waves arecharacterizedby sound pressure expressed as decibels (dB). To evaluate noise as it relates to humans, an A-weighted sound level is used 

### (dBA). This measurement specificallyincludes the frequencies perceptible to the human ear and de-emphasizesthose frequenciesthat humans cannot hear. The State of Alaska statutes were reviewed for applicable noise control requirements. While no specific noise levels were prescribed, the statutes restricted "excessive" or "nuisance" noise and included requirementsto prevent adverse impactsto an area.
The existing noise environment in Kotzebue is influen&d by two main contributors: the municipal airport directly south of Kotzebue and the prevalence of snow machines and all terrain vehicles as a main source of local transportation. With respect to the project site there are no features that generate noise, aside from the three existing wind turbines. Furthermore, the project site is located in an area devoid of sensitive receptors (residences, schools, hospitals, threatened and endangered species).

### This page left intentionallyblank.CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The following chapter summarizesthe potential environmental impacts fromthe proposed action and no action alternative.

4.1 Biological Resources The potential impactsto the local biota from additiond wind turbines would be related to any direct loss ofwildlife habitat from construction or operation ofthe wind turbines or increased bird mortality from collisions with the turbine blades or towers.
4.1.1 Vegetation Installation ofthe additionalwind turbines would be conducted during the winter and in a
manner so that there would be very little disruption ofthe vegetative tundra mat which covers the site. No fill material would be required for tower or building foundations. Thereforethe effect

on vegetation and wetlandswould be expected to be minimized. Some compression or disruption ofvegetation may occur in some areas from ground activity around the tower foundations. However, the overall vegetation cover ofthe site should not be adversely affected. Impacts to vegetation would be expected to be negligible.

4.1.2 Birds Direct impacts to birds would be the loss of a small amount ofwet tundra habitat from construction ofthe towers and the potential effectof collisions with the turbine blades. The loss of habitat would only affect a relatively small number ofnesting birds (e.g. lapland longspur, sandpiper) which would be unable to adapt to the constructionand operational activitiesor the presence of structureswithin their breeding territories. Birds presently nesting near or at the site would be displaced by the proposed activities,but would likely use adjacent habitat.

The effects ofbird collisions with wind turbineblades has received considerable attention at large wind generation sites such as Altamont Pass and Tehachapi Pass in California. Studies have indicated a great deal of variability among siteswith respect to bird strikes, but severalfactors contributeto the rate ofcollision. These factors include: weather,the number ofbirds flying through the site, flight altitude of the birds, the probability of a bird entering the areas swept by the turbineblades, and the number and height ofoperating turbines 

### @&My 1997). Most of these studieshave indicated that raptors are the species most affected by the collisions and may be associated with the raptors attention on hunting for rodents in areas aroundthe turbines. Raptors

are relatively uncommon in the Kotzebue area and any collisions with the turbineblades would likely be to individual birds which would not affect the local population.

Sincethere are no major migratory staging areas for waterfowl or shorebirds in the immediate area of the site, and no major geographic features which concentratebirds within a migratory corridor near the site, effects on migratory species are not anticipated. Local breeders in the surrounding areas are more likely tobe at some risk, and the greatest risk would be during periods of poor visibility or inclement weather. Overall, the potential impactsto birds would most likely be limited to the occasionalindividual collidingwith a turbine. These isolated collisions are not expectedto affectthe local population. As a special conditiontothe USACE permit, an avian survey is tobe conducted on birds found at the wind installation site or flying in close proximity tothe wind installation during one spring and one fall migration period (USACE, 1997~).

4.1.3 Mammals The proposed project's effects on wildlife would be a slight reduction of available habitat for the occasional caribou which may move through the area duringthe winter. This loss of habitat would be expected to have no adverse effect on any ofthe speciesusing the area because ofthe abundance of similar habitat surroundingthe site.

4.1.4 Threatened and Endangered Species Spectacled and Steller's Eiders are not expected to occur in the immediate area during migration or during the nesting season; therefore, they are not expected to be affectedby an increased number ofwind turbines atthe site.4.2 

### Land 

### Use In assessingland use impacts, the proposed action was evaluated for consistencywith land

use plans or guidance, and compatibility with current and future land uses. 

### As stated in Section 3.2,there are no land use plans that govern KIC property. Therefore, it is not possible to evaluate the project with consistency to planned land use. However, accordingto KIC, the wind installationis consideredthe best use forthe land. With respect to land use compatibility, there

are some existingfeatures with which to compare potential land use conflicts, namely the potential for airport relocation, the KOTZ radio tower, and the Kotzeb'ae landfill.



### As mentioned in section 3.2, the airport relocation alternativeis very unlikely. In the remote chance that the airport is relocated to an area south and east ofthe current wind installation, potential impacts would be limited to airspace and runway obstruction and possible electromagnetic interferencewith the aircraft landing systems. With respect to airspace and runway obstruction,runways at Kotzebue are oriented eastlwest 

### as these are the prevailing wind directions. Since the wind installation is located north of the proposed alternative location, potential conflict with runway spacerequired for take-offs and landings would not be expected. There are 

### FAA regulations for structures alongside runways. Based on conversations with ADOT, the wind turbines could limit hturerunway locations, but in no way would preclude the relocation alternativesincethe alternativewould still would have to consider compatibilitieswith the three existing turbines. Sincethe preferred alternative consists ofredevelopment within the airport's existing land, there would be no conflict in land use fiom installing additionalturbines at the existing wind installation (ADOT, 1998).

Other potential conflictswith current land use includethe ways in which the wind turbines could possibly interfere with any type ofelectromagnetic (radio) transmission. The systems of interest includethe KOTZ radio antenna, the airport's instrument landing system, and the unmanned White Alice Communication station. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

### (NREL) conducted a study to address potential electromagnetic interference 

### (EM) fiom the wind turbines. The conclusionsfiom the study are specificto AM broadcasting reception, FMITV broadcasting, aircraft navigation, cellulartelephones, and the Air Force 

### RADAR installation.It is expected that very little reradiation and essentiallyno interferencewill occur with the KOTZ radio broadcast (NREL, 1998). Currently, there is no cellular phone service or conventional FM or TV broadcasting stations in the area, thereforeinterference with these systems is not expected. Satellite dish antennashave very narrow beam widths and are oriented towards specific satellites. Because of the wind installation's remote location, no interference is expected. The Kotzebue airport has not reported any interferencewith their navigation systems related to the existing wind turbines. Furthermore, no signal degradation is expected because the system uses narrow beam widths and is relatively far fiom the wind site. Like navigation systems, radar antennas also use a very narrow beam width for measuring directions accurately. Potential impacts to the White Alice Communication station are considered unlikely, as reception of interfering signals from outside that beam is nearly impossible (NREL, 1998).

4.3 Impacts to the Coastal Zone While the wind installation site is located approximately 0.5 miles fiom the coast, it does not exhibit any coastal habitat as defined in the ACMP, except for wetlands. As mentioned in Sections2.4 and 3.3, the USACE and the Alaska 

### DGC reviewed and approved the access road application which allows approximately 8000yds3offill material to be placed in wetland habitat adjacent to the wind installation. The access road proposal was found to be consistent with the ACMP and would not adversely impact resources in the area.
By comparison, the wind installation expansion would not require any filling in of wetlands nor displace any unique or sensitive habitats. KEA would perform all construction activities while the tundra is frozen to minimize impactsto the vegetation. Wind turbine operation would not produce any effluents or emissions, and with respect to visual impacts, the site is not visible from the sea or coastal beaches (KEA, 1997).

4.4 Air Quality The proposed constructionand operation of 20 wind turbines would result in a small amount of constructionequipment emissionsfrom boring piling holes and raising the towers. As described in Section 2.5, construction equipment will operate on an intermittentbasis throughoutthis project. Because construction equipmentwould be running very infrequently, resultant air emissions would be well dispersed are not expected to adversely affectair quality.

