DOE/EA - 1542

August 2005

Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment

Burleigh County 

Wind Energy Center

Burleigh County, 

North Dakota

Final

Burleigh County Wind, LLC

BASIN ELECTRIC

POWER COOPERATIVE

Central Power 

Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Introduction 1-1 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

CHAPTER 1 

INTRODUCTION 

The Burleigh County Wind Energy Center is a wind generation project proposed by FPL Energy Burleigh 

County Wind, LLC (Burleigh County Wind). The proposed project would produce up to 50 megawatts 

(MW) of electricity, averaged annually. The proposed project is located in Burleigh County, North 

Dakota, approximately 3 miles south and 2 miles east of the town of Wilton, North Dakota (Figures 1-1 

and 1-2). 

Central Power Electric Cooperative (Central Power), a member of the Basin Electric Power Cooperative 

(Basin), would construct a new 230-kilovolt (kV) transmission line, approximately 4.4 miles long, to 

connect the proposed Wind Energy Center to a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Western Area Power 

Administration (Western) transmission line, called the Garrison-Bismarck 230-kV Transmission Line. 

The interconnection with Western’s transmission line would require modifications to the existing Western 

facility, including construction of a temporary interconnection called a “tap” and a permanent switching 

station. The project is scheduled to be operational by the end of 2005. Electricity produced from the 

project is expected to meet the energy demands of approximately 30,000 North Dakota households. 

The project is a Federal action under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 102(2) 

(1969), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the Procedural 

Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), DOE NEPA Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Part 

1021), and other applicable regulations. Western prepared this environmental assessment (EA) under 

these regulations to describe the analysis of environmental effects of the proposed project (proposed 

action) and alternatives, including the no-action alternative. 

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION 

The DOE Energy Information Administration (DOE-EIA) is forecasting a 1.8 percent annual growth in 

electricity sales through 2020. This growth will require an increase in generating capacity of up to 1,300 

new power plants over the next 20 years (DOE-EIA 2001). Deregulation of the electric industry and 

current energy supply issues have emphasized the need for new and diverse energy sources in the region. 
1-2 Introduction 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

APPLICANTS’ UNDERLYING NEED 

Project proponents need to provide additional network resources to meet load obligations and support 

renewable resources. 

Basin needs to meet a recent shareholder directive to diversify its current generation portfolio, which 

includes coal, hydroelectric, and gas with an economical renewable energy source. 

Burleigh County Wind and Central Power need to develop, operate, and maintain the generation and 

transmission infrastructure. 

AGENCY PURPOSE AND NEED 

Basin has a Network Integration Service Agreement under Western’s Open Access Transmission Tariff 

(Tariff) and applied to interconnect a new Designated Network Resource to Western’s existing GarrisonBismarck 230-kV Transmission Line. Western is required pursuant to the terms of its Tariff to respond to 

Basin’s request and, in responding to the need for agency action, has the following purposes: 

3⁄4 Western offers capacity on its transmission system to deliver electricity when such capacity is 

available, under Western’s Tariff. The Tariff has been approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission (FERC) as being consistent with the Commission’s Final Order Nos. 888, 888A, 888B, 

and 888C, which are intended to ensure non-discriminatory transmission system access. Pursuant to 

the Commission’s Order Nos. 2003, 2003-A and 2003-B, Western submitted revisions to its nonjurisdictional Tariff on January 25, 2005, to the Commission. The purpose of the filing was to revise 

certain terms of Western’s original Tariff and to incorporate the Large Generator Interconnection 

Procedures and a Large Generator Interconnection Agreement which are applicable to the 100MW 

interconnection request from Basin. FERC conditionally approved Western’s Tariff revisions on July 

6, 2005. Western needs to respond to the interconnection and transmission service requests under the 

provisions of its revised Tariff. 

3⁄4 Western is required to ensure protection of transmission system reliability and service to existing 

customers. Western’s purpose is to ensure that existing reliability and service is not degraded. 

Western’s LGIP provides for transmission and system studies to ensure that system reliability and 

service to existing customers is not adversely affected. 
Missouri River

Burleigh

McLean

Morton

Sheridan

Oliver Wing

Wilton Regan

Mercer

Mandan

Lincoln

Washburn

Bismarck

Underwood

Coleharbor

Turtle Lake

I94

U83

U83

S14

S36

S41

S25

S200

S6

S1804

S200 A

S1806

S1806

S1804

S200

S200

Burnt Cree k

A pple C r eek

Turtle Creek

Litt le Heart R iver

Square

Butte Creek

Hay Creek

Otter C reek

East Branch Apple Creek

West Branch Apple Creek

Sherk Cre ek

Long Lake Creek

Random Creek

Painte d Woods Creek

Harriet Lake

Lake Nelson

Twin Lakes

Weller Slough

Pelican Lake

Grass Lake

Lonetree Lake

Horseshoe Lake

Clear Lake

Fish Creek

Crown Butte Creek

County Lines

Project Area

Figure 1-1

Project Location

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center

FPL Energy Burleigh County Wind, LLC.

0 5 10

Miles
1-4 Introduction 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Page intentionally left blank – Figure 1-1 (back) 
Burnt Creek

T143N R79W

T142N R79W T142N R78W

T143N R78W

T143N R79W

McLean

Burleigh

1

1

1

1

1

1

6

6

6 6

6

6

31

31

31 31 36

36 36

36 Regan Wilton

West Branch Apple Creek

Grass Lake

41

Figure 1-2

Local Overview

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center

FPL Energy Burleigh County Wind, LLC.

0 21

Miles

Proposed Facilities o

Major Roads

Trails or Minor Roads

Graded & Drained

County Lines

Project Area

Sections

US

83

HWY

36
1-6 Introduction 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

3⁄4 Page intentionally left blank – Figure 1-2 (back)
Introduction 1-7 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

The Applicant’s objectives must be considered. Because the statement of purpose and need affects the 

extent to which alternatives are considered reasonable, it is important to understand both the agency’s 

purpose and need and that of the applicant. 

AUTHORIZING ACTIONS 

Federal, state, and local agencies, including Western, have jurisdiction over certain aspects of the 

proposed action. Table 1-1 provides a listing of agencies and their respective permit/authorizing 

responsibilities with respect to the proposed Burleigh County Wind Energy Center. 

AGENCY CONSULTATION AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 

Western has consulted with the various state and Federal agencies and Tribes (listed in Chapter 4 of this 

document) in the development of this analysis. In addition, Western will consider comments to this EA 

from agencies, tribes, landowners, and other interested parties. 
1-8 Introduction 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

TABLE 1-1 

Permit/Authorizing Responsibilities

Authorizing Action/Statute Responsible Agency 

Interconnection/Transmission Service Agreement Western 

230-kV Transmission Line Construction North Dakota Public Service Commission 

Utility Occupancy Agreement North Dakota Department of Transportation 

(NDDOT) 

Easement Grants and Road Crossing Permits NDDOT, Ecklund Township Board 

Review and Approval of Weed Control Plan Burleigh County, Ecklund Township Board 

National Environmental Policy Act Western 

National Historic Preservation Act Western, North Dakota State Historical 

Preservation Office (NDSHPO) 

Native American Graves Protection and 

Repatriation Act Western 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act Western 

Construction Storm Water Permit 

North Dakota Department of Health (NDDoH), 

North Dakota Division of Water Quality, Storm 

Water Program 

Clean Water Act Compliance U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) 

Safety Plan North Dakota Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act USFWS, Western 

Endangered Species Act USFWS, Western 

Tower Lighting Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-1 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

CHAPTER 2

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND 

ALTERNATIVES 

INTRODUCTION 

Burleigh County Wind proposes to construct, own, and operate a wind energy center in Burleigh County, 

North Dakota. The Burleigh County Wind Energy Center (Wind Energy Center) would consist of no 

more than 66 wind turbines (33 initially as part of phase I, and up to an additional 33 in phase II) with an 

output of up to 50 MW, averaged annually. Central Power proposes to construct, own, and operate 

approximately 4.4 miles of 230-kV transmission line and associated structures, equipment, and facilities 

as part of the first phase of development. The transmission line would originate at the proposed Burleigh 

County Wind collection substation and continue west to interconnect with Western’s existing GarrisonBismarck 230-kV Transmission Line. 

PROPOSED ACTION 

The proposed Burleigh County Wind Energy Project (Proposed Action) is located near the rural 

communities of Wilton and Regan in central North Dakota, approximately 18 miles north of Bismarck, 

North Dakota (Figure 2-1). The Proposed Action would consist of the following components: 

3⁄4 Access roads; 

3⁄4 Thirty-three 1.5-MW General Electric (GE) turbines as part of the initial development; 

3⁄4 Thirty-three additional turbines as part of the expanded project; 

3⁄4 Collection transmission lines; 

3⁄4 A collection substation at the Wind Energy Center; 

3⁄4 A 230-kV high voltage transmission line from the collection substation to the point of interconnection 

with Western’s existing Garrison-Bismarck 230-kV Transmission Line; 

3⁄4 A temporary interconnection facility (“tap”) at the point of interconnection with Western’s existing 

Garrison-Bismarck 230-kV Transmission Line; and, 
2-2 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

3⁄4 A new permanent switching station at the point of interconnection with Western’s existing GarrisonBismarck 230-kV Transmission Line. 

All facilities would be constructed in accordance with the National Electrical Safety Code, U.S. 

Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Standards, and Central’s Power System Safety 

Manual for maximum safety and property protection. The following sections describe these project 

components, pre-construction planning, and construction activities associated with each. 

PRECONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 

Preconstruction activities included site surveys and studies, landowner agreements, engineering design, 

and configuring proposed project facilities: 

Preconstruction Surveys and Studies 

Preconstruction surveys were conducted to ensure the feasibility of the Proposed Action and to avoid, 

minimize, or mitigate impacts to existing resources. A full summary description of these surveys and their 

use follows. 

Meteorological studies were conducted for 1 year to determine the characteristics of the wind resource in 

the project vicinity. The results of these studies were used to ensure project feasibility and determine the 

most efficient location of the wind turbines. 

A Class I cultural resources study (record search) and Traditional Cultural Property (TCP) survey was 

conducted to research and document the location of these resources with respect to the Proposed Action. 

A Class III cultural resources survey (intensive ground survey) was conducted for the areas associated 

with Phase I of the Proposed Action. A Class III cultural resources survey would be conducted for all 

areas of subsequent development. The locations of all facilities would be adjusted to avoid the cultural 

and TCP resources. 

Wetlands surveys were completed for the Proposed Action to determine the presence of jurisdictional and 

non-jurisdictional wetlands in the project area. The locations of the facilities would be adjusted to avoid 

and minimize wetland impacts. 
0816

279TH

240TH

292ND

-

41ST

318TH

66TH

52ND

26TH

93RD

106TH

132ND

0819

119TH

80TH

253RD

331ST

145TH

305TH

15TH

12TH

158TH

266TH180TH AUSTIN

171ST

145TH

0819

253RD

80TH

-

145TH

15TH

331ST

80TH

253RD

12TH

15TH

- -

-

Figure 2-1

Project Area Detail

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center

FPL Energy Burleigh County Wind, LLC

0 10.5

Miles

HWY

36

US

83

Burnt Creek

West Branch Apple Creek

WILTON

REGAN

County Lines

Project Area Garrison-Bismarck Transmission Line

Switching Station

Radio Towers

2005 Turbines

Array Collector Substation

2005 Access Roads

Major Roads

Minor Roads & Trails

Highways

Occupied Residence

With 500 foot Buffer

Proposed 230-kV Transmission Line

Future Expansion Turbines OH 34.5 kV Transmission Line (2005)

OH 34.5 kV Transmission Line (Expansion)

Buried Cable (2005)
2-4 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK – INSERT FIGURE 2-1 (BACK) 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-5 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Wildlife surveys were completed in the vicinity of the Proposed Action. These surveys included a sticknest survey for tree nesting raptors, a lek survey for sharp-tailed grouse, and spring point-count surveys to 

determine avian species composition. The surveys were designed to document wildlife use on the site and 

ensure that the Proposed Action would not be located in an area used extensively by sensitive wildlife 

species. 

Landowner Agreements 

The project proponents entered into agreements with landowners in order to secure rights to access their 

property for surveys, testing, construction, operation, and maintenance of the project components. These 

agreements were developed in consideration of landowner concerns, and include compensation for 

disturbance and loss of farming access during project construction, operation, and maintenance. 

Landowner agreements have not yet been secured for all of phase II of the project. 

Project Planning & Design 

Project planning considered project components, equipment, and material sources available for use in 

construction and operation. The location and design of all project facilities would avoid sensitive 

resources. Generally, land requirements and disturbance areas for each of the components are shown in 

Table 2-1. 

Gravel and Fill 

Staging and construction activities associated with the Proposed Action would require access to gravel. 

During construction, gravel will provide a surface suitable for working during wet conditions. As 

described later in this chapter, some permanent access roads will remain graveled after construction to 

support access during all weather conditions. It has been determined that gravel for these activities would 

be supplied by local gravel pits which have been identified by the construction contractors as sufficient to 

meet staging and construction needs. The selected contractor’s current gravel source is located in the East 

1⁄2 Northwest 1⁄4 Section 27, Township 144 North, Range 80 West. Metcalf Archeological Inc. has verified 

that this gravel pit is in compliance with the North Dakota Department of Transportation’s (NDDOT) 

requirements for cultural resources clearance. Metcalf would include documentation to this affect in the 

final cultural resources report which would be submitted to the SHPO and Western to satisfy the 
2-6 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

conditions of their concurrence letter. If additional sources of gravel or fill material are required during 

project construction, those sources would be surveyed or documentation would be provided to ensure 

cultural resource clearances are obtained. 

TABLE 2-1 

Summary of Disturbances

Component Construction Requirements 

(temporary) 

Maintenance/Operations 

Requirements 

(long-term) 

Turbines 500 feet by 500 feet including 

associated laydown 50 feet by 50 feet 

Turbine Transformers Within turbine construction area 6 feet by 6 feet 

Access Roads to turbines 

7.2 miles 

40 feet wide disturbance within 

100 feet wide construction ROW 

7.2 miles 

32 feet wide 

Underground Lines (trenches) 

8 miles long 

Disturb area no more than 50 

feet wide within 100 feet wide 

construction ROW 

Trenches filled, regraded, and 

vegetated. No permanent 

surface disturbance 

Overhead Sub-transmission 

Line 

50 by 50 feet at each structure 

within 100 ft ROW 

3 feet by 3 feet at each 

structure 

Collection Substation 2 acres 2 acres 

Laydown Area 15 acres 15 acres 

230-kV Transmission Line 50 feet by 50 feet 7 feet by 7 feet 

100 feet by 100 feet with 133 foot 

construction right of way Temporary Tap 50 feet by 50 feet temporary 

maintenance area 

Restored to original contour and 

vegetated following construction 

of permanent switching station 

Switching Station 470 feet by 750 feet 470 feet by 750 feet 

PROPOSED FACILITIES 

Burleigh County Wind expects to bring the proposed Wind Energy Center online within approximately 

90 days from the start of construction. Construction impacts would be temporary and would include the 

use of bulldozers, graders, trenching machines, concrete trucks, tractor-trailer trucks, and large cranes. 

The proposed project facilities would consist of the following components and are described sequentially 

from the Wind Energy Center to the point of interconnection – generally east to west within the proposed 

project area: 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-7 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Wind Turbines – Turbines would be used to convert wind energy from the Wind Energy Center into 

electrical energy. 

Access Roads – Gravel roads would be installed to provide access to each turbine and along the proposed 

new 230-kV transmission line to allow for construction, operation, and maintenance activities. 

Electrical Collection System (underground and overhead 34.5 kV sub-transmission lines) – The overhead 

and underground sub-transmission lines would be used to transmit electricity from each of the wind 

turbine transformers to the electrical collection substation. 

Electrical Collection Substation – The collection substation would be used to transmit electricity from the 

turbines to the 230-kV high voltage transmission line, 

Laydown Yard – The laydown yard would be used for the storage of construction materials and 

equipment (see Burleigh County Wind Laydown Yard for further details). 

230-kV High Voltage Transmission Line – The 230-kV high voltage transmission line would connect the 

electrical collection substation to the point of interconnection at Western’s existing Garrison-Bismarck 

230-kV Transmission Line. 

Temporary Tap – The tap would be used to temporarily connect the 230-kV high voltage transmission 

line into the existing Bismarck-Garrison 230-kV Transmission Line, 

Permanent Switching Station – The switching station would be used to provide a permanent point of 

interconnection between the 230-kV high voltage transmission line and the existing Bismarck-Garrison 

230-kV Transmission Line. 

The following criteria were considered in the planning of project components of the Proposed Action: 

3⁄4 Establish a thousand-foot radius from turbine sites for safety, noise, vibration, and shadow flicker 

buffer zones for residences. 

3⁄4 Avoid and minimize impacts to avian species through avoidance of high use areas relative to 

surrounding areas. 

3⁄4 Avoid unnecessary wetland disturbances, including a 50-foot avoidance buffer from all wetlands not 

previously converted to agricultural use, and permit all necessary disturbances to wetlands. 

3⁄4 Avoid cultural and historic resources. 

3⁄4 Comply with permits and applicable Federal state, and local regulations. 
2-8 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Roads would be constructed and upgraded prior to installation of the proposed facilities. Existing and new 

roads would be used to move equipment, personnel, and materials during the construction, maintenance, 

and operations of the Proposed Action. Heavy equipment related to the construction phase of the 

Proposed Action would gain access to the Wind Energy Center via the existing gravel roads (93rd Street, 

66th Street, and 52nd Street traveling south from State Highway 36). 

Civil Construction –New access roads, serving all facilities associated with the Proposed Action would be 

constructed from existing street and avenue routes. Topsoil would be salvaged from road areas and 

replaced on roadside slopes and other associated areas following construction to provide a reclaimed 

growth medium. All access roads would be constructed in association with the wind turbines. No new 

access roads are required for collector or transmission lines. Graded surfaces within the footprints of the 

laydown area, substation, and switching station are separately described in associate with the facilities’ 

descriptions. 