Wind turbine operation. would not produce any air emissions. The use ofwind energy to supplantthe use of diesel power would, in effect, reduce air pollutants by reducing the reliance on combustion engines currentlyused to generate electricity. Based on KEA's current operations and the assumptionthat wind power would replace approximately 2.5 million kwh per year (roughly 13 percent), it is estimated that KEA would be able to reduce criteria pollutants by approximately 200,000 lbs per year.

4.5 Cultural Resources/Human Environment Cultural resource concerns specificto the proposed project site were addressed during a consultation with the StateHistoricPreservation Office and the DOE during an informal meeting in November 1997. According to Mr. Tim Smith, archaeologist, the project site would be likely devoid of any unrecorded historic properties and is considered to be low in cultural resource sensitivity. This finding is based upon the lack of findingsfiom previous cultural resource studies in the project area, and the location ofthe project being sited within a former lake bed area which would not have been expected to support previous human activity.
With respect to Native American concerns in the project area, the DOE met with 

### Mr. Pete Schaeffer, Executive Director ofthe Native Village ofKotzebue IRA, the tribal government servingthe people ofthe Kotzebue area, to inform him ofthe project and to gather information regarding cultural sensitivity ofthe area proposed for project development. According to 

### Mr. Schaeffer,the project area is not considered to possess any unique ethnic cultural value and is not used for subsistence or religious purposes.

4.5.1 Environmental Justice In 1994,the President issued an Executive order to focusFederal attention on the environmental and human health conditionsin minority and low income communities with the goal of achieving environmentaljustice. The purpose of environmental justice is to ensure that no segment of the population, regardless of race, ethnicity, or income, bears disproportionately highand adverse effects of environmental pollution. The expansion of the Kotzebue wind installation would not result in any air or noise emissions, liquid effluents, or solid waste. The site is not visible from Kotzebue nor the coastal areas adjacent to the site. The expansion ofthe wind installation would, however, decrease the consumptionof diesel fbel, decrease air emissions, and ideally keep electricity costs from escalating. The potentialbenefits from the proposed project would be distributed equally to all Kotzebueresidents. Consequently, the proposed project would not be expectedto result in unfair or unequal treatment of any low income or impoverished communitiesor populations.

4.6 Noise Noise generation as a result of the project is expected from construction, operation, and maintenance activities at the wind installation. Daily turbine operation is expected to generate the worst case and long-term noise conditions.

Wind turbine installationis expected to generate noise primarily from internal combustion engines used to power the construction equipment. Specific noise generation and characterization depends on the type of equipment used, the amount of equipment operating simultaneously, and hours of operation. It is anticipatedthat typical construction equipment will be used and that the hours of operation would occur only during normal working hours. 

### As described in Section2.5, it is anticipated that the constructionperiod will be a relatively short time period. Because ofthe noise standards that constructionequipment manufacturesare required to adhereto, it is not' anticipated that excessive or unusual noise generationwill result from the construction operations. In addition, assuming the construction operations occur only during normal working hours, it is anticipated that the noise generation will not have any adverse impacts to offsite receptors.
Using reasonably conservative assumptions, noise levels ofthe AOC 15/50wind turbine
were estimated to be 104 dBA at the turbine hub with an 18mile per hour wind (NREL 1997). Based on other vender data and information, this noise level appears tobe relatively high for modem wind turbines, but was used as a conservativebasis for the purposes of this noise assessment. Assuming a relatively high noise level as a basis will help ensure a conservative assessment ofthe potential noise impacts from the proposed project.The ambient sound level at the ground surfacewas estimated to be 75 dB(A) assuming 10

or more wind turbines operating simultaneously (see Appendix). This sound level is below the federal standard of 85 &A for occupational hearing conservationprograms. Operation-related noise levels were estimated for distanceshrther away fiom the project site and are shown in the table below. Table 

### 1Operation-Related Noise Level Estimates

pp-pppp Noise Level (in &A) At Distance (in meters) 75 24 63 100 49 500 43 1000 37 2000 3 3 32 19 (landfill) 29 5000 27 6437 (airport) 26 7242 (Kotzebue)

The followingthree examples put noise level estimates into perspective: normal conversation at approximatelyonemeter has a sound pressure of approximately 60 dBA; a quiet office has a sound pressure of approximately 50 dE3A and is considered quiet; and finally a soft whisper at five meters is approximately30 dE3A and is consideredvery quiet (Lipscomb, Taylor, 1978).Based on the estimated noise levels it is not anticipatedthat significant noise emissions would result fiom the operation ofthe wind installation.

4.7 No Action Altenative Without the expansion ofthe existing wind installation, Kotzebuewould continueto use diesel generators for electric power and purchase additional wind turbines if and when hnds are available. Impacts fromthe no action alternativeincludethe loss ofwind turbine testing data under Arctic conditions and the continued consumption of diesel he1and subsequent production of air emissions. 

### As other rural communities would potentially benefit fromthe information gathered fromthe test installation,the no action alternativewould preclude or substantially delay the application ofwind technology to these communities.

### This page left intentionallyblank.

### CHAPTER 5 

### CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

This section examines the cumulative environmental effects which would result from adding the impacts of the proposed action to the impacts from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable activities in the Kotzebue area. At the time ofthis assessment, there are no current or proposed actions that, combined with the proposed project, would contributeto cumulative impacts in the Kotzebue area.

As described in Chapter 4, there are only a couple of environmental categorieswhere the proposed action could cause potential impacts, namely habitat disturbance and bird strikes. The minor disturbanceto wetland habitat would not adversely affect the availability ofwetland habitat in the area. Furthermore, no other constructionprojectswere forecasted near the wind installation site. While isolated bird strikes may occur, there are no other identified projects which would also contributeto bird mortality. The largest contributor to air emission in the vicinity is KEA and arguably the airport. The proposed project is not only devoid of air emissions, but would hnction to reduce air emissionsfrom the diesel generators. The project does not produce liquid effluentsor solid waste. Increased noise fromthe wind installation would be indiscernible fiom other background noises, namely the airport.l;his page left intentionally blank.

### CHAPTER 6 

### REFERENCES

ADOT (Alaska Department ofTransportation), 1998. Personal communicationbetween N. Piispanen (ADOT) and E. Lurier (Dames & Moore), January 6, 1998.

Advanced Wind Turbines, Inc., 1997. Personal communication with E. Lurier (Dames& Moore), December 8, 1997.

Dames & Moore, 1997 

### BiologrcalAssessment for the Kotzebue WindFarm Project, Kotzebue, Alaska, Project No. 30822-1 12for the Department ofEnergy, Golden Field Office, December 1997.

DCG (Division of Governmental Coordination, State of Alaska), 1997. Final Consistency Determination. Letter fromMaureen McRae 

### (DGC)to Bish Gallahorn (KIC), July 15, 1997.

Envirometrics, 1997.FacsimiletoE. Lurier (Dames & Moore), KEA air emissions, December 1 6 and December 22, 1997.
Expert Group Study 1994. Expert Group Study on Recommended Practices For Wind Turbine Testing And Evaluation, 4. AcousticsMeasurement ofNoise Emission From Wind Turbines, 3. Edition 1994.
KEA (Kotzebue Electric Association), 1997. Proposal from KEA to DOE-GO.
Lipscomb and Taylor, 1978. Noise Control Handbook of Principles and Practices, Van Nostrand Reinhold Environmental Engineering Series, 1 978.

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), 1994.Local Climatological Data 

### , Annual Summary with Comparative Data, Kotzebue, Alaska.NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) 1998. Memo from G.Nix to E.Lurier (Dames & Moore). Information regarding electromagnetic interference and acoustics, January 20, 1998.