Roads serving the turbines would be graded and compacted to a total width of approximately 32 feet to 

facilitate large truck travel. The length of new and upgraded roads required for access to the initial 33 

turbines is 7.2 miles. The locations and lengths of roads required for the expansion array and overhead 

collection transmission line have not yet been determined. 

Wind Turbines 

The Proposed Action would include construction of an initial 33 turbines that would be constructed 

during the year 2005 and placed in operation prior to December 31, 2005. Up to 33 additional turbines 

would be planned and constructed in 2006, or subsequent years, for a total of up to 66 turbines. The 

proposed turbine arrangement, or “array”, for both phases is shown in Figure 2-1; however, only the first 

33 turbine locations have been finalized. As with the initial installation, expansion turbines would be 

sited to make best use of the wind resource and avoid or minimize impacts to sensitive areas. 

Figure 2-2 provides a diagram and photograph of the GE horizontal axis, three-blade propeller turbines. 

The approximate height of the turbines would be 360 feet from the top of the swept area to the ground 

surface. The bottom of the swept area above the ground surface would be approximately 160 feet. These 

heights would allow the turbines to take advantage of more consistent and less turbulent winds. 
Figure 2-2

Wind Turbine Diagram and Photograph

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center

FPL Energy Burleigh County Wind, LLC
2-10 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK – INSERT FIGURE 2-2 (BACK) 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-11 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Construction 

A photo series depicting the typical process of erecting a turbine is located in Appendix A. All activities 

related to wind turbine construction would occur within a 500 feet by 500 feet area centered on the 

turbine site. Wind turbine and access road construction is typically accomplished in the following 

manner: 

Civil Construction – Civil work is usually performed about 3 to 6 weeks prior to the start of any other 

construction activities. Civil construction entails surveying, clearing, grubbing, excavating, and 

constructing turbine foundations. 

An area of approximately 50 feet by 50 feet would be cleared with a bulldozer and/or road grader and 

excavated with a backhoe to prepare for each concrete foundation. Excess excavated material would be 

used for road construction or otherwise disposed of in accordance with all applicable regulations and 

permit conditions. An aluminum tube and bolt cage would be installed inside and concrete placed into the 

hole. Approximately 150 cubic yards of concrete would be needed for each turbine. Concrete spoil would 

be disposed of off-site by the contractor. Once cured, the foundation would be complete and ready to 

receive the turbine tower. 

Delivery and Access – Major wind turbine components (including rotor assemblies, towers, power cables, 

and transformers) would be delivered to the wind project site by tractor-trailers on existing and/or 

developed access roads. A 500-foot-wide construction easement would extend along each turbine access 

road and turbine foundation allowing for rotor assembly, installation of underground and aboveground 

electrical facilities, and access road construction. 

Structural – Turbine and tower assembly, and erection of the towers onto the turbine foundations, would 

be completed during this task. This work would also include installation of all mechanical and electrical 

systems associated with the turbines. 

Testing – The testing period would start well into the proposed project, usually 3 to 6 months after the 

start of construction, and would typically last 2 to 3 months. This phase would include all the testing 

required to make the Wind Energy Center commercially operational. This incremental process would 

involve energizing the collection substation and bringing each turbine online until the commercial 

operation date. 

Restoration and Final Project Completion – This last task in wind project construction would entail 

restoration and cleanup of all project disturbances. Areas of permanent disturbance at each turbine would 

include those areas occupied by turbines and access roads. Areas temporarily disturbed during 
2-12 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

construction would be restored to pre-construction conditions. Additional details related to reclamation 

and restoration are presented in the Restoration and Reclamation section of this document. 

Operation and Maintenance 

The Wind Energy Center would be supported by two full-time technicians during normal business hours. 

Maintenance activities would occur periodically, resulting in approximately one truck trip along project 

roads per day from spring through fall, and periodic visits to project turbines and substations during the 

winter. Equipment to be stored at the Burleigh County Wind Laydown Yard and used at the project for 

operation and maintenance activities would include the following: 

3⁄4 One service truck on site; 

3⁄4 One small bulldozer with a forklift and snow plow; 

3⁄4 One road grader that would be shared with other projects; 

3⁄4 One 4-wheeler; and, 

3⁄4 One snowmobile. 

To facilitate operation and maintenance, project access roads would be graded as necessary. Maintenance 

activities would be limited to areas accessible by these roads 

Each turbine would be serviced twice a year. Typical turbine servicing activities would include 

temporarily deploying a crane within the construction easement of each turbine, removing the turbine 

rotor, replacing generators, bearings, and deploying personnel to climb the towers to service parts within 

the turbine. 

Computer systems inside each turbine would perform self-diagnostic tests and allow a remote operator to 

set new operating parameters, perform system checks, and ensure turbines are operating at peak 

performance. Turbines would automatically shut down if sustained winds reach 56 miles per hour (mph) 

or gusts reach about 100 mph. The Wind Energy Center would be monitored and operated year-round by 

Burleigh County Wind. 

Collection System

A sub-transmission line collection system consisting of a 1750 KVA, 3 phase pad mounted transformer at 

each turbine would connect to a network of underground 34.5kV and overhead 34.5kV transmission lines. 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-13 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

This system would collect the electricity generated by each of the 33 individual turbines and transmit it to 

the electrical collection substation. 

Construction 

Transformers

Pad-mounted transformers would be located within 20 feet of the base of each turbine tower. The 

approximately 5-foot-square steel transformer box, housing the transformer circuitry, would be mounted 

on an approximately 6-foot-square fiberglass box pad. Figure 2-3 shows a typical pad mounted 

transformer and its location near the base of a turbine tower. 

Underground Collection Line

Approximately 8 miles of underground collection line would be installed for the first 33 turbines and an 

additional 8 miles would be installed for the expansion array. The collection line cable would consist of a 

1,000,000 circular mils (1,000 MCM), 4/0 cable buried in trenches at a depth of 42 to 54 inches (nominal 

depth of 48 inches). Trenches are anticipated to be approximately 2 feet wide and 4 feet deep and would 

generally follow access roads. However, where shorter distances could be achieved through more direct 

paths, the shorter routes would be implemented as shown in Figure 2-1. 

Trenches would be excavated using both a trencher and a backhoe. Disturbance associated with all buried 

collection lines would be limited to a 100-foot wide construction corridor associated with each proposed 

linear disturbance. All trenches would be filled with compacted material and associated disturbances 

would be reclaimed following burial of the electrical cables (see the section on Reclamation/Restoration 

for further details). Above-ground utility warning markers would be installed at appropriate intervals to 

ensure safety and line integrity. 

Overhead Collection Line

Approximately 1.6-miles of overhead 34.5-kV sub-transmission collection line (collection line) would be 

constructed along 52nd Street to collect power from the northernmost turbines (see Figure 2-1). 

Underground lines would also be connected to this common overhead line, which would eventually 

connect to the collection substation. Collection lines from the southernmost four turbines would be 

buried and connected directly at the collection substation. 

Project development associated with the eastern expansion would include construction of an additional 

6.4 miles of overhead 34.5-kV collection line. This line would be installed outside of the existing road 

right-of-way (ROW) along 279th Avenue, as shown in Figure 2-1. 
2-14 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Single wood-pole structures would be used for the overhead collection line. Wood poles are readily 

available, can be installed using simple construction techniques, and can be easily modified or replaced to 

reduce outage time during emergencies. In addition, the life expectancy of these poles is approximately 

45 years. 

Typically, 10 percent of the pole length plus 2 feet is buried (i.e., an 80-foot pole would be buried 10 

feet). An approximately 24-inch auger would be used to drill holes and a crane or boom truck would be 

used to set the structures in place. Soil excavated from the holes would be backfilled and compacted to 

ensure stability and drainage away from the structure. 

The structures would be spaced approximately 300 feet apart. Using these spacing standards would 

require approximately 15 structures per mile. Disturbance at each structure would likely average 50 feet 

by 50 feet, and would be confined to the 100-foot temporary construction corridor. Permanent 

disturbance would include the site occupied by the poles (a footprint of less than 3 feet by 3 feet). An 

illustration of powerline stringing techniques is shown in Figure 2-4 and more fully described later in this 

chapter. An illustration of an example overhead 34.5-kV collection line structure is shown in Figure 2-5. 

Operation and Maintenance 

Transformers

Pad mounted transformers would be maintained as part of normal operations and maintenance activities 

and would be accessed from the turbine access road. In the event of transformer failure, replacement of 

this equipment could be accomplished from the turbine access road. 

Underground Collection Line

Periodic maintenance of underground collection lines would be required during the life of the project. 

Maintenance activities are permitted under the landowner easement agreements and would be conducted 

within the established easement width. Maintenance disturbance associated with all buried collection 

lines would be limited to a 100-foot wide construction corridor associated with each proposed linear 

disturbance. All trenches would be filled with compacted material and associated disturbances would be 

reclaimed following burial of the electrical cables. These activities would be conducted in compliance 

with applicable Federal, state and local regulations and the terms of the landowner easement. 

Underground collection lines are relatively maintenance free and maintenance would be on an as needed 
Figure 2-3

Turbine Base with Transformer

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center

FPL Energy Burleigh County Wind, LLC

Pad Transformer at Base of Turbine
2-16 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK – INSERT FIGURE 2-3 (BACK) 
W

Burleigh Co

FPL Energy Bu
2-18 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK – INSERT FIGURE 2-4 (BACK) 
6 feet

4 feet

4 feet

4 feet

4 feet

Grounding Wire

Figure 2-5

Typical 34.5-kV Transmission Line Structure

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center

FPL Energy Burleigh County Wind, LLC

Not to Scale
2-20 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK – INSERT FIGURE 2-5 (BACK) 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-21 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

basis only; consequently maintenance activities would not be frequent and would require excavation only 

in isolated areas, rather than the entire line. 

Overhead Collection Line

Periodic maintenance of overhead collection lines would be required during the life of the project. 

Maintenance activities are permitted under the landowner easement agreements and would be conducted 

within the easement width. Typical tasks would include periodic inspections, structure and hardware 

replacement, and line maintenance activities. These activities would be conducted in compliance with 

applicable Federal, state and local regulations and the terms of the landowner easement and be managed 

by the onsite O&M Staff. 

Collection Substation 

An electrical collection substation would be built as part of a 17 acre lay down and substation area 

adjacent to the Burleigh County Wind Energy Center turbine array. This substation would be owned by 

Burleigh County Wind. The substation would be designed in compliance with Federal, state, and local 

regulations, and prudent industry practices. 

At the collection substation, the 34.5-kV collection voltage would be converted to 230 kV to connect to 

the proposed new 230-kV transmission line. There would be two 34.5-kV breakers in metal-clad 

switchgear (building) for the two electrical circuits and one 34.5-kV breaker for the capacitor bank. The 

two circuits would feed into the power transformer with one 230kV breaker between the power 

transformer and the 230-kV Transmission Line. The ancillary equipment at the substation would consist 

of metering, relays, switches, control panel, relay panels, and lighting. The substation would have a 

footprint of no greater than 2 acres as shown in Figure 2-1. 

The substation would have a gravel base. It would contain circuit breakers, transformers, switches, 

lightning protection, ground wires, a control building, and three, approximately 25-foot tall wood 

transmission line structures holding emergency lighting for the substation. The 6 foot (minimum height) 

fence surrounding the substation would be partially buried and topped with barbed wire. A photo of a 

typical collection substation is shown in Figure 2-6. 

Breakers automatically interrupt power flow on a transmission line at the time of an electrical fault. The 

type of breaker planned for the proposed substation, called a gas breaker, would be insulated by special 
2-22 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

non-conducting gas (sulfur hexafluoride [SF6]). Small amounts of hydraulic fluids would be used to open 

and close the electrical contacts within the breaker. 

Construction 

The collection substation area would be surveyed, cleared, and graded prior to installation. The surface 

would be graded in compliance with storm water control plans and other applicable permit requirements. 

Gravel would be delivered to the site after all subsurface work is complete (grounding, equipment 

foundations, etc.) and leveled to create a surface for the installation of the above ground substation 

equipment as described above. The substation equipment would be delivered on tractor-trailer trucks and 

installed on top of a concrete foundation in the graveled area. Three 25-foot tall wood transmission line 

poles would be buried in the ground to an appropriate depth using an auger. The main power transformer 

would have secondary containment (concrete) for spill prevention in accordance with the design, 

applicable codes and the SPCC plan. All areas would be graded to ensure proper drainage and runoff 

control in accordance with applicable regulations. 

Operation and Maintenance 

The collection substation would be maintained by operations personnel throughout the year. The fenced 

yard would accommodate approximately five pick-up trucks that would allow for visits by contractors or 

Burleigh County Wind personnel. 

SF6 is a greenhouse gas. The use, storage and replacement of SF6 would be monitored and managed to 

minimize any releases to the environment. SF6 gas in substation circuit breakers would be contained 

within sealed units. Equipment as delivered from the manufacturer would be required to be factory-tested 

and certified not to leak. After installation, the equipment would be scanned for detection of leaks, and 

repairs made as appropriate. During use, the equipment would be monitored by periodic substation 

inspections for indications of leakage. During servicing, SF6 gas would be evacuated using sealed gas 

containment equipment, thereby remaining totally contained. 

Burleigh County Wind Laydown Yard 

During construction, a laydown area would serve as the temporary storage location for power structures, 

conductor spools, turbine parts, and other transmission line materials and equipment. The long term use 

of this area would include temporary staging for maintenance operations. 
Typic

Burleigh Co

FPL Energy Bu
2-24 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK – INSERT FIGURE 2-6 (BACK) 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-25 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Construction 

This area would require partial clearing and grading, which would be completed in compliance with local, 

state, and Federal regulations. Where gravel would be required, the area would first be stripped of topsoil 

for use in final leveling of the site. 

Operation and Maintenance 

The laydown area would require periodic maintenance including grading and installation of gravel for 

repairs. Erosion and weed infestation would be controlled. 

230-KV HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINE 

Central Power would construct, own, and operate a new 4.4-mile, 230-kV high-voltage transmission line 

between the new collection substation at the Burleigh County Wind Energy Center and the 

interconnection at Western’s Garrison-Bismarck 230-kV Transmission Line. The line would have the 

capacity to carry more than 300 MW and would facilitate the maximum transmission of up to 50 MW 

(annual average) of output from the Wind Energy Center to the power grid. An illustration of the line and 

various components is shown in Figure 2-7. 

Components 

The 230-kV high-voltage transmission line would cross U.S. Highway 83 and the Canadian Pacific 

Railroad. The minimum structure distance from the highway would be 67 feet and the minimum height 

of the conductor above the highway would be 30 feet. At the railroad crossing, the minimum structure 

distance from the track would be 55 feet and the minimum distance from the track to the conductor would 

be 33 feet. Construction, operation, and maintenance would occur within a 133-foot wide corridor. Steel 

poles on drilled pier concrete foundations would be used for all structures installed within the corridor. 

Following are the details: 

Power Structures

Poles would be approximately 30 inches in diameter at the base and approximately 75 feet tall. Tangent 

poles would be fastened to 4-foot-diameter drilled concrete pier foundations via anchor bolts for small 

angles, and to a 6-foot foundation for large angles and dead-ends. Photographs of the structures, including 

poles and foundations, are shown in Figure 2-7. 
2-26 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

These spacing standards would require approximately 11 to 12 structures per mile of transmission line. 

The precise spacing and number of structures required is dependant on final engineering and design, 

which would incorporate measures to account for topography and generally avoid sensitive sites such as 

wetlands. 

Conductors

The line would consist of three conductors and an optical groundwire (OPGW). Electrical conductors are 

the wires on which electrical energy flows. The conductor consists of strands of reinforced steel cable 

encased by aluminum strands. The steel cable provides the tensile strength to support the conductor and 

the aluminum conducts the electrical current. 

The OPGW would consist of an overhead galvanized steel groundwire with enclosed 24-fiber, fiber optic 

wire. The OPGW would be installed on one side of the top of the structure to provide lightning 

protection. The fiber optics would be used for utility data communications. Table 2-2 summarizes 

transmission line design characteristics for the proposed 230-kV transmission line. 

TABLE 2-2 

230-kV Overhead Transmission Line Design Characteristics 

Design Element Characteristic 

Line length (approximate) 4.4 miles 

Width of construction corridor 133 feet total 

Width of operational corridor 133 feet total (typically 37 feet road side 

and 96 feet field side) 

Thermal capacity for 230 kV 900 amps 

Voltage 230 kilovolts 

Circuit configuration Vertical stacked (3) 

Conductor size 795,000 circular mil ACSR 26/7 

Conductor type Aluminum Conductor Steel Reinforced 

Electric field at edge of 100-foot operational corridor 0.2737 kV/meter (3 feet above ground) 

Magnetic field at edge of 100-foot operational corridor 

(thermal limit) 

11 milligauss (3 feet above ground at 40 

megavolt ampere) 

Electrostatic short-circuit current limit 7.7 kiloamp for 1 second 

Dead-end and Angel Structure Type Steel pole on 6 foot diameter drilled pier 

concrete foundation 

Tangent Structure Type Steel pole on 4 foot diameter drilled pier 

concrete foundation 

Number of Structures per Mile Average of 11 to 12 

Structure height 85 feet above ground level (typical) 

Length of span 508 feet (average) 

Minimum ground clearance of conductor 26 feet at 212 degrees Fahrenheit 

Typical structure base dimensions 30-inch diameter 

Maximum permanent disturbance at each structure base 7 feet by 7 feet 
Figure 2-7

Proposed 230-kV Transmission Line

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center

FPL Energy Burleigh County Wind, LLC

Concrete Foundation

Typical Conductor Connections

Example of Line Installed Along Right of Way
2-28 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK – INSERT FIGURE 2-7 (BACK) 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-29 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Conductors would be connected to the structures at a minimum height of 40 feet and maximum height of 

82.5 feet. Between structures, the conductors would sag under their own weight. The minimum distance 

to the ground would be 26 feet. 