Reeve, Brad, 1997(a). Personal Communication. E. Lurier (Dames & Moore) with Brad Reeve, General Manager, Kotzebue Electric Association.
Selkregg, L. 1976.AlaskaRegional Profiles 

### - Northwest Region. State of Alaska and Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning Commissionfor Alaska, Juneau, AK.

USACE (U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers), 1997a. Permit No. 4-970322, Kotzebue Sound 60 issued to Kikiktagruk Inupiat Corporation (KIC) for the construction of a 0.7 mile access road, July 3 1, 1997.

USACE, 1997b. Letter from Allan Skinner (USACE) to Percy Frisby (AlaskaDepartment of Community and Regional Affairs, Division of Energy), September 5, 1997.

USACE, 1997c. Permit Evaluation and Decision Document for Kikiktagruk Inupiat Corporation, No. 4-970322, July 18, 1997

USDOI, (U.S. Department ofthe Interior), Bureau ofIndian Affgirs, TheKotzebue Road Project Proposal, Project # 51(1),A CulturalResource Report ofInvestigationsand &Section I06Review. Prepared for the StateHistoric Preservation Office, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, January 1995.CHAPTER 7 LIST OFAGENCIES AND PERSONS CONSULTED
The followingis a list of persons and agencies who provided the informationnecessary to write this environmental assessment:

Brad Reeve 

# - General Manager, Kotzebue Electric Association Craig Thompson

## - ThompsonEngineering Company Mark Koepsel 

## - Alaska Department ofFish and Wildlife Pete Schaeffer

## - Executive Director, Kotzebue IRA Allan Skinner 

### - Regulatory Specialist, U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers Michael O'Connor 

## - Acting President, Kikktagruk Inupiat Corporation Wilfred Lane 

### - Land Manager, Kikiktagruk Inupiat Corporation Timothy Smith

# - Archaeologist, Alaska Department ofNatural Resources, Office of History and Archaeology Robert Poore 

## - Advanced Wind Turbines,Inc. Jim Baumgartner 

### - Alaska Division ofAir and Water Quality Norm Piispanen 

## - Alaska Department ofTransportation JeffDavis - Alaska Division of Governmental Coordination Dennis Meiners 

## - Division ofEnergy, Alaska Department of Community and Regional Affairs

## APPENDIX A SCOPING LETTERS

### Department of 

### Energy Golden Field Office 161 7 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 February 12, 1998

LIST SUBJECT: NOTICE OF SCOPMG

## - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR KOTZEBUE EXPERIMENTALWIND Fm PROJECT, KOTZEBUE, ALASKA The United States Department ofEnergy's (DOE) Golden Field Office (GO) is proposing to partially fbnd the development of an experimentaltest wind farm located in Kotzebue, Alaska. The proposed wind farm is intended to test commercially availableturbines in extreme Arctic conditionsin order to evaluate turbine performance and reliability under a wide range of temperatures, precipitation events and strong Arctic winds. This information would be usefbl in applying wind power technology in other locations subjectedto extreme weather conditions.
It is DOE's policy to integratecommunity and public concerns into its decision making process. Accordingly, prior to undertaking the action described above, GO will be preparing an Environmental Assessment @A) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the construction and operation ofthe proposed wind fm. On November 4-5, 1997,representatives of our officeconducted a site visit and held informal meetings with you or representativesofyour organization. During our discussions, interest was expressedby various parties in the following areas: visual aesthetics, avian impacts, potential cost savings and design life ofthe facility. Please see the attachmentto this letter of a list of other organizationscontacted. The town ofKotzebue and the proposed location ofthe experimentalwind farm are both located within the bounds of a designated wetland area. Therefore, GO willbe posting a Notice of Wetland Involvement 

### in the Federal Register as required by DOE's Compliance with Floodplain/WetlandsEnvironmental Review Requirements (10 CFRPart 1022). The discussion ofthe potential impacts to the wetlands and reasonable alternativeswill be incorporated into the EAbeing prepared under DOE NEPA regulations.
Please direct any additional comments, questions or concerns you may have regarding this proposal to Deborah Turner, NEPA ComplianceOfficer, Golden Field Office by February 27, 1998. The draft EA document will be provided to your organizationas well as other interested parties for review and comment upon its completion. 

### All responseswill be considered prior to DOE reaching a final decision regarding fbnding of the proposed project.

Federal Recycling Program Rinred on RecycledPaper-2- February 12, 1998
Thank you for your interest and participation in ourprocess. Should you have any questions, please contactDeborah at (303) 275-4746. Sincerely, 

## -

Manager Attachment: As Stated

cc w/distribution list: D. Turner, GO C.McDonough, G/M 

### E. Lurier, Dames & MooreMr. Daniel Kirshner SeniorAnalyst West Coast Office Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. 5 655 College Avenue Suite 304 Oakland, CA 946 18
Mr. John Schoen Executive Director Alaska State Office National Audubon Society 308 

### G Street Suite 2 17 Anchorage, AK 99501
Mr. Randall H. Hagenstein Associate State Director Alaska Field Office The Nature Conservancy 42 1 West First Avenue Suite 200 Anchorage,

## AK 99501
Mr. Jack Hession Alaska Representative Alaska Office Sierra Club 24 1East 5th Avenue Suite 205 Anchorage, 

### AK 99501
Ms. Marguerite Young State Program Director WestMorthwest Region Clean Water Action 944 Market Street Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94102 Ms. Diane Mayer, Director, Division ofEnvironmental Coordination Office of the Governor P.O. Box 110030 Juneau, AK 99811-0030
Mr. Willie R. Taylor, Director Office ofEnvironmentalPolicy and Compliance U.S.Department ofthe Interior 1849C Street,NW Room 2340 Washington, DC 20240
Ms. 

### Ann 

### M. Hooker Environmental SpecialistMEPA Liaison Office of Energy and Environment Federal Aviation Administration U.S. Department ofTransportation AEE300 

## -- Room 902 800 IndependenceAvenue, SW Washington, DC 20591
Mr. Rick Parking (ECO-088) Unit Manger, Geographic Implementation Unit Office of Ecosystems and Communities Region 10 

### U.S.Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle,WA 98 101

The Honorable Tony Knowles Governor of Alaska P.O. Box 110001 Juneau, 

## AK 998 11-0001Mr. Ronald J. Moms Western Alaska Office Supervisor Protective ResourcesMgt Division U.S.Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service 222 W 7th Avenue, #43 Anchorage, AK 995 13-7577
ColonelPeter A. Topp District Engineer, Alaska District U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers P.O. Box 898 Anchorage, 

### AK 99506-0898
Mr. LanyK. Bright Acting Field Supervisor U. S. Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Northern Alaska Ecological Services 101 12thAve., Box 19, 

### Rm 110 Fairbanks,

### AK 9970 1 

### Mr. Paul Bateman Alaska Department ofEnvironmental Conservation 6 10University Ave. Fairbanks, 

### AK 99709-3643 Victor Karrnun Northwest Arctic Borough Coastal District P.O. Box 1110 Kotzebue, AK 99752 Mr. Randi Meyers Bureau ofLand Management Kotzebue Office P.O. Box 1049 Kotzebue, AK 99752
Director Bureau ofLand Management NorthernDistrict Office 1150 University Avenue Fairbanks, AK 99709-3899 Frank Green, Mayor City ofKotzebue P.O. Box 46 Kotzebue,

### AK 99752 Chuck Green, Mayor Northwest Arctic Borough P.O. Box 1110 Kotzebue, AK 99752
Lt. Col. David T. Peters 6900 9th. Street Suite 360 ElrnendorfAir Force Base, 

### AK 99506
Mr. Pierre Lonewolf GeneralManager Kotzebue Broadcasting, 

### Inc. P.O. Box 78 Kotzebue,

### AK 99572 NANA Regional Corporation P.O. Box 49 Kotzebue, AK 99752 Refbge Manager SelawikNational Wildlife Refbge P.O. Box 270 Kotzebue, 

### AK 99752

### Department of 

### Energy Golden Field Office 161 7 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 February 12, 1998

DISTRlBUTION LIST
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF SCOPING

### - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR KOTZEBUE EXPERIMENTAL

### WIND FARM PROJECT, KOTZEBUE, ALASKA i The United StatesDepartment of Energy's (DOE) GoldenField Office (GO) is proposing to partially fbnd the development of an experimentaltest wind farm located in Kotzebue, Alaska. The proposed wind farm is intended to test commercially availableturbinesin extreme Arctic conditionsin order to evaluateturbine performance and reliability under a wide range of temperatures, precipitationevents, and strong Arctic winds. This informationwould be usefbl in applying wind power technology in other locations subjectedto extreme weather conditions.
It is DOE'Spolicy to integrate community and public concerns into its decision making process. Accordingly, prior to undertaking the above described action, GO will be preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the construction and operation ofthe proposed wind farm. As part ofthe EA development, public and other agency input is being soughtby means ofthis letter. On November 4-5, 1997, representativesof our office conducted a site visit and held informal meetings with several State and local organizations. Unfortunately, scheduling conflictsdid not allow our representativesto meet with all interested or potentially affected parties. Please see Attachment A to this letter for a list ofthe organizations contacted. The town of Kotzebue and the proposed location ofthe experimentalwind farm are both located within the bounds of a designated wetland area. Therefore, GO will be posting a Notice of Wetland Involvement in the Federal Register as required by DOE'SCompliance with FloodplainAVetlands Environmental Review Requirements (10 CFRPart 1022). The discussion of the potential impacts to the wetlands and reasonable alternativeswill be incorporated into the EAbeing prepared under DOE NEPA regulations. Please direct any comments, questions or concernsyou may have regarding this proposal to Deborah Turner,NEPA Compliance Officer, Golden Field Office by February 27, 1998. The draft EA document will be provided to interestedparties for review and comment upon its completion. All responseswill be considered prior toDOE reaching a final decision regarding fbnding of the proposed project.

Federal Recycling Rogm Rinted on Rsycled PaperFebruary 12, 1998
Thank you for your interest and participation in our process. Should you have any questions, please contact Deborah at (303) 275-4746. Sincerely,

Frank M. Stewart Manager

Attachment: As Stated cc w/distribution list: D. Turner, GO C. McDonough, G/M 

### E. Lurier, Dames & Moore

### Mr. Mike Connor, Acting President Kikiktagruk Inupiat Corporation P.O. Box 1050 Kotzebue, AK 99752 

### Mr. Wilford Lane, Land Manager Kikiktagruk Inupiat Corporation P.O. Box 1050 Kotzebue, 

### AK 99752
Mr. Pete Schaeffer Executive Director Native Village of Kotzebue Kotzebue lRA P.O.Box 296 Kotzebue 

### AK 99752


### Mr. Alex Whiting Environmental Contact Native Village of Kotzebue Kotzebue 

### lRA P.O. Box 296 Kotzebue 

### AK 99752 

### Mr. Man G. Skinner Regulatory Specialist US Army Corps ofEngineers AlaskaDistrict Regulatory Branch P.O. Box 898 Anchorage, 

### AK 99506-0898 

### Mr. Timothy A. Smith Archaeologist Department of Natural Resources Divisions ofParks & Outdoor Recreation Office ofHistory and Archaeology 3601 C Street, Suite 1278 Anchorage, AK 99503-592 1 SHPO Office Anchorage, 

### AK Ms. Maureen McCrea 

### Mr. JeffDavis Division of Governmental Coordination Office ofManagement and Budget SouthcentralRegional Office 3601 C Street Suite 370 Anchorage, AK 99503-2798

## APPENDIX B NOTICE OF WETLANDS INVOLVEMENT FOR THE KOZEBUEWIND FARM PROJECTFederal Re&ter /Vol. 63, No. 31/Tuesday, February
Preferred Alternative

DOE has identified a preferred alternative in the draft PEIS. This preferred alternative does not represent a decision by DOE. The Record of Decision, when issued after completion of the final PEIS,will present DOE's decision for the long-term management of depleted UFh.

DOE's preferred alternative for the long-term management of depleted UF,, is to use its entire inventory of matedal. Some (potentially all) of the depleted US would be used as an oxide, some (potentially all) of it would be used as metal, and some of it might be used in other DOE programs pursuant to other NEPA reviews and decisions. This alternative would include continued storage and safe, effective management of the cylinders prior to conversion, conversion of the depleted UFh into depleted uranium oxide and/or depleted uranium metal, and fabrication of depleted uranium products for uses by government and/or industry. The fluorine in the UFh would also be used. Potential uses for the depleted uranium include radiation shielding in both the oxide and metal forms and as metal in specialty markets, including industrial counterweights. Current possibilities for use of fluorine include use in the nuclear fuel cycle. The schedule and rate of conversion of the depleted UFh inventory into the oxide and/or metal formswould be determined by market demand for the conversion products. Subsequent Document Preparation

DOE intends to prepare a response to comments received during the review of the draft PEIS and to complete the final PEIS in 1998.The availability of the final PEIS will be announced in the Federal Register. Additional NEPA analyses, as appropriate, will be prepared once a long-term depleted UFh management strategy has been selected and announced in a Record of Decision.

Issued In Washington. D.C.. February 6, 1998. Terry R. Lash. Director, Omceof NudearEnergy, Science and Technology. [FRDoc. 98-3845 Filed 2-13-98; 8:45 am] BlLLlNQ CODE 64504l-P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Golden Field Offlce; Notlceof Wetlands Involvementfor the KotzebueWind Farm Project AGENCY: Golden Field Office. DOE. ACTION: Notice of wetlands involvement. SUMMARY: The Department of Energy proposes to provide financial assistance to the Kotzebue Electric Association to expand its exiting wind farm site near Kotzebue, Alaska. In accordance with 10 CFR Part 1022,DOE will prepare an environmental assessment, to include a wetland assessment, and will perform this proposed action in a manner so as to avoid or minimize potential harm to or within the affected wetlands. DATES: Commentsare due to the address below no later than March 4, 1998. ADDRESSES: Commentsshould be addressed to Deborah A. Turner, U.S. Department of Energy, Golden Field Office. 1617Cole Boulevard. Golden CO, 80401, Phone (303) 275-4746, Fax (303) 275-4788. FOR NRTHER INFORMATION ONMIS PROPOSED ACTION, CONTACT: Doug Hooker, U.S. Department of Energy, Golden Field Office, 1617Cole Boulevard, Golden CO. 80401, Phone (303) 275-4780, Fax (303) 275-4753. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON GENERAL DM WETLANDS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS, CONTACT: Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance, EH-42. U.S. Department of Energy. 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington. D.C. 20585. Phone (202) 586-4600 or 1-800-472-2756, Fax (202) 586-7031. SUPPLEMEWARY INFOWTION: The Kotzebue Wind Farm Project that DOE is considering funding will involve the installation, operation, and maintenance of up to 20 wind turbines and ancillary equipment necessary to maintain the site. The proposed project would be located on an existing 148-acre wind farm site locatednear Kotzebue, Alaska. The entire 148-acreland parcel aswell asthe town of Kotzebue and the local airport are located on land that has been designated as wetlands.

In accordance with DOE regulations for compliance with floodplain and wetlands environmental review requirements (10 CFR Part 1022).DOE wU1 prepare anenvironmental assessment, to include a wetlands assessment, for this proposed DOE action.