Insulators and hardware used on the line would be standard design to minimize audible noise, and radio 

and television interference. The typical configuration would involve three vertical stacks of polymer 

insulators.

Construction 

Construction activities typically occur in the following order: 

Equipment Delivery and Storage – Central Power would accept construction materials at the Burleigh 

County Wind Laydown Yard and collection substation site. If possible, the poles would be drop staked at 

their final location to minimize vehicle traffic and handling. In addition, materials and equipment 

required for construction of the line would occupy approximately 2 acres of the Burleigh County Wind 

Laydown Yard and collection substation site. Temporary disturbance for construction would be limited 

to and area of 50 feet by 50 feet. Permanent disturbance would be limited to the area of ground 

disturbance at each structure location no larger than 7 feet by 7 feet (less than 50 square feet). No new 

road construction would be required. 

Steel-Pole Foundation Construction – Vegetation would be removed from a limited area at structure 

locations. An approximately 50 foot by 50 foot disturbance area around the structures would result from 

the construction of each tower foundation. Once vegetation is removed, holes would be drilled for 

structures using a truck-mounted auger. The holes would be approximately 14 to 25 feet deep and would 

range in diameter from 48 to 78 inches. A steel anchor bolt cage and approximately 7 to 31 cubic yards 

of concrete would be placed into each hole. The concrete footings would be exposed approximately one 

foot above the ground surface. The footings would be backfilled with 1.5-inch rock and tamped into place 

to prevent structure movement or settling. Material excavated from the holes would either be used for 

other project components or disposed in accordance with landowner wishes. Disposal of waste material, 

including concrete spoil, would be conducted offsite in compliance with all applicable regulations and 

would not include placement in wetlands or aquatic sites. 

Steel-Pole Transportation and Assembly – The steel-pole structures would be transported to the erection 

sites on flatbed trucks. After adequate curing time for the tower foundations, the contractor would use a 

semi-truck mounted crane to set the steel poles on the foundations. Crews would bolt the structures to the 
2-30 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

foundations, and then follow with a 100-foot reach bucket truck to install suspension insulators and 

stringing sheaves (conductor and static attachment hardware). 

Stringing the Line - After the poles have been erected, conductors would be installed by establishing 

stringing setup areas within the corridor. These stringing setup areas would be located approximately 

every 2 miles along the route. Conductors would be installed between setup areas using a “controlled 

tension method,” which ensures that the cable comes off the reel at a constant tension. Conductor 

stringing operations would also require brief access to each structure to secure the conductor wires to the 

insulators or shield wire clamps once final line sag is established. 

Stringing equipment generally consists of wire pullers, tensioners, conductor reels, shield wire reels, and 

sheave blocks. Stringing operations consist of pulling lightweight cables or ropes through the stringing 

sheaves located at every structure site. This cable or rope would be used to pull the conductors through 

the sheaves under sufficient tension to keep the conductor from coming into contact with the ground. An 

illustration is provided in Figure 2-4. 

Temporary guard structures would be installed over existing distribution or communication lines, streets, 

roads, highways, railways, or other obstacles to keep the conductors from contacting obstructions or 

causing hazard to transportation routes. This also protects the conductors from damage. 

Once the line is complete, temporary structures would be removed, remaining holes backfilled with 

excess excavated material, and the area of disturbance re-contoured and reseeded with native species as 

available, or other species at the landowners’ request. Reseeding would be conducted in accordance with 

Western’s Construction Standard 13, Environmental Quality Protection (Western 2001) (Appendix B), 

requirements and applicable local, state and Federal regulations. 

Operation and Maintenance 

Central Power would conduct periodic inspections and maintenance on the 230-kV high-voltage 

transmission line. Crews would use existing ROWs and easements for access. 

Temporary Tap 

Western would construct a tap to temporarily interconnect the proposed 230-kV, high-voltage 

transmission line with Western’s Garrison-Bismarck 230-kV Transmission Line. The point of 

interconnection would be located approximately 3 miles south of the town of Wilton (Figure 2-1). The 

tap would be used until a permanent switching station could be constructed. In the meantime, faults could 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-31 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

only be cleared by opening breakers at the existing Garrison or Bismarck substations or the proposed 

Burleigh County Wind collector substation. 

Construction 

The tap structure would consist of a four-pole wood structure with guywires (guys) anchored to the 

ground. The structure would occupy an approximately 10 feet by 16 feet area. The guys would extend an 

additional 25 feet from the line. At the top of the structure would be one steel switch frame and one 230-

kV disconnecting gang-operated manual switch. An illustration of the tap components and dimensions is 

shown in Figure 2-8. 

Activities associated with construction of the temporary tap would include: 

3⁄4 Assembling the four-pole wood structure with guys, anchors, and a steel switch frame. The 230-kV 

disconnecting gang-operated switch would be installed on the steel switch frame. A handle operated 

mechanism would be mounted on the wood structures. The steel switch frame and 230-kV 

disconnecting gang-operated manual switch would be assembled on the ground at the site of the 

temporary tap; 

3⁄4 Excavating four holes to receive the structure. Each hole would be drilled with an approximately 24-

inch diameter auger; 

3⁄4 Installing wood poles using a crane. Excess soils would be compacted around the poles to ensure 

stability of the structure and drainage away from the structures. Soils would be salvaged when the tap 

is removed and the permanent substation is operational. 

3⁄4 Attaching the steel switch frame to the wood structure and switch components to the steel switch 

frame using a crane; 

3⁄4 Attaching handle operating mechanisms to wood poles; 

3⁄4 Placing two steel switch operating platforms on wood poles: 

3⁄4 Attaching wood poles and anchors; and, 

3⁄4 Installing conductors, insulators, and insulator assemblies to the proposed 230-kV transmission line 

and the existing Garrison-Bismarck 230-kV Transmission Line. Conductors would be delivered on 

steel reels and would be attached using a manlift. An outage would be necessary for the final 

connection into the existing Garrison-Bismarck 230-kV Transmission Line. 

The tap would remain operational until the permanent substation is complete. After that, the tap would be 

disassembled and replaced by a permanent substation (described below). Activities associated with the 

removal of the tap would include: 
2-32 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

3⁄4 Removing conductors from the structure; 

3⁄4 Disassembling the structure and removing the steel poles from the ground for reuse; 

3⁄4 Backfilling the area using soils from the permanent substation site; and 

3⁄4 Reclaiming the land as describe in the Restoration and Reclamation section of this chapter. 

Operation and Maintenance 

Maintenance of the tap would be minimal given that the life of the tap would likely not exceed 1 year. 

General maintenance would be similar to the 230-kV high-voltage transmission line. 

Switching Station 

It is anticipated that within one year of operation of the tap, Western would construct a permanent, 230-

kV switching station to accommodate the interconnection between the proposed 230-kV high-voltage 

transmission line and the Garrison-to-Bismarck 230-kV Transmission Line. The permanent substation 

would provide reliability to the existing power system that the temporary tap cannot. 

There are three options for the location of the permanent switching station. For the purposes of this EA, 

the entire area has been analyzed and is depicted in Figure 2-1.

Option A – The permanent substation would be located between Western’s 49/3 and 49/2 on the GarrisonBismarck 230-kV Transmission Line transmission line, north of 279th Avenue. 

Option B – The permanent switching station would be located south of 279th Avenue, near highway 83. 

The construction methods under Option B would be the same as for Option A, but would require two 

transmission structures to connect the switching station to the Bismarck-Garrison 230-kV Transmission 

Line. The total distance from the new switching station perimeter to the Garrison-Bismarck 230-kV 

Transmission Line would be approximately 900 to 1,100 feet. These structures would be single-pole 

steel, double-circuit structures. Construction activities would be similar to those described for the 

proposed new 230-kV transmission line. 

Option C – The permanent switching station would be located south of 279th Avenue. The construction 

methods under Option C would be the same as for Option A. Construction at this site would require 

significantly more grading to create a level pad. 
Figure 2-8

Temporary Tap Design Characteristics

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center

FPL Energy Burleigh County Wind, LLC

Temporary Tap

End of Proposed

230-kV Transmission

Line

Existing Garrison-Bismarck

230-kV Transmission Line
2-34 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK – INSERT FIGURE 2-8 (BACK) 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-35 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Construction 

The construction of this switching station would be similar to that described for the new collection 

substation and would include: 

3⁄4 Clearing and leveling an area of approximately 8 to 14 acres of land. Site grading would use on-site 

soils. Excess soils are not anticipated. In the case of the switching station location Option C, a 

considerable amount of fill would be required to make the location level. If selected, the fill would 

come from an approved source or commercial supplier to ensure that it is eligible and that cultural 

resources would not be affected 

3⁄4 Constructing an approximately 6- to 12-acre gravel surface designed to drain into an adjacent borrow 

ditch. The area would be graded in accordance with the design, applicable codes, and a stormwater 

runoff plan. 

3⁄4 Installing a 7-foot-high chain link fence topped with three barbed wires. An access gate would be 

installed on the side nearest the access road. This yard would contain the switching station equipment. 

Access during construction and maintenance would be secured and limited to authorized personnel. 

3⁄4 Installing power circuit breakers (similar to those used for the substation) and associated disconnect 

switches and instrument transformers. 

3⁄4 Installing a bus system on steel structures to link the 230-kV equipment to the existing transmission 

line. 

3⁄4 Installing a fiber-optic line connected to existing communication lines along the Bismarck-Garrison 

230-kV Transmission Line. 

3⁄4 Constructing a control building and associated equipment within the fenced yard. 

Operation and Maintenance 

The new switching station would be owned, operated, and maintained by Western. Crews would 

periodically visit the switching station for inspections, as well as routine and emergency maintenance. 

Maintenance of circuit breakers would be similar to that of circuit breakers at the proposed substation. 

CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT 

Debris associated with construction may include construction materials such as packaging material, 

crates, reels, and parts wrapping. This debris may also include excess excavated soil and removed 
2-36 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

vegetation. Materials with salvage value, including conductor reels, unused conductor and hardware, 

poles, and other materials, would be removed from the site for reuse. Excavated spoils would be backfilled within the area of permanent disturbance and restored in compliance with applicable guidelines as 

described in the Restoration/Reclamation section of this chapter. 

If necessary, solid waste, including topsoil or other excavated materials not otherwise disposed of, would 

be temporarily stored within the corridor or within the temporary construction easements, and then 

transported to appropriate disposal facilities in accordance with Federal, state, and local regulations. 

RECLAMATION AND RESTORATION 

Following construction, areas not maintained as permanent facilities would be reclaimed for their prior 

land use. Reclamation would initially consist of grading to replace the approximate original contour and 

drainage of disturbed areas. Grading would include removal of any temporary crossing or drainage 

control structures. Following grading, salvaged topsoil would be spread and blended with adjacent areas 

to provide a growth medium for vegetation. Soil that has been compacted by equipment operation would 

be tilled to alleviate compaction and prepare a seed bed. Where natural regrowth of vegetation is not 

anticipated, disturbed areas would be reseeded in accordance with landowner agreements or with 

regionally native species. Trees greater than 6 inches diameter at breast height removed during 

construction operations would be replaced within the project area at a 3:1 ratio. Noxious weeds would be 

controlled in accordance with state regulations. Pesticides or herbicides would be used in accordance with 

label specifications and would not be used near aquatic systems without NDDoH approval. Where 

possible, farming activities would resume in those areas temporarily disrupted by the construction of the 

Wind Energy Center. In the event farmable land is lost due to project construction, landowners would be 

compensated. 

PERMITS AND COMPLIANCE STANDARDS 

Prior to construction, Burleigh County Wind would ensure compliance with Federal, state, and local 

environmental permits (see Table 2-3). 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-37 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

TABLE 2-3 

Environmental Permits/Approvals

Permit/ Approval Issuing Agency/ Entity 

Section 404 Clean Water Act - Nationwide 

Permits 12 and/or 33 (wetlands disturbance) US Army Corps of Engineers 

Article 69-06: Energy Conversion and 

Transmission Facility Siting Act (transmission 

line >115kV) 

North Dakota Public Service Commission 

Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure 

Plan (SPCC) 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

and North Dakota Department of Health 

Environmental Health Section 

North Dakota Permit for Construction Activity 

and North Dakota Water Pollution Control Act 

(NDR10-0000) 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

and North Dakota Department of Health 

Environmental Health Section 

National Historic Preservation Act and North 

Dakota State Regulations 

North Dakota State Historic Preservation 

Office (SHPO) 

Native American Graves Protection and 

Repatriation Act Affected tribes in the region 

Railroad Crossing Permit Canadian Pacific Railway 

Highway Crossing and Hauling Permits North Dakota Department of Transportation 

Zoning, Conditional Use Approval Local Townships 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION MEASURES 

Burleigh County Wind, Central Power, and Western would comply with the provisions defined in 

Western’s Construction Standard 13, Environmental Quality Protection (Western 2001) (Appendix B). 

Burleigh County Wind and Central Power would also use the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee 

(APLIC) Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power Lines in the design of the overhead portion 

of the 34.5-kV overhead collection line and 230-kV overhead transmission line respectively (APLIC 

1996). 

In addition to the provisions contained in these documents Burleigh County Wind, Central Power, and 

Western would further minimize impacts during construction by implementing the following measures: 

3⁄4 Unless otherwise permitted or approved, Burleigh County Wind, Central Power, and Western would 

avoid all sensitive resources during siting, construction, maintenance, and operations. 

3⁄4 Burleigh County Wind would consult with interested tribes to develop additional measures to protect 

TCPs, such as protective easements, in agreement with underlying landowners. 

3⁄4 Crews would use silt fencing, straw bales, and ditch blocks during access road construction and 

electrical line trenching on sloped ground or at ephemeral drainage crossings within the project area 

to further minimize erosion and related environmental impacts. 
2-38 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

3⁄4 Security lighting for on-ground facilities and equipment would be down-shielded to keep light within 

the boundaries of the site. This would minimize attracting night migrating birds to the substation or 

turbine locations during inclement weather conditions. The USFWS would be consulted regarding 

the specific down-shielding measures employed prior to installation. 

3⁄4 East-west oriented 34.5-kV overhead collector lines, ground wires, or shield wires and the entire 

length of 230-kV overhead transmission line would be marked with state-of-the-art line marking 

devices to minimize bird collisions with overhead lines. 

3⁄4 Conduct operations at the turbine array in accordance with FPL Energy’s Wildlife Procedures Manual 

for dealing with dead and injured wildlife as provided to USFWS. The purpose of this manual is “to 

standardize the actions taken by FPL Energy in response to any wildlife fatalities and/or injuries 

found within the windplant boundaries”. The manual is similar to the Avian Protection Program 

developed by USFWS and the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee. This manual requires the 

following: 

 Dead wildlife found within the turbine array boundary, regardless of cause of death, 

would be reported immediately to the on-duty Plant or Site Supervisor; 

 The supervisor would complete an incident report and take photographs; and, 

 The Wildlife Program Manager would be notified and further actions would be 

determined at that time based on the species and the circumstances surrounding the 

incident. 

3⁄4 Conduct post construction avian and bat mortality monitoring during the first year of commercial 

operation (2006) using methods developed in coordination with USFWS. This monitoring will 

include the following: 

 Six surveys of the array would be conducted and consist of two surveys in the spring, 

summer, and fall; 

 Half of the turbines in the array (alternate turbines) would be surveyed such that turbines 

not sampled in one visit would be surveyed in the subsequent visit. This would ensure 

that each turbine is surveyed a minimum of three times; 

 Observer efficiency trials would be conducted to quantify observer bias resulting from 

several factors, including innate ability, subtle differences in vision, previous experience, 

and attentiveness; and, 

 Results would be reported to the USFWS within 90 days of the final site survey. 
Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-39 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

3⁄4 Introduction of noxious weeds would be mitigated through prompt revegetation with regionally native 

species or restoration of prior land use. A Clean-Vehicle Program will be initiated which will require 

the inspection and washing of vehicles and construction equipment from outside the project area to 

remove adhered soils and plant debris prior to entry into the project area. 

3⁄4 Vehicle speeds of no more than 15mph would be required to minimize dust and wildlife collisions; 

3⁄4 Roads would be watered during construction to minimize dust; 

3⁄4 Signs will be installed where construction vehicles frequently enter or exit US Highway 83 and State 

Highway 36. Signs will be installed in consultation with the NDDOT; and, 

3⁄4 Wetlands would be flagged to ensure avoidance by a minimum of 50 feet, unless disturbances are 

permitted through USACE. All construction activities impacting non-jurisdictional wetlands would 

be conducted in accordance with the methods approved by the USACE for jurisdictional wetlands and 

impacts would be similarly mitigated. 

PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

There are two sub-alternatives under the No Action alternative: 

a) The applicant would not submit interconnection or transmission service agreement requests to 

Western. 

b) Western would not approve the interconnection or transmission service agreement requests. 

Under either scenario above, no aspect of the project would be built. As a result, no disturbance would 

occur and there would be no effect to the environment. Western would continue to operate and maintain 

the Garrison-Bismarck 230-kV Transmission Line and associated facilities. 

Environmental impacts from construction, operation, and maintenance associated with the Proposed 

Action would not occur. Environmental conditions, as described in the affected environment would be 

expected to persist in their existing dynamic state. 
2-40 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED ANALYSIS 

Early planning for the proposed Wind Energy Center considered delivering power from the Wind Energy 

Center to a substation on the west side of the Missouri River. This alternative would have required 

construction of a 230-kV transmission line approximately 28 miles in length and would have included 

crossing the Missouri River. This alternative was determined not to be feasible by the applicant, and has 

been dismissed. The alternative has been dismissed from further consideration. 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-1 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

CHAPTER 3

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

INTRODUCTION 

This chapter describes the existing environment and potential impacts to resources resulting from the 

construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed Burleigh County Wind Energy Center. 