Issued in Golden Coloradoon February 16. 1998. Frank M. Stewart, Manager, GoldenField Omce. [FRDoc. 98-3844 Filed 2-13-98; 8:45 am] BlLLWO CODE 6450-01+ DEPARTMENTOF ENERGY Offlce of Energy Research Energy Research FinancialAsslstance Program Notlce98-10; Blologlcal Research Program, Use of Model Organlsmsto Understandthe Human Genome AGENCY: Office of Energy Research,U.S. Department of Energy ACM)N: Notice inviting grant applications. SUMWY:The Offlce of Biological and Environmental Research (OBER) of the Office of Energy Research (ER).U.S. Department of Energy (DOE),hereby announces its interest in receiving peerreviewable applications for research in support of the BiologicalResearch Program. This Program is a coordinated multidisciplinary research effort to develop creative, innovative approaches, resources, and technologies that lead to a molecular understanding of the human genome. This solicitation is for research that capitalizes on our understanding and the manipulability of the genomes of model organisms, includingyeast, nematode, fruitfly. Zebra fish, and mouse, to speed understanding of human genome organization, regulation, and function. DATES: Potential applicants are encouraged to submit a brief preapplication. All preapplications. referencing Program Notice 98-10, should be received by DOE by 4:30 P.M. E.S.T., March 26, 1998.A response to the preapplications discussing the potential program relevance of a formal application generally will be communicated within 7 days of receipt.

The deadline for receipt of formal applications is 4:30 P.M., E.D.T., May 7, 1998,in order to be accepted for merit review and to permit timely consideration for award in FY 1999. ADDRESSES: Preapplications, referencing Program Notice 98-10. should be sent by E-mail to joanne.corcoran@oer.doe.gov. however, preapplications will also be accepted if mailed to the following address: Ms. Joanne Corcoran, Offlce of Biological and Environmental Research. ER-72. U.S. Department of Energy, 19901 Germantown Road, Germantown. MD 20874-1290.

Formal applications, referencing Program Notice 98-10. should be sent to: U.S. Department of Energy. Office of Energy Research. Grants and Contracts Division. ER-64. 19901 Germantown Road, Germantown,MD 20874-1290, ATl'N: Program Notice 98-10, Ms. Debbie Greenawalt. TMs address must be used when submitting applications

## APPENDIX C
EA 

## DISTRIBUTION LETTERS AND COMMENTS

### Department of 

### Energy Golden Field Office 161 7 Cole Boulevard Golden. Colorado 80401-3393 March 24, 1998 DISTRZBUTIONLIST
SUBJECT: PREDECISIONAL DMT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE KOTZEBUE WIND INSTALLATION PROJECT, KOTZEBUE, ALASKA (DOEIEA- 1245)
In October 1997,the U. S. Department of Energy's Golden Field Ofice (GO) began an evaluation of providing partial hnding for the Kotzebue Wind Installation to test commercially available turbines in extreme Arctic conditions in order to evaluate turbine performance and reliability under a wide range of temperatures, precipitation events and strong Arctic winds. As part of this evaluation, 

### GO undertook the preparation of an environmental assessment for the proposed project to be located in Kotzebue, Alaska. In November 1997, representatives of GO conducted a site visit and met with various Inuit tribal, state, and local representatives. In February 1998, a formal request for input on the proposed project was conducted through the issuance ofNotice of Scoping letters to Federal, state, and local regulatory bodies, and other potential interested parties. A description of the proposed project, environmental analyses including potential impacts, potential wetlands impacts and comments from interested parties have been integrated into the Predecisional Draft Environmental Assessment.
It is DOE'Spolicy to integrate community and public concerns into its decision making process. Therefore, by this letter, notice ofthe availabilityofthe Predecisional Draft Environmental Assessment for the KotzebueWind Installationis being provided to your organization. If you are interesting in obtaining a copy for review please contact our office. Comments should be provided to Deborah Turner, NEPA Compliance Officer, by May 8, 1998. Once comments have been received, reviewed and addressed, a final Environmental Assessment will be issued. If you are interested in receiving a copy of the final document, please let Deborah know. Deborah can be reached by phone (303) 275-4746, fax (303) 275-4788, email deborah_turner@nrel.gov or the above address. Thank you for your interest and participationin our process. Sincerely, r

+--- 

# *k '. Frank M. Stewart Manager

cc: D. Turner, 

### GO ~urier, D&M

Federal Recycling Rogram Prinled on Recycled Paperdr. Daniel Kirshner .nvironrnental Defense Fund, Inc. i655 College Ave, Suite 304 Iakiand, CA 946 13

&.Randall Hagenstein The Nature Conservancy 121 West First Ave., Suite 200 inchorage, iU( 9950 1

vls. Marguerire Young :lean Water Action, WestfNorthwest Region p44 Market Street, Suite 600 ;an Francisco, CX 94102

vls. Xnn Hooker -- - - j.



### S. Deparrrnenr ofTransponarion lffice 

### ofEnergy and Environment GE300---Room 902 100 Independence Ave., SW Nashtington, DC 2059 1

,,r- n --.. :.4 7 .,?---i.. .I> A\.?....-C- J . -.."...I) 

### J.S. Department of Commerce 123W. 7th Xve., H; inchorage, 

## AK 995 13-7577

&. Paul Bateman Uaska Department ofEnvironmental Conservation i10 University Ave. :airbanks, 

### AK 99709-3643

ullr. Randi bleyers 3ureau of Land Management Cotzebue Ofice '.O. Box !049 Cotzebue. ..U( 99752 blr. John Schoen National Audobon Society 308 

### G Street, Suite 217 Anchorage,

### AK 99501



### Mr. Jack Hession Sierra Club, Alaska Office 241 East 5th Ave., Suite 205 Anchorage, 

### AK 9950 1



### LW. Wie 

### R Taylor 

### U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street,NW, Room 2340 Washington, DC 20240

Mr.RickParking 

### U. S



### .EnvironmentalProtection Agency 1200 

### SixthAve. Seattle, WA 98101

Coiunci ~"~LCL 

## A.iopp U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 898 Anchorage, 

### AK 99506-0898



### Mr. Victor Karmun Northwest Arctic Borough 

### P.O. Box 1110 Kotzebue, 

### AK 99752

Director Bureau 

### ofLand Management 11 5 0 University Avenue Fairbanks, 

### .AK99709-2 899r.. 

### Col. David 

### T. Peters

"300 9th Siree:, Suire 360 Elmendor?' .Air Force Base, .4K 99506

### Department of 

### Energy Golden Field Office 161 7 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 March 24, 1998 DISTRIBUTION LIST SUBJECT: PREDECISIONALDRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR KOTZEBUE EXPERIMENTAL WIND INSTALLATION PROJECT, KOTZEBUE, ALASKA (DOEIEA- 1245) In October 1997,the U. S. Department ofEnergy's Golden Field Office (W)began an evaluation of providing partial hnding for the KotzebueWind Installationto test commercially available turbines in extremeArctic conditions in order to evaluate turbine performance and reliability under a wide range oftemperatures, precipitation events and strong Arctic winds. As part ofthis evaluation, W undertook the preparation of an environmental assessment for the proposed project to be located in Kotzebue, Alaska. 