The project area is shown in Figure 3-1. All proposed facilities are within the Proposed Action area. The 

general project area outlined represents the area of impact analysis for the majority of the discussed 

resources; however, study areas associated with several resources discussed in this chapter are more 

resource specific. These individual study areas were determined through review of potential direct and 

indirect impacts from the Proposed Action and are defined in the individual resource discussions. 

Critical Elements of the Human Environment, as defined and specified in statutes or executive orders, 

must be considered in an EA. The critical elements that could be impacted by the Proposed Action 

include: 

3⁄4 Geology and Soil; 

3⁄4 Air Resources; 

3⁄4 Water Resources; 

3⁄4 Vegetation; 

3⁄4 Wetlands; 

3⁄4 Wildlife; 

3⁄4 Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate Species, as well as Designated Critical Habitat; 

3⁄4 Socioeconomics; 

3⁄4 Environmental Justice; 

3⁄4 Land Use; 

3⁄4 Visual Resources; 

3⁄4 Noise; 

3⁄4 Safety and Health Issues; 

3⁄4 Cultural Resources; and, 

3⁄4 Native American Religious Concerns. 
3-2 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Preliminary analysis indicated that the Proposed Action would not affect other critical elements of the 

human environment (as listed below). Justifications for dismissal of these elements from further 

discussion in this EA are provided in the following paragraphs. 

Floodplains – No 100-year or 500-year floodplains occur within the project area. 

Paleontology – Investigations of public maps and local geology did not identify any fossil collection sites 

in the immediate vicinity of the project area. 

Wild and Scenic Rivers – Review of the pertinent U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service Web 

site indicated that there are no Federally designated Wild and Scenic Rivers in North Dakota. 

Wilderness – The nearest Federally designated wilderness area to the proposed Burleigh County Wind 

Energy Center is the Chase Lake Wilderness Area, a 4,155-acre isolated alkali lake located 

approximately 65 air miles to the east. 

Recreation – The Proposed Action would not occur within designated recreation areas. The Proposed 

Action would not increase public accessibility to any previously inaccessible areas. 

An environmental impact is a change in the status of the existing environment as a direct or indirect result 

of a proposed action or no action alternative. Impacts can be direct or indirect (direct impacts are those 

that are a result of construction, operation, and/or maintenance, whereas indirect impacts generally occur 

following construction and may not be directly related to the project); positive (beneficial) or negative 

(adverse); and permanent or long-lasting (long-term) or temporary (short-term). Short-term impacts are 

generally associated with the construction phase of the Proposed Action, while long-term impacts remain 

for the life of the project and beyond. Measures that would be implemented to reduce, minimize, or 

eliminate impacts (mitigation measures) are discussed under each resource. 

Impacts that would result from implementation of the Proposed Action and alternatives are described 

herein. The alternative temporary tap locations (Options A, B, and C) would only have notable 

differences in resource impacts for geology and soil and cultural resources. 
Figure 3-1

Wetlands and Biological Resources

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center

FPL Energy Burleigh County Wind, LLC

0 10.5

Miles

HWY

36

US

83

Burnt Creek

West Branch Apple Creek

WILTON

REGAN

Garrison-Bismarck Transmission Line

Switching Station

Radio Towers

2005 Turbines

Array Collector Substation

County Lines 2005 Access Roads

Project Area

Waters of the US

USFWS NWI Wetland Points

USFWS NWI Wetlands

Proposed 230-kV Transmission Line

Future Expansion Turbines

OH 34.5 kV Transmission Line (Expansion)

OH 34.5 kV Transmission Line (2005)

Buried Cable (2005) Raptor Nest

Sharp-tailed Grouse Lek

Painted Woods Creek
3-4 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

This Page Intentionally Left Blank - Insert Figure 3-1 (back)
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-5 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

PHYSICAL RESOURCES 

GEOLOGY AND SOIL 

The following is a discussion of the geology and soils impacted by the Proposed Action. Impacts to 

geology are discussed on a regional scale, while the discussion of impacts to soils is focused on the 

project area. 

Existing Environment 

Burleigh County lies within the Missouri River Trench, Coteau Slope, and Missouri Coteau 

physiographic districts of the Glaciated Missouri Plateau Section. However, the project area is completely 

contained within the Coteau Slope district (Kume and Hansen 1965). 

The physiography of south-central North Dakota has been affected by glaciation. Continental glaciers 

have advanced and retreated several times in the past 2 million years. Glaciers deposited unsorted 

sediments, or glacial till, in layers up to 30 meters thick on top of sedimentary shale and sandstone 

bedrock of the Bullion Creek Formation (formerly referred to as the Tongue River Member of the Fort 

Union Formation) and Cannonball Formations in Burleigh County (Bluemle 1973; Bluemle 1991). 

All glacial till deposition occurred during the Wisconsinan Glaciation. These till deposits are assigned to 

the Quaternary Coleharbor Formation and account for the majority of the surface geology in the project 

area. 

Much of the project area and surrounding vicinity is characterized by undulating topography with gentle 

relief typical of the Coteau Slope district. This topography resulted from glacial till deposits thick enough 

to mask underlying bedrock topography but not so thick as to form large hills and depressions when 

glacial ice melted. 

According to the North Dakota Geological Survey (Bluemle 1991), North Dakota is located in an area of 

very low earthquake probability. There are no known active tectonic features in south-central North 

Dakota and the deep basement formations underlying North Dakota are expected to be geologically 

stable. 

Soils in the project area are grassland soils (Mollisols) typical of the Missouri Coteau and Coteau Slope 

(USDA 1974). Soils of the glacial uplands tend to be well drained, fine- to medium-textured loams, 

while poorly drained fine-textured soils are found in the morainal depressions (potholes and wetlands). 
3-6 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

The majority of the soils within the project area are moderately susceptible to water erosion on sloping 

topography. Erosion occurs most frequently following cultivation or other surface disturbance that 

removes the upper soil horizon, exposing subsurface horizons. 

Most of the soils in the project area (90 percent of the surface area) have low to moderate susceptibility to 

wind erosion (i.e., USDA Wind Erosion Groups 6 or greater). The remaining 10 percent of the project 

area is covered by soils with moderate to high susceptibility (i.e., USDA Wind Erosion Groups 4L and 3). 

There are no known metallic mineral deposits or oil fields in the project area (Bluemle 1991, Bluemle 

1992). Sand and gravel deposits are common in glaciated areas of the Coteau Slope and Missouri Coteau, 

but the quality of these deposits is variable (Bluemle 1991). Some small open aggregate pits are found in 

the project area, but are limited in extent and are not immediately adjacent to any proposed facilities. 

Lignite (coal) was recovered from mining operations dating back to 1920 in the project area. Surface 

mining for lignite continued through the late 1960s; however, there are no active mines in the project area 

(Lou Ogart pers. comm. 2005). The high stripping ratio, relative to other deposits in the state, makes 

reserves in the area less suitable for development (Ed Murphy, State Geologist, North Dakota Geological 

Survey, June 20, 2005). Thick lignite deposits, best suited to coal-bed methane development, are 

generally not found in Burleigh County (Ed Murphy pers. comm. 2005). 

Environmental Consequences 

A significant impact to geology and soils would occur if: 1) erosion results in irreversible impacts to 

other resources, or 2) there is a loss of mineral resources that are not available elsewhere. 

Because of the gentle relief in the project area and the deliberate siting of facilities on level terrain, the 

potential for soil loss due to erosion would be low. However, construction of switching station Option B 

would require more grading than options A or C, and the steep slopes associated with the cut and fill areas 

may be prone to erosion. Should Option B be selected, implementation of environmental protection 

measures described in Chapter 2 of this document would minimize erosion of these areas. 

The Proposed Action includes restoration of disturbed areas to pre-construction conditions. Soil erosion, 

compaction, and other related disturbance would be short-term, and would be minimized by 

implementing environmental protection measures. With the proper implementation of environmental 

protection measures intended to prevent, minimize, and/or reclaim soil erosion, compaction, and spill 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-7 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

effects, no unmitigated loss of highly productive soil would result from implementation of the Proposed 

Action. 

Sand and gravel are normally mined near the location of their final use. It is likely that any future need 

for these resources could be met by deposits in other areas. 

AIR RESOURCES 

The impact analysis for air resources is limited to the vicinity of the project area (Figure 3-1). 

Existing Environment 

The entire state of North Dakota is in attainment of all state and Federal air quality standards (Tom 

Bachman pers. comm. 2005). Within the project area, minimal effects to air quality are likely to occur due 

to existing emission sources such as vehicles, trains, and agricultural equipment. Although relatively high 

concentrations of total suspended particulates (dust) likely occur in springtime from farming operations 

and high wind, these are not likely to exceed National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). 

Environmental Consequences 

A significant impact to air resources would result if Federal or state air quality standards were exceeded 

during construction, maintenance, or operation of the Proposed Action. Vehicle movement during 

construction activities associated with the Proposed Action may temporarily affect air quality in the 

project area. Temporary emissions would include nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and 

sulfur dioxide from vehicles, equipment, and machinery. These impacts would be short-term, and are not 

expected to cause an exceedence of state or Federal air quality standards. Circuit breakers would be 

sealed and certified to not release SF6 gas. At the time of servicing, SF6 gas would be evacuated using 

sealed gas containment equipment, thereby remaining totally contained. 

Air quality effects caused by dust would be short-term, limited to the time of construction, and would not 

exceed the aforementioned NAAQS particulate standards. The North Dakota Department of Health 

(NDDoH) Air Quality Program does not require a permit for the project and has stated that the Proposed 

Action is unlikely to result in the exceedence of air quality standards (Tom Bachman pers. comm. 2005). 

The limited duration of construction, along with implementation of the environmental protection 

measures presented in Chapter 2 of this document, is expected to mitigate air quality effects so that 
3-8 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Federal and state standards would not be exceeded. Complaints regarding fugitive dust emissions would 

be addressed in an efficient and effective manner. 

WATER RESOURCES 

The following discussion of water resources includes descriptions of the surface water, groundwater, and 

wetlands found within the project area (Figure 3-1). 

Existing Environment 

Surface Water 

Surface water resources within the project area include wetlands and ephemeral drainages (i.e., drainages 

that only flow for short periods of time during the year). Limited open water is available within the 

project area. Two main watersheds comprise the project area: Burnt Creek and the West Branch of Apple 

Creek (Figure 3-1). A third watershed, the Painted Woods Creek watershed, drains the northernmost 

portion of the project area. These drainages are ephemeral and typically maintain flows in the spring of 

the year or in response to precipitation events. Overland flow during storm events is low due to 

undulating topography and permeable soil underlying the project area. 

Stock ponds, reservoirs, and dugouts (i.e., excavated water impoundments) are present throughout the 

project area and are generally less than 1 acre in size. The majority of seeps and springs are found in 

association with dugouts, as well as temporarily and seasonally flooded palustrine emergent wetlands. 

These features are further discussed in the wetlands section presented later in this analysis. 

Wetlands 

Wetlands are important because they perform hydrologic (e.g., flood attenuation, surface water, 

groundwater recharge) and water quality (sediment retention, pollution control) functions (Novitzki et al. 

1997). Wetlands also provide valuable habitat for species of special interest (e.g., migratory birds) and 

special status (e.g., State or Federally listed endangered, threatened, proposed, and candidate species, or 

species of conservation concern) discussed later in this chapter. 

“Waters of the U.S.,” as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (1973), are within the jurisdiction 

of the USACE. Jurisdictional waters within the project area are regulated by the USACE-Omaha District. 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-9 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Waters of the U.S. include both wetlands and non-wetlands that meet USACE criteria. USACE has 

determined that a jurisdictional wetland must have a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, 

and wetland hydrology, and be connected to waters of the U.S. 

A 2001 U.S. Supreme Court decision removed “isolated wetlands” from USACE jurisdiction (Solid 

Waste Agency of Northern Cook County vs. USACE). Isolated wetlands are those that have no connection 

with any tributary system that flows into traditional navigable water or interstate water (i.e., intrastate 

lakes, streams, prairie potholes). This decision does not alter state or tribal jurisdiction over wetlands, and 

regulatory authority over isolated wetlands varies from state to state. 

The DOE has developed floodplains and wetlands environmental review requirements as presented in 10 

CFR, part 1022. This applies to actions implemented under DOE purview that may involve floodplains 

and/or wetlands. 

Wetland resources were evaluated within the project area (Figure 3-1). A thorough survey for wetlands 

was completed for the 2005 phase of the Proposed Action and thorough wetlands inventories would be 

completed prior to the design and installation of the expansion turbines. 

With the exception of a few scattered reservoirs, few wetlands in the project area offer open water habitat. 

Most are areas of saturated soils located near springs and seeps or simply areas of water accumulation in 

low-lying areas. Large open water habitats in the vicinity of the Proposed Action include the Missouri 

River and its reservoirs and various small lakes 

The majority of wetlands present within the project area are temporarily and seasonally flooded palustrine 

emergent wetlands (Cowardin et al. 1979). Water regimes of these wetlands are highly variable, 

depending on seasonal climatic conditions, topography, and location. Some of these wetlands form in 

shallow depressions, although most are located in drainages with minimal flow. The wetlands that are 

located within drainage bottoms may be connected to the jurisdictional waters of the U.S. 

Non-jurisdictional wetlands are found outside of main channels in soil types exhibiting poor internal 

drainage. These wetlands are not common in the project area due to the well-developed drainage patterns 

found there; however, some wetlands do occur and are generally small in size (0.1 to 0.25 acre), and 

appear to be ephemeral in nature. 
3-10 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Numerous wetlands within agricultural areas have been converted and are grass waterways or farmed 

depressions planted in cool season grasses and harvested for hay. Many other wetlands are subject to 

cattle grazing and many have been excavated to provide more permanent water sources for cattle. 

Groundwater 

As discussed in the Geology and Soil section, the project area is located within the Coteau Slope 

physiographic unit, bisecting the Apple Creek Uplands subdistrict and Burnt Creek subdistrict, described 

by the North Dakota Geological Survey (Kume and Hansen 1965). 

Shallow groundwater occurs in the project area. Well logs recorded within the vicinity of the project area 

show that the regional water table is approximately 50 feet below ground surface (North Dakota State 

Water Commission 2005). These well logs and others from this portion of Burleigh County indicate a 

southeasterly flow direction under an average hydraulic gradient of 0.3 percent. 

Deeper groundwater resources in Burleigh County are contained within aquifers comprised of waterbearing sandstone, interbedded with shale, mudstone, siltstone, lignite coal, and beds of limestone (USGS 

1996). Water quality from these aquifers is typically poor, with high concentrations of total dissolved 

solids. 

Environmental Consequences 

A significant impact to water resources would occur if 1) the Proposed Action causes a loss or 

degradation of wetlands in violation of a USACE permit; 2) the Proposed Action causes an increase in 

susceptibility to on-site or off-site flooding due to altered surface hydrology; 3) the Proposed Action 

causes a violation of the terms and conditions of a NDDoH stormwater permit; or 4) the Proposed Action 

causes a loss or degradation of surface water quality. 

The Proposed Action design minimizes disturbances to wetlands through implementation of 

environmental protection measures and avoidance of wetland habitats during facilities siting. Most 

construction activities associated with the Proposed Action would be sited outside of ephemeral channels 

and the depression cone of wetlands. However, the proposed buried and overhead powerlines bisect 

ditches and ephemeral drainages and construction of these facilities would result in some temporary or 

permanent disturbances. These disturbances would be permitted, restored and mitigated as required by the 

USACE-Omaha. Impacts to these resources during construction would be limited to permanent impacts 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-11 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

totaling less than 0.1 acre or temporary impacts and would be authorized by the USACE through either a 

Nationwide Permit 12 or 33. 

Temporary impacts to wetlands may occur where access for construction requires installation of 

temporary crossing structures at channels, wetlands, or other wet areas. If required at these sites, one of 

the following four types of temporary crossings would be constructed: 

1) Crossings of wetlands with construction equipment using wooden matting; 

2) At-grade crossings of non-wetland, dry-bed waters of the U.S. without dredge or fill; 

3) Crossings of non-wetland, dry-bed waters of the U.S using geotextile and course rock fill, and; 

4) Culverted crossings using geotextile, course rock fill and culverts. 

Equipment crossings in wetland areas which do not have defined channels would be restricted to crossing 

on wooden mats to prevent compression and or disturbance of wetland soils. Non-wetland, dry-bed waters 

of the U.S. would be crossed without dredge or fill. Areas with water in defined channels would be 

crossed at temporary, at-grade crossings or culverted crossings to prevent permanent impacts to these 

areas. Crossing of areas which have a combination of a defined channel and adjacent wetland areas may 

require the use of wooden mats and installation of a temporary at-grade or culverted crossings. 

Construction activities would include implementation of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Fill 

material placed below the high water mark would be free of topsoil, decomposable materials, and toxic 

concentrations of persistent synthetic organic compounds. 

Temporary crossings would be inspected after runoff-producing rains to check for blockage in channel, 

erosion of abutments, channel scour, riprap displacement, or piping. All repairs would be made 

immediately to prevent further damage to the installation. Temporary crossings would be removed 

immediately when they are no longer needed. All construction materials (e.g., rock, geotextile fabric, 

culvert, etc.) would be removed and the site would be restored to its original grade. The disturbed area 

would be smoothed and appropriately stabilized with silt fence or erosion control blankets as necessary to 

control erosion. The site would be seeded with local native species adapted to the site conditions as 

necessary to promote prompt revegetation. Due to the temporary nature of impacts, it is likely that onsite 

propagules (e.g., living plants and seeds) would regenerate vegetative cover similar to that found prior to 

the disturbance without additional seeding. Silt fences would remain in place to continue capturing 

sediment until the crossing site is fully stabilized and revegetated as determined in consultation with 

USACE. Soils at risk to erosion would be identified prior to disturbance and the need for placement of 

additional silt fence or erosion control matting would be evaluated and implemented as needed. 
3-12 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Permanent impacts to wetlands would occur where transmission structures or underground transmission 

line are installed within a wetland. Currently, installation of no more than two transmission structures 

(each with a permanent footprint of approximately 49 square feet) and no more than 100 linear feet of 

underground transmission line (with an associated maximum of 400 square feet of permanent 

disturbance) are planned which would permanently impact wetland areas. The proposed permanent 

disturbance area of wetlands would not exceed 500 square feet. 

Construction activities may disturb soils and vegetation to an extent that would require some regrading 

and reseeding following completion of operations. Should such disturbance occur, these soils would be 

smoothed to the original contours and reseeded, if necessary, with native perennial species common to the 

area. If surface disturbance does not significantly impact vegetation, plants may regenerate or sprout from 

onsite propagules, thus negating the need for additional revegetation. Routes necessary to maintain access 

to the site would remain cleared of vegetation and some coarse surface material may be left in place to 

ensure access is possible during adverse weather conditions. Road surface materials would not be placed 

in waters of the U.S. and wetlands would not be impacted by regrading or resoiling activities associated 

with this project as proposed. 

Avoidance of wetlands during siting of the turbine locations and ancillary wind generation project 

facilities, implementation of the environmental protection measures described in Chapter 2 of this 

document, and compliance with USACE permits and attendant conditions of approval would ensure that 

there would be no unmitigated loss or permanent degradation of wetlands. 

On-site or off-site flooding would not result from the construction and grading of roads and other 

facilities related to the Proposed Action. Implementation of environmental protection measures such as 

installation of adequately-sized and appropriately placed culverts, and avoidance of channels and other 

areas of concentrated flow, would ensure that such on-site or off-site flooding does not occur. 

A stormwater runoff permit would be obtained prior to construction. Compliance with this permit and the 

associated stormwater pollution prevention plan would ensure that surface water is not adversely affected 

by runoff from disturbances and construction areas. 

As with any construction activity, there is a possibility of spilling fuel, hydraulic fluid, or other hazardous 

substances. The potential of such events would be minimized through implementation of the 

environmental protection measures described in Chapter 2 of this document. Construction equipment 

would be equipped with spill cleanup kits. Equipment refueling would take place at secure areas, away 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-13 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

from wetlands or drainages. These measures would ensure that surface and ground water quality is not 

degraded through spillage of contaminants. 

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

VEGETATION 

The vegetation resources in the project area (Figure 3-1) were investigated to assess impacts of the 

Proposed Action to biological resources. The Missouri River is within 6 miles of the project area, as 

shown in Figure 1-1. 

Existing Environment 

Land use and land cover mapping was performed using a combination of recent color aerial imagery and 

field reconnaissance (Figure 3-2). These data were used to derive area estimates of land use and cover, 

including aquatic habitats, within the project area. Land use in the project area is dominated by 

agricultural uses (75 percent). Also present are grasslands (19 percent); waterways dominated by 

perennial grasses and forbs (2 percent); woodlands, including forested shelterbelts and wooded drainages 

(1 percent); aquatic habitats, including streams, ponds, wetlands, and dugouts (less than 1 percent); and 

disturbed areas, including farmsteads, gravel pits, dams, edges of dugouts and roads (nearly 2 percent). 

The Missouri Plateau, River Breaks, and Missouri Coteau Slope ecoregions occur in the vicinity of the 

Project Area and vary in vegetative characteristics. Native vegetation of the Missouri Plateau is 

dominated by blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis), wheatgrass/needlegrass (Pascopyrum spp./Nassella spp.) 

association, little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), and prairie sandreed (Calamovilfa longifolia). 

The River Breaks native vegetation is dominated by blue grama, western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum

smithii), buffalograss (Buchloe dactyloides), and some little bluestem. Juniper (Juniperus spp.) and 

deciduous trees are found on north facing slopes and cottonwood (Populus deltoides) gallery forests with 

willow (Salix spp.) are located on the floodplain. 

Native tracts within the Missouri Coteau Slope (location of Project Area) are generally dominated by 

western wheatgrass, needle and thread (Hesperostipa comata), prairie junegrass (Koeleria macran), or 

green needlegrass (Nassella viridula) (USDA 2005). Common forbs species found within the native 

grassland of the Coteau Slope also includes numerous forbs (e.g., yarrow [Achillea millefolium], pussy 
3-14 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

toes [Antennaria spp.] prairie sagewort [Artemisia frigida], purple avens [Geum rivale], and milk vetch 

[Astragalus spp.]), and shrubs (e.g., prairie wild rose [Rosa arkansana], snowberry [Symphoricarpos 

occidentalis]) (Kantrud and Kologiski 1982, Kuchler 1964). 

Large tracts of forest are non-existent within the project area. Woody vegetation is typically present only 

in drainages and shelterbelts and is highly fragmented throughout the project area. Shelterbelts are 

typically planted to reduce wind erosion in cultivated areas, accumulate snowfall downwind of 

shelterbelts to increase available soil moisture, provide wildlife habitat, and protect farmsteads and 

livestock areas from winter winds. A variety of native and non-native shrubs, deciduous trees, and 

conifers are used for shelterbelt plantings. Important native woody species found in the region include: 

cottonwood, aspen (Populus tremuloides), snowberry, prairie wild rose, sagebrush (Artemisia spp.), 

willow, and birch (Betula spp.). 

Agricultural Lands 

Agricultural land is the dominant land cover type in the project area. In Burleigh County, the most 

common crops in production are dry land wheat (primarily spring wheat), sunflower, barley, corn, and 

hay. Hayland, cropland, and pasture are managed for the production of livestock forage and cereal crops 

within agricultural tracts. 

Grassland 

Grasslands within the project area are typically grazed or hayed annually and include native species and 

mixed (native and non-native) pasturelands. Since the 1800s, 75 to 90 percent of North Dakota’s native 

grasslands have been lost due to cropland conversion. USFWS (Towner 2005) has an interest in native 

prairie for the following reasons: 

3⁄4 Native prairie provides important habitat for a number of migratory grassland birds, and year round 

residents; 

3⁄4 Native prairie provides nesting habitat for a variety of waterfowl; 

3⁄4 Native prairie exhibits genetic plant diversity that is important to agriculture and medicine; 

3⁄4 Native prairie provides habitat for a variety of insects; and, 

3⁄4 Native prairie provides opportunities for scientific research and recreation.. 
279TH AVE

292ND AVE

66TH ST

52ND ST

93RD ST

318TH AVE

119TH ST

132ND ST

106TH ST

26TH ST

80TH ST

145TH ST

171ST ST

16TH ST

14TH AVE

357TH AVE

13TH AVE

158TH ST

266TH AVE

18TH ST

305TH AVE

2848SPUR 

14 1/2 AVE

344TH AVE

80TH ST

15TH ST

331ST AVE

357TH AVE

344TH AVE

171ST ST

12TH ST

158TH ST

344TH AVE

145TH ST

15TH ST

15TH ST

344TH AVE

357TH AVE

5

3

3

8

4

3

8

2

9

4

2

5 2

1

1

9

6

7

7

6

10

23

11

26

10

35

24

15 17

22

11

10

24

27

33

36

29 28 26

11

32

29

32

22

22

34

24

15

20

18

22

20

34

15

25

24

16

34 35

22

23

20

26

13

35

21

14

19 23

23

27

23

22

13

21

21

12

16

27

14

20

25

33

36

14 17

21

23 19

12

31

28 30

18

19

30

31

19

27 26 25 30

4

29 28

1

27

9

26 25 30 29 28 27

14

26

16 15

21

17

28

13

24

14 18

33

13

15

12

16

36

17

16

25

21

24

15 14 13 18

28

25

13

16

Figure 3-2

Land Use / Land Cover

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center

FPL Energy Burleigh County Wind, LLC

0 10.5

Miles

Agricultural - includes cultivated tracts, tracts in hayland

production and other areas managed for high forage production but regularly grazed. These tracts are commonly dominated

by introduced species. Areas enrolled in the conservation reserve

program may be included in this cover type.

Aquatic - includes tracts largely dominated by aquatic vegetation

or inundated with water for a large portion of the year. Not all

wetlands are identified as aquatic.

Disturbed - generally includes areas actively disturbed for industrial 

use or other uses not conducive to vegetation production. Some natural

disturbances, such as periodically flooded areas and denuded areas

adjacent to aquatic habitats are also included.

Grassland - tracts generally characterized as having low-growing

native or introduced grasses and forbs in perennial production. These

areas are commonly used for livestock grazing and do not appear

to be regularly cultivated in row-crop agricultural or hayland cycles.

Roads - areas of heavy traffic including wide areas of linear gravel

or other surfacing as well as two-track trails along section lines.

Waterways - areas bounded by agricultural tracts comprised of 

perennial grass, forb, and shrub species that control erosion. 

Woodlands - shelterbelts and natural shrub and tree stands.

WILTON REGAN

HWY

36

US 83

This land cover type map was created through airphoto interpretation and partial site review through site reconnaissance. A general review of the cover types and land uses identified is described below:

Railroads

Proposed Transmission Line

Garrison-Bismarck Transmission Line

Radio Towers

Array Collector Substation

2005 Access Roads

Project Area

Roads

Major Roads

Switching Station

OH 34.5 kV Transmission Line (2005)

OH 34.5 kV Transmission Line (Expansion)

Buried Cable (2005)

Future Expansion Turbines

2005 Turbines

Land Use / Land Cover Types

Grassland

Roads

Disturbed Waterway

Agricultural

Aquatic

Woodlands Not Mapped
3-16 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

This Page Intentionally Left Blank - Insert Figure 3-2 (back)
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-17 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

The USFWS has also stated that shortgrass-prairie provides habitat crucial to sharp-tailed grouse 

(Tympanuchus phasianellus) (Terry Ellsworth pers. comm. 2005a). 

Easements and Other Limitations 

The USFWS commonly purchases wetland and grassland easements to help preserve habitats critical to 

migratory birds, native species, and other sensitive species. The easements provide perpetual protection 

of wetlands within the boundaries of the easement agreements. Within the vicinity of the Proposed 

Action, only one site is currently held under easement by the Long Lake Wetland Management District. 

This easement is located outside of the project area. 

The USDA-Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) and Farm Service Agency (FSA) administer 

a number of conservation-based programs for private landowners. The Conservation Reserve Program 

(CRP) conserves soil and water resources and provides wildlife habitat by removing enrolled tracts from 

agricultural production, generally for a period of 10 years. While tracts within the project area are 

enrolled in CRP, the Proposed Action would not result in disturbance of any of these areas. 

Forest and Shelterbelt 

The limited amount of woody vegetation present provides important nesting and roosting habitat for a 

variety of bird species. Trees and shrubs are important feeding, roosting, and escape cover for a wide 

variety of wildlife. Woody species that are particularly important for sharp-tailed grouse include aspen,

snowberry, sagebrush, willow, and birch. 

Aquatic and Riparian 

Aquatic and riparian habitats are disproportionately important to wildlife because they tend to have high 

species richness and diversity, and often exhibit high vertical habitat diversity. These habitats represent 

less than 1 percent of the project area (Figure 3-2). Riparian areas within the project area are small and 

are associated with ditches along roads and other modified land areas. 

Rare Plant Populations 

A request was submitted to the USFWS and North Dakota Game and Fish Department (NDGFD) in 

March 2005 for information on endangered, threatened, proposed, and candidate plant species or 

populations that may be present in the project area. An additional request was submitted to the North 

Dakota Natural Heritage Program (NDNHP) to query their database for known populations of rare plant 
3-18 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

species in the vicinity of the Proposed Action. The NDNHP responded that there were no documented 

occurrences of rare plants in the project area (Tetra Tech, Inc. 2005). 

The only plant of special concern in North Dakota the western prairie fringed orchid (Platanthera 

praeclara), which is listed as endangered by the USFWS. This species is only found in tallgrass prairies 

and sedge meadows, neither of which occurs to a notable extent within the project area. Populations are 

known to exist well outside of the project area in southeast North Dakota (USFWS 1995). USFWS has 

determined that this species does not occur in Burleigh County (Terry Ellsworth pers. comm. 2005b). 

While no specific surveys were conducted throughout the entire project area to determine if the species is 

present, this species was not incidentally observed during any site visits. 

The state of North Dakota does not maintain a list of protected rare plants. However, a listing of plants is 

maintained by Natureserve in cooperation with the NDNHP. Species on this list are not necessarily 

reflective of species with imperiled populations, but does include species rare in North Dakota. Those 

listed as rare in Burleigh County, North Dakota (smartweed dodder [Cuscuta polygonorum] and Rocky 

Mountain iris [Iris missouriensis]) are common and abundant elsewhere (G5 status) and as such were not 

the target of specific rare plant surveys (Natureserve 2005). Native plant populations were observed by 

biologists during the numerous site surveys in 2005 and no apparent uncommon species or communities 

were identified. 

Noxious Weeds 

North Dakota currently designates 12 plant species as noxious weeds. The listed weed species are 

commonly recognized to harm North Dakota’s agriculture, environment, and/or public health. North 

Dakota Department of Agriculture Century Code, Chapter 63-01.1 states that all local governments must 

require public and private landowners to manage noxious weeds. The noxious weed list currently 

includes absinth wormwood (Artemisia absinthium), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), diffuse knapweed 

(Centaurea diffusa), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula), musk thistle 

(Carduus nutans), purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens), spotted 

knapweed (Centaurea biebersteinii), yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis), dalmation toadflax 

(Linaria dalmatica), and saltcedar (Tamarix chinensis, T. parviflora and T. ramosissima). Non-noxious 

invasive species also include black henbane (Hyoscyamus niger), hoary cress (Cardaria draba), St. 

Johnswort (Hypericum spp.), and yellow toadflax (Linaria vulgaris). During surveys conducted in the 

spring of 2005, absinth wormwood and Canada thistle were observed in the vicinity of the project area. 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-19 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Burleigh County has a weed control program that governs the monitoring and control of noxious weeds 

on public and private lands. Currently, the county also performs monitoring for black henbane. 

Environmental Consequences

A significant impact to vegetation resources would occur if: 1) the Proposed Action resulted in a loss of 

habitat resulting in the listing of or jeopardizing the continued existence of plant or animal species; or 2) 

the Proposed Action resulted in uncontrolled expansion of noxious weeds. 

Vegetation communities most sensitive to disturbance are native grasslands and wetlands. During the 

planning phase, access roads and turbine locations would be placed to minimize impacts to wetland areas. 

Grasslands, a portion of which are largely composed of native species and many of which have been 

previously farmed, occur across approximately 19 percent of the project area. A portion of these tracts 

would be disturbed in association with the Proposed Action; however, the disturbances resulting from the 

Proposed Action would impact less than 1 percent of these tracts. Neither threatened nor endangered 

plants were observed or previously documented to occur within the project area. 

New road construction would also include dust control measures to reduce impacts from dust on adjacent 

vegetation communities. Introduction of noxious weeds would be mitigated through prompt revegetation 

with regionally native species or restoration of prior land use and institution of a Clean-Vehicle Program 

as detailed in Chapter 2 and required by Western’s Construction Standard 13, Environmental Quality 

Protection (Western 2001) (Appendix B). 

WILDLIFE 

Although the evaluation of wildlife resources focused on the project area (Figure 3-1), some regional 

discussion is included. This is necessary because of the greater mobility of wildlife and the high usage of 

the region by migratory birds. Existing literature and other information related to known species 

distributions, including endangered, threatened, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species; migration 

pathways; and wetlands and unique habitats within the project area, were reviewed for relevance to the 

Proposed Action. When necessary, appropriate agency personnel were interviewed via telephone or in 

person to collect information about the project area relevant to this study. 
3-20 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Existing Environment 

Species lists of vertebrates known or likely to occur on or near the project area were developed through 

literature review and in consultation with agency personnel. Checklists of North Dakota birds (Stewart 

1975; Faanes and Stewart 1986), mammals (Grondal no date), and amphibians and reptiles (Hoberg and 

Gause 1992) were available online through the USGS Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. 

Additionally, species lists for Burleigh County were provided by a NDGFD non-game biologist 

(presented as received in Appendix C). The sources yielded general distribution information that aided 

in developing the species lists for the project area. 

Based on the review of these species distribution lists, known wildlife habitat affinities, and site-specific 

survey data, 7 amphibian, 9 reptile, 68 bird, and 52 mammal species were identified that may occur in the 

project area. Surveys were conducted during 2005 to document avian and other wildlife use in the project 

area (Tetra Tech, Inc. 2005). During site survey activities conducted in 2005, 65 wildlife species (53 bird 

species and 12 mammal species) were observed within or adjacent to the project area (Tetra Tech, Inc. 

2005). Locations of raptor stick-nests and sharp-tailed grouse leks found during these surveys are shown 

on Figure 3-1. No site-specific amphibian, reptile, or mammal surveys were conducted within the project 

area. 

Environmental Consequences 

A significant impact to wildlife resources would occur if the Proposed Action resulted in the loss of 

individuals of a population leading to the listing of or jeopardizing the continued existence of animal 

species. Impacts to wildlife could be short-term (one or two reproductive seasons, generally during the 

construction period), or long term (affecting several generations during the life of the project). Impacts 

can be direct (an immediate affect to an individual, population or its habitat), or indirect (an affect that 

may occur over time or result from other actions). 

Construction activities that remove vegetation and disturb soil may cause direct impacts to individuals of 

less-mobile species (e.g., small mammals, amphibians, reptiles) through direct mortality or displacement 

and exposure to predators. More mobile species (medium to large mammals and birds) would be 

expected to disperse from the area of disturbance during construction, returning following completion of 

these activities. 