### In November 1997, representatives ofW conducted a site visit and met with various Inuit tribal, state, and local representatives. In February 1998, a formal request for input on the proposed project was conducted through the issuance ofNotice of Scoping letters to Federal, state, and local regulatory bodies, and other potential interested parties. A description ofthe proposed project, environmental analyses includingpotential impacts, potential wetlands impacts, and comments already expressed to GO by various parties have been integrated into the Predecisional Draft EnvironmentalAssessment for the Kotzebue Wind Installation Project.
It is DOE'Spolicy to integrate community and public concerns into its decision making process. Therefore, the Predecisional Draft EnvironmentalAssessment for the KotzebueWind Installation is being provided to your organizationfor review and comment. Please provide any commentsto Deborah Turner, NEPA Compliance Officer, by May 8, 1998. Once comments have been received, reviewed and addressed, a final Environmental Assessment will be issued. If'you are interested in receiving a copy ofthe final document, please let Deborah know. Deborah can be reached by phone (303) 275-4746, fax (303) 275-4788, email deborah-turner@nrel.gov or the above address. Thank you for your interest and participationin our process. Sincerely, 

# f
FrankM. Stewart ' Manager Enclosure: As Stated

cc wladdress list: D. Turner, GO z~urier, Dames & Moore

Fedenl Recycling Rogm Printed on Recycled Paper~lr. Mike Connor Skiktagruk Inupiat Corporation

l.0. Box 1050 (otzebue, 

### AK 99752

llr. Pete Schaeffer Jative Village of Kotzebue Lotzebue 

### IRA

l.0. Box 296 :3tzebue, 

### .AK 99752

Ir.Allan G. Skinner ..S Army Corps ofEngineers, 

### AK District 1.0. Box 898 inchorage, 

### AK 99506-0898

:s. Maureen McCrea 1Mr. JeffDavis

.ivision of Governmental Coordination 601 C Street, Suite 370 achorage, 

### AK 99503-2798

Ye HoncraS!c 

### Tsny Kno-~fes ;o.~ernor of Alaska 

### '0. Box 110001 uneau, .'LK 998 1 1-0001

'rank Green, Mayor 

### :iry of Kotzebue

l.0. Box 46 lotzebue, 

### AK 99752

JAVA Regonal Corporation '.O. Box 49 Lotzebue, 

### AK 99752 

### Mr. Wilford Lane Kikiktagruk Inupiat Corporation P.O. Box 1050 Kotzebue, 

### AK 99752



### Mr. Alex Whiting Native Village ofKotzebue Kotzebue 

### IRA P.O. Box 296 Kotzebue, 

### AK 99752



### Mr. Timothy Smith Department ofNatural Resources Division ofParks & Outdoor Recreation 3601 C Street, Suite 1278 Anchorage, 

### AK 99503-592 1



### Ms. Diane Mayer Office ofthe Governor Division ofEnvironmental Coordination P.O. Box 110030 Juneau, 

### AK 998 11-003 0



# -- -

. ;vL. Lq A. dngh~ 

### U.S. Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 101 12thAve., Box 19, Room 110 

### Fairbanks, AK 99701

Chuck Green, Mayor Northwest Arctic Borough P.O. Box 1110 Kotzebue, 

### AK 99752



### Mr. Pierre Lonewolf Kotzebue Broadcasting, Inc. P.O. Box 78 Kotzebue, 

### AK 99752Ir. 

### Paul Gates J. S. Department of Interior 1689 

### C Street, Room 119 

### achorage, AK 9950 1-5 126[ms" SERVICE ac,'Eiwumi 

## United States Department of the Interior FISH AND 

### WILDLIFE SERVICE ' /-' 

### NORTHERN ALASKA

### ECOLOGICAL SERVICES 

### - I 

### 101 12'Ave., 

### Box 19,

### Room 110 Fairbanks, 

### AK 9970

### 1 May 11,1998

Debra A. Turner NEPA Compliance Officer U.S. Department of Energy Golden Field Office 161 7 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401 -3393
Re: PredecisionalDraft Environmental Assessment for the Kotzebue Experimental Wind InstallationProject, Kotzebue, Alaska
Dear Ms. Turner: The Fish and Wildlife Service has reviewed the draft EnvironmentalAssessment (EA) for the Kotzebue Wind Farm Project. In an effort to provide a cost-effective and clean source of electricity to Alaskan villages dependentupon diesel-powered generators, the Golden (CO) Field Office of the Department of Energy plans to test commercially available turbines in extreme Arctic conditions to 'evaluate turbine performance and reliability under a wide range of temperatures, precipitation events, and strong Arctic winds.
The 148-acre project site is located 4.5 miles south of Kotzebue, Alaska in moist tundra at an elevation of 50 feet above sea level. The project consists of installing, operating, and maintainingup to .20wind turbines and ancillary equipment. Three different turbines will be tested, and will vary in size, power rating, and spacingrequirements. The heights will vary for each model ranging from 107 feet to 186 feet. 'The wind turbine tower units will be erected on pilings placed 25 to 30 feet deep to anchor the structure and to prevent significant temperature changes in the permafrost. Although the document describes the types ofpotential impactsto public trust resources, it lacks information that would allow adequate assessment ofthe extent of impactsto these resources by the proposed project. Diagrams and illustrationswould have helped those unfamiliar with such devices and facilities to get a better understanding ofthe project. Answers are needed for a number of questions that would clarify orprovide informationpertinent to assessing the extent of impacts. These are as follows:Although the height of the units varied from 107to 186 feet, it was unclear whether this was the height ofthe tower at the top ofthe turbine or the blade at the top of its rotating circumference.What are the spacing requirements and what governs it? How will the 20 towers be distributed over the 148-acre project site? According to the National Weather Service (personal communication), heavy fog occurs fairly frequently in Kotzebue during April, May and June, and less so in August and September. Are the towers lighted in any way for aviation or other needs? If so, could the lighting be an attraction to birds in fog or bad weather during migration or other periods?
Would there be guy wires attached to support the towers?
Would the visible action ofthe turbine blades have an impact upon wildlife use of adjacent habitats or modify their movement patterns?
Noise was adequately described and assessed for one model turbine, the AOC 15/50, in an 18mph wind; its noise level was 104 dBA. According to the National Weather Service, Kotzebue often experienceswinds greater than 18 mph. Winds usually become stronger in the afternoon and evening. Does the noise level increase with stronger winds or gusts, say at 25 to 50 mph winds? The Species List in Appendix 

### D is inadequate. For example, the document states (p. 14)that the common shorebirds in the Kotzebue area include over 30 species of migrants and breeders, yet there are only four listed in the SpeciesList. The list in the Appendix should be as complete as possible, and the text should describe the general fauna and flora,with more detailed information about those species considered to be most important or most likely to be affected by the project.
The document states that the potential environmental impacts from the proposed expansion of the wind farm could include some loss of wildlife habitat from constructionand operation ofthe turbines, and increased bird mortality from collisionswith the turbine blades and towers. In the opinion of the Service, several other questions should be addressed as indicated above and information included in the EA for analysis prior to reaching conclusions regarding the potential extent ofthe impacts to public trust resources, particularly migratory birds.
The Service had requested monitoring ofbird carcassesand birds flying near the wind farm site to be accomplished during one spring and fall migration 