Disturbance to wildlife from noise, vehicles, and human presence would be localized and short-term in 

nature. Vehicles traveling access roads could kill small mammals, reptiles, or birds, though more mobile 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-21 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

species would be able to avoid impacts from vehicles. Nests of ground-nesting birds could be destroyed 

by vehicle traffic if construction activities occur during spring and early summer months when birds are 

nesting. However, these losses are not expected to cause significant impacts to overall wildlife 

populations because construction would not occur during the nesting season. 

Staging and construction activities associated with the Proposed Action would require access to gravel. 

Gravel for use during the project would be obtained from currently a active gravel pit near the project site. 

The selected contractor’s current gravel source is located in the East 1⁄2 Northwest 1⁄4 Section 27, 

Township 144 North, Range 80 West. Use of this existing gravel pit would prevent the loss of additional 

wildlife habitat caused by mining gravel resources near the Project Area. 

Construction activities could result in an accumulation of trash and food scraps that may be attractive to 

scavengers. Scavengers, such as raccoons or ravens, pose a threat to ground-nesting birds or other 

ground-dwelling wildlife species susceptible to predation. Waste containment measures would be 

implemented as described in Chapter 2 of this document. All waste material would be secured from 

scavengers and removed from the construction site daily. Any attraction of scavengers to the construction 

area would be of short duration and would not affect populations of wildlife in the area. 

As part of the Proposed Action, approximately 4.4 miles of 230-kV overhead transmission line and 8 

miles of 34.5-kV overhead transmission line would be constructed (Figure 3-1). Impacts to individual 

birds and associated mortality resulting from transmission line facilities interactions may occur. Based on 

the studies conducted, waterfowl, shorebirds, cranes, and other birds with a high wing loading to low 

wing aspect ratio (Crowder 2000) appear to be most susceptible to powerline collisions. This is 

particularly true when powerlines are located near wetlands. In upland habitats, raptors and passerines 

appear most susceptible to mortality from interactions with wind turbines (NWCC 2004). 

To minimize bird collisions with overhead lines, all east-west oriented 34.5-kV overhead collector lines 

would be marked with state-of-the-art line marking devices. Habitats in the proposed powerline corridors 

are primarily agricultural row crop habitats, with few aquatic and grassland habitats. The 34.5-kV 

overhead line portion of the Proposed Action is not expected to bisect daily movement patterns of avian 

species due to the small amount of suitable habitat located within and adjacent to the proposed powerline 

corridors. Burnt Creek is a possible exception and may be a communication flyway between areas south 

of the project area and the Audubon National Wildlife Refuge. The entire length of the proposed 230-kV 

overhead transmission line, including the crossing of Burnt Creek, would be marked with approved 

devices in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendation. All 34.5-kV overhead lines that bisect 
3-22 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

communication flyways (as observed by project or agency personnel or documented through collisions) 

would also be marked with state-of-the-art line marking devices. 

To minimize the possibility of electrocution on above-ground portion of the collector system ground 

wires on the 34.5-kV poles would be covered and would not stick up beyond the top of the poles. Pole 

mounted insulators would be rated for 69-kV. 

Mortality to birds resulting from collision with turbines at wind generation projects has been described at 

other wind generation projects (Nelson and Curry 1995; Osborn et al. 2000; Johnson et al. 2002) and 

these reports have identified avian mortality due to collisions as an issue. The magnitude of the issue has 

been described as site-specific. In Minnesota, Johnson et al. (2002) classified 71 percent of documented 

avian collision mortalities as migrants and 76 percent of those were passerines. Estimated mortality rates 

for 8-month periods ranged from 0.98 to 4.4 collisions per turbine (ca. 1.5-6.6 collisions/turbine/year), 

with the highest rate being due primarily to a single mortality event that may have been weather-related 

(Johnson et al. 2002). Data collected from a number of studies conducted prior to 2004 indicate an 

average of 2.19 avian fatalities per turbine per year in the United States for all species combined and 0.03 

raptor fatalities per turbine per year (NWCC 2004). Avian collisions with turbines may be influenced by 

such factors as annual migration and local movement patterns, turbine size, and weather. 

Avian mortality in association with turbines has been reduced by locating the Wind Energy Center and 

turbines where birds are less likely to encounter them relative to other areas in the region. While it is 

possible that there would be impacts to individual birds as a result of collisions with the wind turbines and 

transmission lines of the Proposed Action, the Wind Energy Center has been situated in an area with a 

low density of wetlands relative to areas to the north and east and away from the Missouri River corridor, 

an area of known high avian use (Figure 1-1 and Figure 3-1). Individual turbine towers would be 

located on ridgelines and hilltops, away from low passes between wetlands where shorebirds and 

waterfowl are more likely to fly. This would reduce the likelihood of avian collisions. 

The Wind Energy Center would use improved turbine and tower designs (e.g., solid towers rather than 

lattice towers) to further reduce avian mortality. Strobe lights would be placed on towers, which may 

promote avoidance by night-flying birds. In addition to the specific design measures that would reduce 

avian mortality, during the first year of commercial operation biologists would conduct periodic searches 

of the wind generation project for carcasses in accordance with the mortality monitoring procedures 

developed in consultation with USFWS. Searches would be conducted at times coinciding with annual 

migration, as well as during the nesting season (late spring and summer) and during late summer fledging 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-23 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

season to identify impacts to avian species. Local USFWS and NDGFD personnel would be notified if 

carcasses of migratory birds or federally-listed species or injured animals are found during these surveys. 

Notification would occur within 48-hours of incidents involving endangered species. A report 

summarizing the findings of the mortality monitoring surveys and observations made in accordance with 

FPL’s Wildlife Procedures Manual (as noted in Chapter 2) would be prepared and submitted to USFWS. 

During consultations, the USFWS expressed concerns regarding migratory birds and powerline 

interactions, as well as construction through wetlands and stream channels (Towner 2005). To address 

their concerns, the USFWS offered the following recommendation: 

3⁄4 Poles and other construction for overhead lines should be sited to avoid placement of fill in wetlands 

along the route. 

3⁄4 If construction is unavoidable in or near wetlands or streams, the following recommendations should 

be implemented: 

o Defer the timing of construction to late summer (after July 15) or fall so as not to 

disrupt waterfowl or other wildlife during the nesting season and to avoid high water 

conditions. 

o Replace unavoidable loss of wetland functions on an ecological value-for-value basis 

and trees or shrubs on a 2:1 basis. 

o Reseed disturbed grassland with a mixture of regionally native grass and forb species. 

3⁄4 New overhead powerlines should be constructed in accordance with the current guidelines for 

preventing raptor electrocutions as described in Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power 

Lines: The State of the Art in 1996 (APLIC 1996). 

3⁄4 If birds are found to be colliding with the transmission line, the USFWS recommended the lines be 

modified according to guidelines described in Mitigating Bird Collisions with Power Lines: The State 

of the Art in 1994 (APLIC 1994). 

3⁄4 Develop a voluntary Avian Protection Plan in accordance with the Avian Protection Plan (APP) 

Guidelines (APLIC and USFWS 2005) and the specific needs of the Burleigh County Wind Energy 

Center. 
3-24 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

ENDANGERED, THREATENED, PROPOSED, CANDIDATE AND OTHER SENSITIVE 

SPECIES 

The connection of the Proposed Action to Western’s Garrison-Bismarck 230-kV Transmission Line is a 

Federal action. As a result, Western is the lead Federal agency responsible for ESA Section 7 compliance. 

The area of study for special status species was essentially the same as that for wildlife resources, with 

focus on the project area (Figure 3-1). 

Existing Environment 

Lists of protected species and species of concern are maintained by both Federal and state agencies. These 

listings are discussed separately below. 

Federally Listed Species 

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires protection of species Federally-listed as threatened or 

endangered and any habitat designated as essential to the maintenance or recovery of a listed species 

(designated critical habitat). One of the purposes of the ESA is to "provide a means whereby the 

ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved," (16 U.S.C. 

§ 1531(b)). The designation of "critical habitat" serves several important express purposes and also 

informs other aspects of habitat protection under the ESA. The ESA allows for the protection of habitat in 

several ways, including: classifying impacts to critical habitat as a prohibited "take" of a particular 

species, the purchase of lands for critical habitat, cooperative programs with states, consultation on 

Federal actions or actions with a Federal nexus, and issuance of incidental take permits based, in part, on 

habitat protection. 

Projects that may adversely affect listed or proposed species require formal consultation with USFWS. 

Significant changes to habitats of these species and projects that may result in a “take” require close 

scrutiny by the USFWS and may require special permitting or mitigation measures to lessen or mitigate 

effects. 

A request was submitted on March 25, 2005, to the USFWS Ecological Services Office in Bismarck, 

North Dakota for information on endangered, threatened, proposed, and candidate that may be present in 

the project area. Of the Federally-listed species known to occur in North Dakota, the bald eagle 

(Haliaeetus leucocephalus), whooping crane (Grus americanus), interior least tern (Sterna antillarum), 

and piping plover (Charandrius melodus) are all known to occasionally or frequently occur near the 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-25 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Project Area, primarily in the Missouri River corridor. Other species such as Gray wolf (Canis lupus) 

may also occasionally be present but are either infrequently observed or have only historic range in the 

Project Area. No Federally-listed species were observed during site surveys in 2005. 

State Protected and Other Species of Conservation Concern 

Through the Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Program (now known as State Wildlife Grants) 

legislation of 2001, NDGFD has identified 100 species in decline at the national, regional, or state level, 

or species whose population status is not well known, but thought to be in decline. These species are 

ranked by the NDGFD in three priority levels (Level I, Level II and Level III) based on factors such as: 

known status, funding available for conservation, and presence of breeding habitat in North Dakota 

(NDGFD 2004). A description of the priority levels is as follows: 

3⁄4 Level I- Species which have a high level of conservation priority because of declining status either in 

North Dakota or across their range; or a high rate of occurrence in North Dakota constituting 

the core of the species’ breeding range, but are at-risk range wide, and non-State Wildlife 

Grant funding is not readily available to them. 

3⁄4 Level II - Species having a moderate level of conservation priority; or a high level of conservation 

priority, but a substantial amount of non-State Wildlife Grant funding is available to them. 

3⁄4 Level III - Species which have a moderate level of conservation priority, but are believed to be 

peripheral or do not breed in North Dakota.

A request was submitted on March 25, 2005, to the NDGFD office in Bismarck, North Dakota 

for information on state species that may be present in the project area. The sensitive species 

observed in the project area are shown in Table 3-1. 

Environmental Consequences 

A significant impact to endangered, threatened, proposed, and candidate species would occur if: 1) the 

Proposed Action resulted in the loss of individuals of a population leading to a jeopardy opinion from the 

USFWS; or 2) the Proposed Action resulted in the loss of individuals leading to the upgrade (e.g., change 

in listing from threatened to endangered) of the Federal listing of the species. 
3-26 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

TABLE 3-1 

North Dakota Game and Fish - Birds of Conservation Priority 

Common Name Scientific Name Priority Level 

Northern harrier Circus cyaneus Level II

Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsoni Level I

Sharp-tailed grouse Tympanuchus phasianellus Level II

Willet Catoptrophorus semipalmatus Level I

Upland sandpiper Bartramia longicauda Level I

Marbled godwit Limosa fedoa Level I

Sprague’s pipit Anthus spragueii Level I

Baird’s sparrow Ammodramus bairdii Level I

Grasshopper sparrow Ammodramus savannarum Level I

Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus Level II

The project area was surveyed for threatened, endangered, or candidate species on three occasions during 

the spring of 2005. The project area is not representative of bald eagle, whooping crane, interior least 

tern, and piping plover breeding habitat, and these species are not known to reside in the project area. In 

addition, these species were not observed during site surveys in the vicinity of the Proposed Action (Tetra 

Tech, Inc. 2005). It is possible that migrating whooping cranes could use the limited wetlands resources 

or uplands in the vicinity of the project area for feeding or roosting. While it is possible that these species 

could collide with turbines or overhead lines, such collisions are unlikely. Migrating bald eagles and 

whooping cranes tend to fly at altitudes well above the height of wind turbines. Also, because bald eagles 

and interior least terns tend to migrate along river corridors, they are less likely to migrate through the 

project area. However, elevations used when these birds move between feeding, resting, and loafing areas 

may result in collisions. 

Suitable nesting habitat for piping plovers or interior least terns is non-existent within the project area, 

further reducing the likelihood of significant impacts to these species. Because piping plovers and interior 

least terns are not common inhabitants of the project area, they are not expected to experience direct or 

indirect impacts as a result of the Proposed Action. 

The proposed action may result in the long-term loss of some foraging and loafing habitat of the 

whooping crane. Loss of winter feeding- and resting-cover is the main reason for the decline of the 

species (USFWS 1970). Some wetlands and native grasslands occur in the project area, and USFWS 

records indicate that whooping cranes have been observed in the vicinity of the project area (Terry 

Ellsworth pers. comm. 2005b). Due to the current size of the population of whooping cranes, direct and 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-27 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

indirect impacts to an individual whooping crane may constitute a significant impact. Marking of the 230-

kV overhead transmission line was recommended by USFWS and incorporated into the proposed action 

to minimize potential for collisions. East-west oriented portions of the 34.5-kV overhead collection line 

would also be marked. 

Bald eagles, Northern harrier, Swainson’s hawk, sharp-tailed grouse, willet, upland sandpiper and 

marbled godwit may experience direct and indirect impacts to individuals. However, impacts are not 

likely to contribute to population decline. 

Impacts to species of concern would be reduced by use of modern turbine and tower designs (e.g., solid 

towers rather than lattice towers), state-of-the art line marking techniques and development of an Avian 

Protection Plan for the Wind Energy Center. Environmental protection measures described in Chapter 2 

of this document and the additional mitigation measures described in this Chapter (particularly in the 

previous “Wildlife” section) would further reduce impacts. 

SOCIAL RESOURCES 

SOCIOECONOMICS 

The socioeconomic setting and potential impacts of the Proposed Action were evaluated on a regional 

basis with emphasis placed on Burleigh County. Regional and state-wide economic data are also 

discussed to allow comparison. 

Existing Environment 

The Proposed Action would be located in the northwestern portion of Burleigh County, near Wilton 

North Dakota, within a rural agricultural area. The following towns and communities in Burleigh County 

are located within 6 miles of the Proposed Action area (2000 census populations, as available): 

3⁄4 South Wilton (population 242); 

3⁄4 North Wilton (population 565); 

3⁄4 Regan (population 43); 

3⁄4 Wing (population 124); 

3⁄4 Wogansport; and 

3⁄4 Baldwin. 
3-28 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Services in these communities are limited. The largest near-by city, located approximately 20 miles south 

of the Proposed Action area, is Bismarck, North Dakota with a population of approximately 55,532 (U.S. 

Census Bureau 2003). This city offers a full range of services and is the capital of North Dakota. 

Bismarck has a variety of support services, including medical centers. The nearest hospital to the project 

area is St. Alexius Medical Center. 

In 2003, the U.S. Census Bureau estimated Burleigh County had a population of 71,693, an increase of 

3.3 percent from the 2000 census count of 69,416, and an increase of over 16 percent since the 1990 

census (U.S. Census Bureau 2004). The county contains approximately 1,633 square miles, with a 

current population density of just over 42 people per square mile. 

General demographics of the county, as measured in 2000, showed 95 percent of the population is 

composed of Caucasians, who are not of Hispanic or Latino origin (see Environmental Justice section 

below). At the time of the 2000 census, the median age of Burleigh County residents was 35.9, and 12 

percent of the county population was 65 or older. 

According to the 2000 census, the workforce in Burleigh County was involved in the following: 

3⁄4 Services (Health, Legal, Business, Others) – 35.9 percent; 

3⁄4 Retail Trade – 18.7 percent; 

3⁄4 Government – 17 percent; 

3⁄4 Finance – 6.9 percent; 

3⁄4 Transportation & Public Utilities – 5.4 percent; 

3⁄4 Construction – 5.4 percent; and 

3⁄4 Wholesale Trade – 3.9 percent. 

Per capita income in 1999 was $20,436; median household income for the region for the same period was 

$41,309, which was about 16 percent more than the statewide median of $34,604 (U.S. Census Bureau 

2000). Unemployment in Burleigh County was 3.4 percent in March 2005, compared with 4.2 percent 

statewide (Northwest Area Foundation 2005). 

Environmental Consequences 

Significant socioeconomic impacts would occur if the Proposed Action resulted in the degradation or 

commitment of existing goods and services to an extent that would limit the sustainability of existing 

communities. 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-29 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Impacts from the Proposed Action on social and economic resources are expected to be short-term (less 

than 16 months). Measurable effects of the Proposed Action would likely follow the build-up and 

execution of the construction phase of the Proposed Action, which is expected to require up to 4 months 

to complete. The project would include two construction phases. The first phase would occur in 2005 

and is expected to last approximately 4 months; the second phase would likely occur in 2006 and may 

occur over more than 4 months. 

Construction crews would range from 80 to 120 personnel for the Proposed Action during each of the 

phases. Approximately 60 to 70 percent of the work force would be recruited locally. During peak 

construction, the estimated monthly payroll would range from $480,000 to $760,000. 

Local businesses such as motels, restaurants, bars, gas stations, and grocery stores would likely 

experience some increase in revenue resulting from new employment of the non-resident portion (30 to 

40 workers) of project construction crews. In particular, the consumption of goods, services, and 

temporary lodging in and near Bismarck, Wilton, and surrounding cities could be expected to minimally 

increase due to the presence of these non-native workers. Other local area businesses that may benefit 

through increased sales would likely include ready-mix concrete and gravel suppliers, hardware and 

general merchandise stores, welding and machine shops, packaging and postal services (Federal Express, 

United Parcel Service, U.S. Postal Service), and heavy equipment repair and maintenance services. 

This relatively small increase in demand for local goods and services would not be minimal due to the 

small size of the non-local workforce and the short-term nature of the construction phase of the Proposed 

Action. For the same reasons, the effects to infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, housing, and utilities 

would also be minimal. 

The North Dakota Department of Commerce determined that the Proposed Action would result in no 

detrimental changes to existing goods and services (NDDOC 2005). 

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE 

The goal of environmental justice is to ensure the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people 

with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, 

and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people, including a racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic 

group, should bear a disproportionate share of potentially adverse human health and environmental effects 
3-30 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

of a Federal agency action, operation, or program. Meaningful involvement means that affected 

populations have the opportunity to participate in the decision process and their concerns are considered. 

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations 

and Low-Income Populations) is intended to ensure that adverse human health and environmental effects 

of agency actions would not disproportionately impact minority and low-income populations, including 

Native American Indian Tribes. For purposes of this section, minority and low-income populations are 

defined as follows: 

Minority Populations – People of Hispanic or Latino origin of any race, Blacks or African Americans, 

American Indians or Alaska Natives, Asians, and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islanders. 

Low-Income Populations – People living below the national poverty level. In 2000, the weighted-average 

poverty threshold for a family of four was $17,603, and $8,794 for an unrelated individual. 

EO 13045 (Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks) is intended to 

ensure adverse human health and environmental effects of agency actions would not disproportionately 

impact child populations. 

Existing Environment 

Estimates of two populations of concern (minority and low income) were developed to determine if 

environmental justice populations exist in Burleigh County (Table 3-2; U.S. Census Bureau 2005a,b). 

The Standing Rock Sioux Reservation and the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation are approximately 50 

miles from the project area. These two regions may represent the closest minority or low-income 

populations in the region. 

TABLE 3-2 

Minority and Low-Income Populations

Location Total Population Percent Minority Percent Below Poverty 

Burleigh County 69,416 5.4 7.8 

State of North Dakota 642,200 8.3 11.9 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-31 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

The median family/household income for the region surrounding the project area is about 16 percent 

greater than the statewide average. Consequently, income does not constitute a condition that warrants 

focus under EO 12898. 

Children and sensitive receptors exist near the Proposed Action area. However, the proximity of children 

and sensitive receptors to the Proposed Action does not constitute a condition that warrants focus under 

EO 13045. 

Environmental Consequences 

With regard to EO 12898, an impact would be considered significant if a low-income, minority, or 

subsistence population in the region of the Proposed Action was disproportionately affected by the 

Proposed Action. 

Because of the distance of the Proposed Action from the Standing Rock and Fort Berthold Indian 

Reservations, no impacts to the economy, environment, or culture of the reservations are anticipated. In 

addition, Western’s interactions with North Dakota Indian tribes are intended to address potentially 

adverse impacts to tribal interests outside the reservations. Therefore, discrimination toward or 

disproportionate impacts to low-income, minority, and subsistence populations resulting from the 

Proposed Action are not anticipated. 

LAND USE 

The evaluation for land use was focused on the project area (Figure 3-1), but includes some discussion 

that establishes the regional setting of the Proposed Action. 

Existing Environment 

The Proposed Action is located in the Ecklund and Ghylin Townships in Burleigh County, North Dakota. 

Local land use features in the project area include existing transmission lines, rural roads, rural 

residences, and agricultural properties. Agricultural properties comprise the majority of the project area 

and include lands used for a variety of agricultural purposes. Specific acreages of different agricultural 

land uses within the project area are not available because they change from year to year based on market 

trends and farm-specific operational requirements. 
3-32 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Hayland, cropland, and pasture are managed for the production of livestock forage and cereal crops 

within agricultural tracts. Management may include fertilization, weed and brush control by pesticide 

application, and management of fallow fields, tillage, and reseeding. Species composition often includes 

mixes of grasses and legumes, small grain hay, or monocultures of legumes such as alfalfa or clover. No 

prime or unique farmlands exist within the project area. 

Environmental Consequences 

Land-use impacts would pertain to physical and operational effects of the Proposed Action on existing 

and future land use. In the project area, these impacts are primarily related to agricultural practices. A 

significant impact would occur if: 1) the Proposed Action resulted in the uncompensated loss of crop 

production; or 2) the Proposed Action resulted in the foreclosure of future land uses. 

Temporary and short-term impacts would occur from construction activities due to removal of existing 

agricultural land from crop or forage production. Permanent disturbance and loss of vegetation would 

result from installation of access roads, the substation, and turbine foundations and other permanent 

facilities. 

Western, Burleigh County Wind, and Central Power would compensate landowners for land, both 

purchased and leased, that is required for the Proposed Action. However, construction of proposed 

facilities would affect existing agricultural uses locally and would be both short- and long-term, in 

duration. 

Short-term effects would include a temporary loss of cropland during construction. Long-term impacts 

would include: 

3⁄4 Loss of cropland under and around structures; 

3⁄4 Modified farming operations near and around structures; 

3⁄4 Damage to farm equipment through collisions with proposed facilities; and, 

3⁄4 Modified aerial application of herbicides and fertilizers. 

Impacts to existing land uses and agricultural practices have been reduced by siting structures in 

previously disturbed areas, or in areas where agricultural practices are already limited (along existing 

roads etc) or have been modified. 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-33 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Less than 1 percent of the project area would be occupied by the proposed facilities and associated 

surface disturbances. In addition, land uses were among the considerations during siting of the wind 

generation project and ancillary facilities. As a result of these considerations and the implementation of 

environmental protection measures, the Proposed Action would not foreclose future land uses. 

Environmental protection measures as described in Chapter 2 of this document would be implemented to 

minimize or avoid potential land use impacts from the Proposed Action. In addition, Western, Burleigh 

County Wind, and Basin would provide fair market value compensation to landowners for purchased and 

leased land. 

VISUAL RESOURCES 

The analysis of the visual study area was considered to be the general project area, including the wind 

energy center and those residential areas and roadways along the ROW of the proposed 230-kV 

transmission line connecting the wind energy center to the Garrison-Bismarck 230- kV Transmission Line 

(Figure 2-1). 

Scenic quality is determined by evaluating the overall character and diversity of landform, vegetation, 

color, water, and cultural or manmade features in a landscape. Typically, more complex or diverse 

landscapes have higher scenic quality than those landscapes with less complex or diverse landscape 

features. 

Existing Environment 

The project area lies in a rural location with farming, livestock grazing, and related agricultural operations 

dominating land use. The area within the vicinity of the proposed Wind Energy Center consists of a 

rolling to moderately hilly landscape with prominent ridges trending in a northwesterly to southeasterly 

direction. The visual resources of the area are neither unique to the region nor entirely natural. 

Structure and color features in the visual region of influence include those associated with wetlands, 

cultivated cropland, pasture, forested shelterbelt, and additional human-caused features described above. 

Colors vary seasonally and include green crop and pasture land during spring and early summer, green to 

brown crops and pasture during late summer and fall, brown and black associated with fallow farm fields 

year round, and white and brown associated with late fall and winter periods. 
3-34 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Key observation points (KOPs) are viewing locations that represent the location of the anticipated 

concentration of sensitive viewers (or the highest incidence of sensitive viewers) near the Proposed 

Action. KOPs for the Proposed Action include roadways such as: U.S. Highway 83 (located west of the 

project area), State Highway 36 (located north of the project area), 93rd Street (located east of the project 

area), 266th Avenue (located south of the project area), and occupied residences within the vicinity of the 

project area. There are approximately 15 occupied residences within the visual region of influence of the 

project area. 

Currently, no distinctive landscape features exist in the project area that would require specific protection 

from visual impairment. 

Environmental Consequences 

Visual resources reflect aesthetic qualities of the landscape in terms of its public viewing value and 

sensitivity to change. Significant impacts to visual resources would occur if the Proposed Action 

interrupts a unique viewshed from a KOP. 

Wind turbines, transmission lines and structures, and construction of access roads would result in changes 

to public views. The uppermost portion of the turbine blades would reach 360 feet above ground surface 

and would be visible for up to several miles, changing the visual character of the area from agricultural to 

quasi-industrial. These structures would be visible from all of the identified KOPs. Structures and 

facilities in the Wind Energy Center would be anywhere from 2,200 feet to 980 feet away from nearby 

highways. Some of the turbines would require strobe lights for aircraft safety, potentially changing the 

view from KOPs. Visual effects would decrease as the distance from the Wind Energy Center increases. 

The transmission line would bisect the rural areas from the turbine array to the substation and continue 

west to the point of interconnection. The transmission line would be approximately 75 feet tall and would 

be visible from KOPs such as U.S. Highway 83, 266th Avenue, and many of the occupied residences. 

Two of the homes within the transmission corridor are within the 500-foot buffer and have signed consent 

agreements. The appearance of the transmission line would result in changes to the aesthetics of the 

landscape. Landowner concerns are a consideration in the ROW agreements negotiated along the route. 

Impacts on visual resources within the project area were determined by considering the post-construction 

views from the KOPs, as discussed above. The project area does not contain any highly distinctive or 

important landscape features, registered cultural resources, or unique viewsheds. In addition, there are no 

visual quality standards in place within Burleigh County. 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-35 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

NOISE 

Evaluation of noise was limited to potential receptors within the project area (Figure 2-1). 

Existing Environment 

The project area is located in a rural, predominantly agricultural area. As a result, sources of background 

noise to rural residents and occasional visitors to the area include: wind, agricultural activity, recreation 

(primarily hunting), vehicles traveling on U.S. Highway 83; State Highway 36, and low-traffic gravel 

roads such as 266th Avenue, 52nd Street, 93rd Street, and 132nd Street. Typical baseline noise levels in 

the project area likely range from approximately 38 average day-night sound levels measured in Aweighted decibels (dBA) to 48 dBA (USEPA 1978). 

Potential noise receptors in the vicinity of proposed facilities include scattered rural residences, the 

closest of which is approximately 1,640 feet from one of the proposed turbine sites. Figure 2-1 shows the 

locations of occupied residences in the project area. 

Environmental Consequences 

Significant impacts would occur if the Proposed Action results in noise levels in exceedence of national 

standards. 

The National Safety Council (NSC) recommends no more than 85 dBA for 8 hours of exposure as the 

safe limit for farm operations. Industrial standards of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

(OSHA) regulations would apply to those involved in the construction, operation, and maintenance of the 

facilities. OSHA permissible noise exposures are shown in Table 3-3. 

TABLE 3-3 

OSHA Permissible Noise Standards 

Duration 

(number of hours per day) 

Sound Level 

(dBA) 

8.0 90 

6.0 92 

4.0 95 

3.0 97 

2.0 100 

1.5 102 

1.0 105 

0.75 110 

0.5 115 
3-36 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Noise generated by construction activities would occur intermittently over the construction period and 

would be generated by an increase in traffic on local roads, as well as heavy equipment operation. 

Available estimates from other wind farm construction projects indicate that the maximum noise levels 

from heavy equipment would be 85 to 88 dBA at a distance of 50 feet (Western 2003). Given that the 

distance to residences from any turbine is expected to be greater than 1,500 feet, noise levels are not 

expected to be exceeded and noise issues are not expected to be a concern at this project site. 

Noise associated with the proposed transmission line construction is expected to be localized and shortterm. All construction operations would occur during daylight hours. Two residences are located within 

500 feet of the transmission line as shown in Figure 2-1. These landowners have been contacted and the 

proximity approved. Occupants of residences in proximity, but not within 500 feet of the line, would be 

contacted prior to construction to further reduce annoyances and other potential impacts from these 

operations. 

Corona-generated audible noise from transmission lines is generally characterized as a crackling, hissing 

noise. The noise is most noticeable during wet-conductor conditions such as rain, snow, or fog. 

Transmission-line audible noise is measured and predicted in dBA. Some typical noise levels are light 

automobile traffic at 100 feet, 50 dBA; an operating air conditioning unit at 20 feet, 60 dBA; and freeway 

traffic or freight train at 50 feet, 70 dBA. This last level represents the point at which a contribution to 

hearing impairment begins. The average noise-level during wet weather at the edge of the ROW for the 

proposed transmission line is anticipated to be 46 dBA at 230 kV. 

Noise estimates for wind generation projects of comparable size have been previously modeled. Model 

variables included turbine noise levels of 105 dBA, wind speed of 8 meters per second, no tonal noise, no 

background noise, and a noise threshold set to 50 dBA. Model results indicate a noise level range of 

between 45 and 50 dBA at 1,000 feet distance around the proposed wind generation project. Based on the 

expected typical baseline noise levels for the area (between 38 to 48 dBA) and given the wind speeds 

used for the calculations (8 meters per second), ambient noise levels would likely approach or mask 

entirely the noise generated from the turbines. Noise level standards set by NSC and OSHA would not be 

exceeded and the long-term increase in noise levels would be minimal. 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-37 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

TRANSPORTATION 

The analysis area that would be used to determine impacts on transportation from the Proposed Action 

would be the area delineated by roadways adjacent to the project area. These roadways have been 

identified as: U.S. Highway 83 (located west of the project area), State Highway 36 (located north of the 

project area), 266th Avenue (located south of the project area), and 132nd Street (located east of the 

project area). 

Existing Environment 

The turbine array is located east of U.S. Highway 83 and south of State Highway 36. U.S. Highway 83 

has a junction with Interstate 94 approximately 20 miles south of the project area. The road located south 

of the project area (266th Avenue) has a gravel surface and is a major collector that has a junction with 

U.S. Highway 83 to the west. Several roads lie either within the project area or east of the project area. 

These roads are 52nd Street, 93rd Street, and 132nd Street. All of these roads have gravel surfaces and 

receive a low volume of traffic. Motor vehicle traffic along the majority of roads within the vicinity of 

the project area is considered light, with low speed and low volume. 

Environmental Consequences 

Significant impacts would occur if: 1) the Proposed Action resulted in the permanent disruption of 

regional and local traffic; or 2) the Proposed Action results in the destruction of existing transportation 

infrastructure. 

Construction of the Proposed Action would increase traffic on local roads to the site, possibly causing 

temporary impacts to local traffic flow while equipment is hauled to the site. There are several roads 

adjacent to the project area in which construction-related traffic would be concentrated. Constructionrelated vehicles would use 52nd Street, 93rd Street, and 66th Street, as they access the project area off of 

State Highway 36. In addition, a portion of 52nd Street would be improved for the purpose of 

transporting materials and equipment. These improvements would remain in place after construction is 

completed. A portion of the construction-related traffic would also occur on 266th and 279th Avenues. 

The construction company hired to build the project would obtain any necessary permits for transporting 

equipment. The North Dakota State Highway Patrol and NDDOT would be contacted regarding the 

transmission line crossing of U.S. Highway 83. 
3-38 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Construction activities associated with the Proposed Action would use the existing section line roads 

whenever possible. The Proposed Action would include approximately 7.2 miles of roads associated with 

the turbines and other support facilities installed during 2005; this estimate includes those section-line 

roads that would be upgraded. These roads would be constructed to assist with access and maintenance of 

the proposed facilities. Future roads associated with the expansion turbines would be constructed or 

upgraded to provide access to the expansion turbine locations. The precise location of these proposed 

future roads have not yet been determined. 

Operation of the wind energy center is not expected to result in any significant traffic issues on the area 

highways or state roads because there would be only a minor increase in traffic (potentially two vehicles 

per day). In addition, the necessary permits would be obtained and safety protocols implemented. 

SAFETY AND HEALTH ISSUES 

Evaluation of safety and health issues was limited to the project area (Figure 2-1. This evaluation 

specifically focused on areas in the immediate vicinity of proposed wind turbines, access roads, 

transformers, buried and overhead transmission lines, and substations. 

Existing Environment 

The predominant activities that currently occur within the project area include agriculture and vehicular 

travel. The safety regulations for these activities are defined and enforced by Federal and state agencies. 

Environmental Consequences 

For the purpose of this analysis, a significant impact to public safety and health would occur if 1) the 

Proposed Action resulted in an increase in personal injuries; 2) the Proposed Action resulted in an 

increase in health risk to area residents; 3) the Proposed Action resulted in impacts to public health as a 

result of increased electric and magnetic fields; 4) the Proposed Action resulted in an increase in injuries 

or fatalities related to increased traffic during the construction and operation of the wind energy center; or 

5) the Proposed Action resulted in a violation of Federal, state, or local regulations regarding handling, 

transport, or containment of hazardous materials. 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-39 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Public Safety 

Work plans and specifications would be prepared to address public safety during project construction. On 

such occasions that people not involved in facilities construction or operation are present, safety 

precautions such as fencing, limitations on access to high hazard areas, and provision of adult supervision 

would be implemented. Because of the distance and the construction/operation site control measures 

anticipated during these phases, it is anticipated that the project would not adversely influence the health 

of area residents. 

Worker Safety 

Project construction work plans and specifications would be prepared to address worker safety during 

Proposed Action construction. Preparation of these documents would include appropriate performance 

provisions for worker protection as is required under OSHA with emphasis on CFR 1926 – Safety and 

Health Regulations for Construction. Because development and preparation of these documents would 

be prepared as part of FPL Energy’s contractor bid specifications, there would be no increase in injuries 

to workers. In addition, all workers would adhere to the safety standards and guidelines set forth by all 

parties involved in the Proposed Action. 

Electric and Magnetic Fields 

The proposed transmission line for the project area is a 230-kV line. At maximum thermal capacity of the 

conductor, approximately 900 amperes would flow in each of three phases. Voltage and current are 

required to transmit electrical power over the transmission line. A phenomenon called electromagnetic 

field (EMF) results from electrically charged particles which may cause effects some distance away from 

the line. Voltage (measured in volts or kilovolts) is the source of the electric field. Current (measured in 

amperes) is the source of a magnetic field. Fields drop rapidly as the distance increases from the source. 

The electrical effects of the 230-kV transmission line would be characterized as “corona effects” and 

“field effects.” Safety concerns directly relating to EMF have also been identified. 