### as a condition on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit (4-970322) required for the construction ofthe proposed project. We continueto stress the importance of a monitoring program at the wind farm site, since it is a new type of construction in Alaska with potential for impacting migratory birds. Threatened and endangered species The proposed project is within the range of two species listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended:the threatened spectacled eider (Somateriajscheri),and the threatened Alaska breeding population ofthe Steller's eider (Polysticta stelleri). Spectacled eiders were listed as a threatened speciesunder the Act on May 10, 1993. The population in Alaska declined approximately 96% between the 1970'sand the 1990's. Thecurrent worldwide population estimate is 360,000 birds. This species winters in the Bering Sea between St. Matthew and St. Lawrence islands, and nests on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, possibly on the Seward Peninsula, across the arctic coastal plain of northern Alaska, and in arctic Russia. Spectacled eiders establish nests near shallow ponds or lakes, and are most abundant in areas with extensive wetlands. While moving between nesting and molting areas, spectacled eiders travel along the coast, sometimesup to 50 kilometers offshore. During spring migration past Barrow, they are observed migrating along leads in the sea ice. There is no designated critical habitat for spectacled eiders in Alaska. Spectacled eiders are not known to nest in the Kotzebue area, nor on the Baldwin Peninsula. In addition, the species is not likely to migrate within Kotzebue Sound. It is likely that spectacled eiders follow leads in the Bering Sea (which are offshore from Kotzebue Sound) during spring migration to breeding grounds.
The Alaska breeding population of Steller's eiders (Polysticta stelleri) was listed as threatened on June 11, 1997. The size of the Alaska breeding population is not known, but is subjectively estimated to number in the hundreds to a few thousand birds. Most of the world's population, estimated at 150,000 to 200,000, winters in protected marine waters of the Alaska Peninsula, the coastal areas of south-central Alaska, and the eastern Aleutian 'Islands. Steller's eiders nest in tundra areas of the Alaskan arctic coastal plain and arctic Russia. Barrow, Alaska is the only remaining place in Alaska where Steller's eiders are known to breed regularly (although not annually), however, there are indications that breeding occurs on the Alaskan arctic coastal plain as far east as Prudhoe Bay. Post-breeding and young-of-the-year Steller's eiders may use coastal habitat in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas to feed and rest as they begin their migration back to the Bering Sea. They migrate along the coast to and from breeding grounds in spring and fall. During spring migration past Barrow, they are typically observed migrating along leads in sea ice. There is no critical habitat for Steller's eiders in Alaska. On the Seward Peninsula, evidence of nesting by Steller's eiders has not been reported since the late 1800's. In addition, Steller's eiders are not known to migrate within Kotzebue Sound, but instead, probably follow the offshore Bering Sea ice lead which occurs outside of the Sound.
The Service concludes that listed species are not likely to occur within the vicinity of the proposed project, and therefore, adverse effects to listed species are not likely.
We appreciate the opportunity to review this Environmental Assessment. Should you have any questions concerning the above comments, please contact Erv McIntosh at (907) 456-0444 or e-mail at ervin-mcintosh@fws.gov. Sincerely,

Patrick J. Sousa Field Supervisor

cc: Dave Erickson, Dames & Moore, Anchorage

## APPENDIX D LIST OF SPECIES 

## IN KOTZEBUE REGIONLIST OF SPECIESIN KOTZEBUE REGION



### VEGETATION 

### water sedge 

### (Carex aquutalis) Bigelow

### 's sedge 

### (Carexbig el ow^'^] 

### russet sedge 

### (Carex saxitalis) short-staked sedge 

### (Carex podocalpa) tussock cottongrass 

### (Eriophorium vaginahun) bluejoint reedgrass 

### (Calamagrostiscanadensis) Arctic bentgrass 

### (Arctagrostislatifolia) narrowleaf cottongrass 

### (Eriophoriumangustifolium). woodrush 

### (Luzula

### spp.) goldenrod 

### (Senecio spp.) dwarf birch 

### (Bemla

### nana) diamondleaf willow 

### (Salix planryolia) Labrador tea 

### (Ledum decumbens) bog blueberry (V'cinim 

### uliginosm) lingonberxy (V'cinim 

### vitis-i&a) BIRDS
Waterfowl 

### Tundra Swan Greater White-fronted Goose Brant Canada Goose Green-winged 

### Teal Northern 

### Pintail Northern Shoveler American Wigeon Greater Scaup Oldsquaw Black Scoter
Shorebirds 

### Western Sandpiper Whimbrel Common Snipe Northern Phalarope

Raptors 

### Northern Harrier Rough-legged HawksGolden Eagles Merlins Gyrfalcons
Passerines Common and Hoary Redpolls Wilson's Warbler Yellow Warbler Northern Waterthrush Lapland Longspur White-crowned Sparrow Savannah Sparrow 

### Tree Sparrow Fox Sparrow
Other Species willow Ptarmigan 

### Bank Swallows Glaucous Gulls Arctic Terns Long-tailed and Parasitic Jaegers Sandhill Crane CommonRaven MAMMALS masked and tundra shrews, snowshoe hare tundra redbacked vole brown and green-collared lemmings meadow vole, 

### Alaska vole, and tundra voles least and short-tailed weasels brown 

### bear moose muskrat feral reindeer Arctic fox red fox, coyote wolf muskox caribou. Threatened or Endangered Species Spectacled Eider 

### (Somareria _fishen) Steller's Eider 

### (Polystictastellen]

## APPENDIX 

## E NOISE AND ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE ANALYSES

### NOISE ANALYSIS This section describesthe 148 acre wind farm sitenear Kotzebue Alaska specificto noise generation issues, potential noise generation, applicable noise standards, and the anticipated impact ofthe potential noise generation. Current Conditions Thewind farm site is located approximately 4.5 miles south of KotzebueAlaska, and the Kotzebue ElectricAssociation leasesthe site from the KikiktagrukInupiat Corporation. The site currently has three AOC wind turbines in place that were installed in the spring of 1997. A site visit was conducted during the fall of 1997, and at that time,'the current condition of the wind farm sitewas primarily undeveloped open spacewith no noted significant or unusual noise generators.No noise survey data characterizing current conditions at the location ofthe wind farm was conducted or discovered duringthis investigation, however, duringthe site visit, the noise generated fiom the current wind turbines did not appear significant. Based on the site visit, it is estimatedthat the closest residents to the boundary ofthe wind farm live in the town of Kotzebue and are approximately 4.5 miles to the north. A local airport is also located between the wind farm site and the town ofKotzebue; it is approximatelyfour miles north ofthe site. Also a municipal landfill is located approximatelytwo miles northwest ofthe wind farm site. The local topography is nearly uniform with a general low relief. There are no significant terrain barriers in the immediate area to impede the noise that will be generated, the surface air flow, or to produce pronounced local variation in temperatureor precipitation. Indications are that there are no municipal or local noise ordinances, therefore, a review was completed ofthe state of Alaska's statutes for applicable noise or noise control requirements that would be applicable at the Kotzebue wind farm. Specific noise levels, for example, implementing noise area classifications, are not available in the state statutes. The requirements are more general and restrict "excessive" or "nuisance" noise and include requirements for not having an adverse impact in the area. Potential Noise Generation Noise generation as a result ofthis project is expectedto consist of construction and maintenance of the wind farm and any associated facilities.

### In addition, the daily operation of the wind farm turbines is expected to generatethe worst case and a long-term noise generation. Construction and development ofthe facilitiesis expectedto generate noise primarily from internal combustion engines used to power the construction equipment and conduct operations. Specific noise generation and characterization depends on the type of equipment used, the amount of equipment operating simultaneously, and hours of operation. It is anticipated that typical constructionequipment will be used and that the hours of operation will occur only during normal working hours. 

### As described in section 2.5, it is anticipated that the construction period will be a relatively shorttime period. Because of the noise standards that construction equipment manufactures arerequired to adhereto, it is not anticipated that excessive orunusualnoise generation will result fiom the construction operations.In addition, assumingthe construction operations occur only during normal working hours it is anticipated that the noise generation will not significantly impact potential nearby receptors. Wind farm operationsare expectedto occur 365 days per year, 24 hours per day and include periodic maintenance operations. The traffic associated with these operations is not expected to significantly contribute to the total noise characteristics ofthe respective area. The primary noise generator is expected to be the wind turbines. A sound survey was not conducted during the sitevisit to analyze the noise generated by the existing wind turbines, however, vender noise data is available. Using estimates and assumptionsthat are reasonably conservative, noise levels ofthe AOC 15/50wind turbinewere estimatedto be 104 &(A) at the hub with an 18mile per hour wind 

### (NREL 1997). This estimation is consistent with the Acoustics Measurement ofNoise EmissionFrom Wind Turbines (Expert Group Study 1994). Based on othervender data and information, this noise level appearstobe on the high side for modem wind turbines, but will be used as a conservativebasis forthe purposes ofthis noise evaluation. Assuming a relatively high noise level as a basis will help ensure a conservative review ofthe potential noise impacts. The primary assumptionsused in reviewing the potential noise impacts are: 104&(A) noise level at the hub of each wind turbine Thewind farmwill contain a maximum of 20 wind turbines The hub height of each wind turbine will be a minimum of 24 meters There are no other significant noise generators

### in the vicinity of the wind farm A municipal landfill is located approximatelytwo miles northwest of the site 

### An airport is located approximatelyfour miles north ofthe site The nearest residential receptor is approximately4.5 miles north in the town of Kotzebue.
The total noise generated by up to 20 wind turbines is estimated based onthe relationship among sound power, sound intensity, sound power level, and the addition ofharmonic waves. Using these relationships as described in the Noise Control: Handbook of Principles and Practices (Lipscomb, Taylor, 1978),it is conservatively estimatedthat the maximum noise level is approximately 114 &(A) assuming 10 or more wind turbines. Assuming a worse case configuration of all wind turbines being essentially at the same location the additivity ofthe noise fiom each wind turbine continues at a nonlinear scale until the eleventhwind turbine is added at which point the increase is insignificant and may be neglected. Therefore the maximum noise generated is with a configuration of 10co-located wind turbines. Assuming the wind turbines are on 24 meter towers the noise level at the ground can be estimatedby using the following equation (Lipscomb, Taylor, 1978):

### NoiseL =

### SNoiseL 

### - 10xlog(4x 

### r x

## R' 

## )
where: NoiseL =Noise level at distanceR in &(A) SNoiseL =the source noise level in dB(A) (104 dB(A)) 

### R =the distance from the sourcein meters (24) Using this relationship it is estimated that the noise level at the ground level is approximately75 &(A) assuming 10or more wind turbines simultaneously operating. This noise level is below the federal requirements for occupational hearing conservation programs and in additionwill decrease asthe distance from the noise source increases. Using the same relationship as described in the above equation, noise levels were estimated for distances fbrther away from the wind farm and are shown in the table below.

Noise Level (in dB(A)) At Distance (in meters) 24 100 500 1000 2000 32

### 1 9 (landfill)

5000 6437 (airport) 26 7242 (Kotzebue)

To put these noise level estimates into perspective;normal conversation at approximately one meter has a sound pressure of approximately 60 dB; a quiet oficehas a sound pressure of approximately 50 

### dB and is considered quiet; and finally a softwhisper at five meters is approximately 30 dB and is consideredvery quiet (Lipscomb, Taylor, 1978).Based on the estimated noise levels it is not anticipatedthat any significantnoise impact will result from the wind farm. Directly at the wind farm, workers or maintenance personnel will not likely be required to use hearing protection and at the landfill, the airport, or atthe town of Kotzebuethe noise will be negligible.REFERENCES: (Lipscomb, Taylor, 1978), Noise Control HandbookofPrinciples and Practices, Van Nostrand Reinhold Environmental Engineering Series, 1978. (Expert Group Study 1994),Expert Group Study on RecommendedProcticesFor Wind Turbine Testing And Evaluation, 4. Acoustics Measurement ofNoise Emission From Wind Turbines, 3. Edition 1994. (NREL 1997), Communicationwith NREL Wind Energy Program, December 9, 1997.ELECTROMAGNETICINTERFERENCE ANALYSIS The purpose of this section is to describe potential electromagnetic interference (EM)as it is applicable to the proposed wind farm site located near Kotzebue Alaska and the potential effect on radio services.The wind fm site is located approximately4.5 miles south ofKotzebue Alaska, and the Kotzebue ElectricAssociation leasesthe site from the Kikiktagruk Inupiat Corporation. The site currently has three AOC wind turbines in place that were installed in the spring of 1997. A site visit was conducted during the fall of 1997, and at that time, the current condition ofthe wind fm site was primarily undeveloped open space. A local airport is located between the wind farm site and the town of Kotzebue; it is approximatelyfour miles north of the site. A local AM radio station (KOTZ) is located in the town ofKotzebue and dperates at the frequency of 700 kilohertz. The KOTZ antenna is located approximately 1000 feet to the west ofthe wind fm site. Also the abandonedU.S. Air ForceWhite Alice Communicationsstation is located less than one mile to the west of the site. The local topography is nearly uniform with a general low relief There are no significantterrainbarriers in the immediate area, or pronounced local variation in temperature orprecipitation. The potential EMI effects of wind turbines onradio servicesinvolve multiple parameters including:the type ofwind turbine, whether it is on a vertical or horizontal axis, the diameter and number ofblades, the shape of the blades and properties oftheir materials, and the height ofthe support tower. Also applicable for wind turbineswith blades made of dielectric materials, or materials which are an electrical insulator, are the shape and location of any metal parts such as lightning conductors or spars. The electromagnetic scattering properties of a wind turbine is a complex condition and involvesthree dimensionalvector fields incident upon a time varying structure and requires many parameters for its description. The analytical descriptions use electromagnetic analysistechniques to categorize the EMI situation into three classes dependent upon their dimensionsin terms of a wavelength, (Expert Group Study 1986). The vulnerability of various radio servicesto

### EM1 effects is dependent upon some primary parameters ofthe radio service.The primary parameters are: spatialpositions of the transmitter and receiver with respect to the wind turbine; carrier frequency; polarization ofthe signal; modulationtype and frequency; time constants ofthe automatic gain or other controls; and the symbol rate of digital systems, (Expert Group Study 1986). A semi-quantitativeanalysis has been performed and is documented in a paper titled, "Some Comments on Possible Electromagnetic InterferenceAttributabletoWind Machines," (Nix, 1998)This paper specificallyevaluatesthe EMI situationat Kotzebue against thebackground of the existing technical literatureon this subject. The conclusions are specificto

### AM broadcast reception, MV broadcasting, aircraft navigation, cellular telephones, and the Air Force Radar Installation. It is expected that very little reradiation and essentially no interference will occur with the KOTZ radio broadcast because the wind turbineslwind machines near the radio antenna present only about 5% of a wavelength in any dimension. Currentlythere are no conventional TV or FM broadcasting stations in theKotzebue area and thereforeinterferenceis not an issue. In addition, receiving dish antennasfor satellite reception have beam widths of only a few degrees and they are oriented to a specific satellite(s), therefore, wind farminterference is not expected. The airport is located approximately four miles north ofthe wind farm site and has not observed any wind machine related interference with their aircraft navigation systems. In addition, a report by D.L. Sengupta and T.B.A. Senior indicates that no significant degradation of VHF Omnidirectional Ranging (VOR) systems will occur assuming wind turbines are sited accordingto FAA guidelines, (Sengupta, Senior 1977). There is currently no cellular servicein the Kotzebue area and therefore intefierenceis not an issue. The abandoned U.S. Air Force White Alice Communications station is no longer in operation, thereforeinterference is also not considered aq issue. In addition, radar antenna systems typically have very narrow beams in orderto rnehure directions accurately, therefore interference is not anticipated even ifthe systems were operational. Based on the reviewed information, and assuming the electromagnetic related services do not change in the Kotzebue area, it is not anticipated that the planned wind farm will cause any noticeableEM1issues.

REFERENCES (Sengupta, Senior 1977), Sengupta, D.L., Senior, T.B


## . A., "ElectromagneticInterference by Wind Turbine Generators. Final Report," ERA-04-01 865 1; EDB-78-002 112;Michigan Univ., 

### Ann Arbor 

### MI, February 1977. Nix, Gerald. 1998. National RenewableEnergyLaboratory



### . MemorandumtoE. Lurier, Dames & Moore. "Some Comments on Possible Electromagnetic Interference Attributable to Wind Machinesyy (Expert Group Study 1986), Expert Group Study on Recommended Practices For Wind Turbine Testing And Evaluation, 

### 5. Electromagnetic Interference, Issue 1, February 198 6.