Corona Effects

Effects of corona are audible noise, visible light, radio and television interference, and photochemical 

oxidants. Corona effect can be described as the situation when the voltage is at high levels and the 

electrons are attracted to ground (at lower potential) with sufficient energy to ionize air. It is this 

breakdown that produces the corona. Noticeable side effects of corona are: 
3-40 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Audible Noise – Corona generated audible noise is generally characterized as a crackling/hissing noise, 

most noticeable during wet-weather conditions. There are no design-specific regulations to limit audible 

noise from transmission lines. Audible noise generated from the proposed 230-kV line would be 

indistinguishable from background noise. 

Visible Light – Corona is visible as a bluish glow under conditions of darkness, and probably only with 

the aid of telescopic devices. Light would be difficult to detect at the operating voltage of 230 kV. 

Radio and Television Interference – Corona-generated interference is most likely to affect amplitude 

modulation (AM) broadcast band reception at transmission line voltages of 345 kV or more. Frequency 

modulation (FM) broadcast band reception is rarely affected. The proposed transmission line would be 

constructed according to standards that minimize sources of corona, such as surface irregularities and 

sharp edges on suspension hardware. 

Photochemical Oxidants – Corona would ionize the surrounding air and generate ozone and nitrogen 

oxides. The low levels of oxidants produced would not be measurable either near the line or at ground 

level. 

Field Effects

Field effects include induced current and voltage in conducting objects near the line, spark discharge 

shocks, steady-state current shocks, field perception at ground level, and magnetic field. 

Current and Voltage – Voltage induction and the creation of currents in long conducting objects, such as 

fences and pipelines, would be possible near the proposed transmission lines. Grounding practices and 

the availability of mitigation measures would minimize the magnetic induction effects of the line. Nonelectric fences, such as those made of barbed wire directly attached to steel posts, would be adequately 

grounded and would not collect an electric charge. It is recommended that other types of wire fences be 

constructed using at least one steel post every 150 to 200 feet to ground the fence. 

Spark-Discharge Shocks – If the induced voltage were sufficiently high on an ungrounded object, a spark 

discharge shock would occur as contact is made with the ground. At the operating voltage of 230 kV and 

with standard design practices, shock discharge and nuisance shocks would be unlikely. 

Steady-State Current Shocks – Steady-state currents are those that flow after a person has contacted an 

ungrounded object, providing a path for the induced current to flow to ground. Design requirements that 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-41 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

reduce or eliminate induced current and voltages would help ensure steady-state current shocks would not 

occur. 

Field Perception – When the electric field under a transmission line is sufficiently high, persons standing 

under or near the line may perceive hair rising on an upraised hand. At the operating voltage of 230 kV, 

any of electric fields from the proposed line should not be perceived. 

Safety Concerns Related to Electric and Magnetic Field (EMF)

Safety concerns have been identified with regard to field effects. These effects are generally related to the 

EMF surrounding transmission lines. It is not known if any EMF levels are unsafe. Some nongovernmental organizations have set advisory limits as a precautionary measure, based on the knowledge 

that high field levels (more than 1000 times the EMF found in typical environments) may induce currents 

in cells or nerve stimulation. The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection has 

established a continuous, magnetic field exposure limit of 0.833 Gauss(G), or 833 milliGauss (mG), and a 

continuous electric field exposure limit of 4.2 kilovolts per meter (kV/m) for members of the general 

public. The American Council of Governmental Industrial Hygienists publishes Threshold Limit Values 

(TLVs) for various physical agents. The TLV for occupational exposure to 60 Hz magnetic fields has 

been set as 10 G (10,000 mG) and 25 kV/m for electric fields. 

The earth’s fields are static, or 0 Hz frequency. The earth’s magnetic field is about 500 mG. The earth’s 

electric field is about 100 V/m, but thunderstorms can temporarily increase the field in a given location to 

several thousand V/m. In the home, in addition to the earth’s natural fields, there are power frequency 

fields (60Hz). All electric appliances produce electric and magnetic fields having a frequency of 60 Hz 

(Table 3-4). The fields are greatest closest to the surface of the cord and appliance, and drop rapidly in 

just a short distance. The average household background 60 Hz magnetic field is about 1 to 2 mG. The 

average background 60 Hz electric field is 1 to 20 V/m. 

All overhead lines produce fields. The fields are usually the highest directly under the lines and fall 

rapidly with distance to the sides of the line. Actual field strengths would vary depending on the height 

of the conductors from the point of measurement. Electric fields from power lines are relatively stable 

because voltage does not change. Magnetic fields fluctuate greatly as current changes in response to 

changing load. The magnetic fields in Table 3-5 were calculated for a population of 321 power lines 

using 1990 mean loads. 
3-42 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

TABLE 3-4 

Typical 60 Hz Magnetic Field Levels From Common Home Appliances 

(where available)

Appliance Magnetic Field 6 Inches 

from Appliance (mG) Magnetic Field 2 Feet Away (mG)

Electric Shaver 100 - 

Vacuum Cleaner 300 10 

Electric Oven 9 - 

Dishwasher 20 4 

Microwave Oven 200 10 

Hair Dryer 300 - 

Computers 14 2 

Fluorescent Lights 40 2 

Facsimile Machines 6 - 

Copy Machines 90 7 

Garbage Disposals 80 2 

TABLE 3-5 

Typical 60 Hz Electric and Magnetic Field Levels From Overhead Powerlines 

Voltage of Line Centerline Approx. Edge of 

Right of Way 100 feet 200 feet 300 feet 

115 kV 

Electric Field kV/m 

Magnetic Field mG

1.0 

30 

0.5 

6.5 

0.07 

1.7 

0.01 

0.4 

0.003 

0.2 

230 kV 

Electric Field kV/m 

Magnetic Field mG

2.0 

57.5 

1.5 

19.5 

0.3 

7.1 

0.05 

1.8 

0.01 

0.8 

500 kV 

Electric Field kV/m 

Magnetic Field mG

7.0 

86.7 

3.0 

29.4 

1.0 

12.6 

0.3 

3.2 

0.1 

1.4 

Magnetic fields at the edge of ROW (25 feet from centerline) at maximum line capacity are calculated to 

be 7.4 mG. At a distance of 50 feet from the centerline, the maximum fields would be less than 2 mG. It 

is unlikely that exposures to the electric and magnetic fields from the proposed line would have adverse 

effects on biological systems, based on the low levels of magnetic fields from the proposed line and the 

fact that the proposed line would not be located near a residential area. Electric fields would be less than 

one kV/m and no significant adverse impacts are anticipated. 

In the June, 2005 British Medical Journal, Draper, Vincent, Kroll and Swanson’s paper Childhood 

cancer in relation to distance from high voltage power lines in England and Wales: a case-control study 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-43 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

reported on the risk of childhood leukemia in relationship to their home address when born. Compared 

with those who lived greater than 600 meters from a transmission line at birth, children who lived within 

200 meters had a relative risk of 1.69. Those between 200 and 600 meters had a relative risk of 1.23. The 

researchers reported “there is no accepted biological mechanism to explain the epidemiological results; 

indeed the relation may be due to chance or confounding.” 

No Federal regulations have established environmental limits on the strengths of fields from power lines. 

There are no established limits for fields in North Dakota. The state of Florida limits the magnetic field to 

less than 150 mG at the edge of the right-of-way for 69 to 230 kV transmission lines. The state of New 

York limits the magnetic field to less than 200 mG at the edge of the right-of-way. The states of Florida, 

Minnesota, Montana, New York, and Oregon set limits of between 7 and 11 kV/m electric field strength 

at the edge of the right-of-way. 

Underground Collection System 

Placement and care of underground power transmission lines comes with inherent risks. Lines may be cut 

or contacted by others digging in or across the proposed utility corridors. Underground utility locations 

would be identified with appropriate signage in the project area. Above ground utilities may also require 

signage with maximum vehicle height designations. The National Electric Safety Code (NESC) 

publishes recommended safety requirements for transmission systems. Recommended clearances within 

the NESC consider a relative vehicle height of 14 feet. Proper planning and adherence to safety 

regulations would ensure that no significant adverse impacts to safety as a result of the collection system 

occur. 

Safety Issues Related to Increased Traffic during Construction 

Motor vehicle traffic near the project area would temporarily increase during the construction phase as 

contractors working in the area establish the new power generation system. Traffic management and 

control of the local roadways would be considered in the forward planning and implementation of the 

Proposed Action. With these measures, the potential for a traffic fatality is low; consequently, an increase 

in risk to local residents or an increase in injuries and fatalities related to traffic is not anticipated. 

In summary, with consideration during siting of the Proposed Action (avoidance), and implementation of 

proper mitigations as required by Western’s construction standards, OSHA, and other regulatory 

agencies, there would be no significant impacts to human safety and health resulting from the Proposed 

Action. 
3-44 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

Cultural resources include archaeological and historical sites, buildings, structures, and objects of historic, 

scientific, social value, or places of spiritual and cultural significance. The primary legislation that 

mandates Federal management and protection of cultural resources is the National Historic Preservation 

Act (NHPA) of 1966 (as amended in 1976, 1980, and 1992), specifically Section 106 of the act. For the 

purpose of 106 compliance, properties are considered significant if they meet the criteria for listing on the 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) (36 CFR part 60). Western is responsible for Section 106 

consultation with the NDSHPO and interested public and tribes. 

Cultural Background 

The cultural history, from an archaeological perspective, of the region surrounding the project area 

extends back approximately 12,000 years. A prehistoric and protohistoric summary of the area follows: 

Paleo-Indian Tradition (ca. 9500 – 5500 BC) – This is the earliest convincingly documented period of 

human occupation in North America. Known Paleo-Indian materials in the region consist primarily of 

surface finds of dateable artifacts such as projectile points (State Historical Society of North Dakota 

1990). 

Plains Archaic Tradition (ca. 550 BC – AD 1700) – This tradition is marked by a shift in overall 

subsistence strategies, increased diversity, and regionalization of projectile point styles. Cultural 

materials and sites from this period are quite common within the James River Study Unit (State Historical 

Society of North Dakota 1990). 

Plains Village Tradition (ca. AD 1000 – 1780) – This tradition is marked by a subsistence strategy using 

both hunting and gathering and small-scale, primarily corn-based agriculture. 

Equestrian Nomadic Tradition (ca. post-1720) – This tradition is marked by the introduction of horses 

and goods of European manufacture to indigenous cultural groups. Commonly termed the “protohistoric” 

period, this is the period when native peoples began to come under the influence of European culture 

without necessarily coming into direct contact with Europeans. 

Like most other places in the interior of North America, the earliest historic activity (marked by direct 

contact between Native Americans and Europeans) in North Dakota was connected with the fur trade. A 

partial list of Native American tribes known or suspected to have inhabited the general area in 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-45 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

protohistoric or historic times would include: the Nakota (Yankton and Yanktonai, or Middle Sioux), 

Lakota (Teton or Western Sioux), Dakota (Santee, Woodland, or Eastern Sioux), Cheyenne, Hidatsa, 

Assiniboine, Mandan, Arikara, Plains Ojibwa, and Crow (State Historical Society of North Dakota 1990; 

Wilkins and Wilkins 1977; Lowie 1963). 

Existing Environment 

Metcalf Archaeological Consultants were contracted to conduct a Class III cultural resource inventory for 

the Proposed Action (Stine, 2005). The investigation involved an inventory of all proposed facilities 

associated with the initial phase of the Proposed Action, including the initial 33 turbines and associated 

collection lines, the collection substation, the new 230-kV transmission line, the temporary tap, the 

switching station for Option C and portions of options A and B, and access roads to serve all these 

facilities. 

The expansion turbines and associated access roads and collection lines, as well as remaining portions of 

the switching station options A and B, have not yet been inventoried. Class III surveys and consultation 

would be completed prior to conducting any ground-disturbing activities for these additional areas. 

The results of the inventory for the initial phase noted above revealed three prehistoric sites, three isolated 

finds and one historic site within the project area. The prehistoric sites and isolated finds were sparse 

lithic scatters. The prehistoric sites have not been formally evaluated for NRHP eligibility; however, 

given their sparse nature, none of the sites are likely eligible (Stine 2005). 

The only historic site within the survey area is an active railroad (32BL541) that was formerly part of the 

Soo Line built in the early 1900s. The site was recorded by L. Hafermehl in 2004 and is part of Dakota, 

Missouri Valley and Western Railroad, Inc. The site was recommended as not eligible for the NRHP. 

Environmental Consequences 

A significant impact to cultural resources would occur if a site of archaeological, tribal, or historical value 

that is listed, or eligible for listing, by the National Register could not be avoided or mitigated during 

siting or construction of the Proposed Action. 

Upon completion of the cultural resource inventory for the initial phase, it was determined that two of the 

proposed turbine sites may potentially disturb two of the prehistoric lithic scatter sites. As a result of 

these findings, these proposed turbine sites have been relocated to avoid these sites. Consultation with 

NDSHPO and interested tribes supported this concept. Additional Class III cultural inventories and 
3-46 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

consultation would be completed prior to the second phase of the Proposed Action. Turbines, collection 

lines, roads, and the permanent substation location would be designed and sited to avoid cultural 

resources. 

As discussed in Chapter 2, gravel would be used for upgrading and developing roads in the project area. 

The gravel used for the Proposed Action would come from gravel pits that have already been investigated 

and cleared by the NDSHPO. If a gravel pit were to be used that has not been cleared by NDSHPO, that 

site would be inventoried and NDSHPO and interested public and tribes would be consulted prior to its 

use. The same would be true of any soils required for fill at any facility location associated with the 

Proposed Action. 

Additional mitigation, if required, would be developed in consultation with the NDSHPO and other 

interested parties and may include treatment of all known sites, those discovered during pre-construction 

surveys and those discovered during construction or maintenance activities. If historic or prehistoric 

materials are discovered during monitoring of earth-disturbing construction activities, construction would 

be halted and Western would be notified in order to initiate procedures outlined in 36 CFR Part 800. 

These procedures would include evaluating the find for eligibility and determining appropriate treatment 

with the NDSHPO and the North Dakota Intertribal Reinternment Committee (NDIRC). 

NATIVE AMERICAN RELIGIOUS CONCERNS 

In addition to NEPA, NHPA, and DOE American Indian and Alaska Native tribal consultation policy 

(DOE 2000), other regulations that pertain to consideration of Native American religious concerns 

include the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) and the Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). AIRFA provides that agencies consider the effects of their 

actions on Native American religious practices. NAGPRA provides that if native human remains, 

funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony are found on Federal land, the Federal 

agency (Western) is responsible for disposition of these remains and objects. This can include tribal 

consultation to identify potential affiliation and repatriation needs. NHPA, AIRFA, and NAGPRA all 

mandate consultation with affected native groups. 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-47 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Existing Environment 

Research of cultural resources (discussed in greater detail in the Cultural Resources section) indicates that 

Native Americans who inhabited the region throughout prehistoric and historic times typified the culture 

of the North American Plains Indians. Subsistence was focused on hunting, gathering, and small-scale 

agriculture. However, Native American hunting parties likely frequented uplands including the site of the 

proposed Burleigh County Wind Energy Center. 

Metis Cultural Resource Consultants conducted a survey of traditional cultural properties within the 

immediate vicinity of both phases of the Proposed Action (Ferris and Nadeau 2005). This survey was 

conducted to identify the existence of traditional cultural properties within the project area that would be 

directly impacted by project implementation and in locations within the area of potential effect (APE) that 

may be secondarily affected (i.e. viewshed, changing land use, etc.). The results of this survey identified 

several stone circles and rock cairns, including potential burial sites. The report recommended avoidance 

of these sites. 

In addition, consultation has been initiated with the NDIRC, which represents collective tribal interests in 

North Dakota on issues related to sacred sites (State Historical Society of North Dakota 1990). This 

consultation would be ongoing throughout planning and construction of the Proposed Action, including 

addressing comments to the EA and meeting with tribes. 

Environmental Consequences 

A significant impact would occur if the Proposed Action caused an unmitigated, adverse effect to a 

traditional cultural property (TCP) or a burial site. Western entered into a Memorandum of Agreement 

(MOA) with the NDIRC during 1996 to ensure that provisions of NAGPRA are addressed on lands 

owned and/or managed by Western. To mitigate the potential for significant effects from activities 

associated with the Proposed Action, Western would address any concerns expressed by the NDIRC 

during the course of Proposed Action planning and construction in accordance with the terms of the 

MOA. 

Siting and construction of the Proposed Action would be subject to the following North Dakota laws: 

Protection of Human Burial Sites, Human Remains and Burial Goods (ND Century Code §23-06-27) and 

Protection of Prehistoric Sites and Deposits (ND Century Code §55-03, et seq.). As a result, Western 

would notify the appropriate individuals, agencies, and authorities in accordance with these laws and the 
3-48 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

NDIRC MOA in the event that important cultural or historic resources are discovered during inventories 

or construction associated with the Proposed Action. 

TCPs were identified within the survey area. Project planning, however, has and would continue to 

consider and avoid these sites. If burials or cultural sites with Native American religious values are 

identified during construction of the Proposed Action, work would halt within 200 feet of the site until 

Native Americans are notified and consulted about mitigation measures. 

Consultations between Western and interested tribes would continue and recommendations resulting from 

these consultations would be considered and implemented to the extent practicable. Burleigh County 

Wind, in cooperation with Native American representatives and agreements with landowners, would also 

implement additional measures and agreements to protect these resources. 

NO ACTION 

Under the no action alternative, no aspect of the project would be built. Western would continue to 

operate and maintain the Garrison to Bismarck Transmission Line and associated facilities. 

As a result, environmental impacts from construction and maintenance associated with the Proposed 

Action would not occur. Most environmental conditions, as described in the Affected Environment, 

would be expected to persist in their existing dynamic state. The need for renewable energy would not be 

satisfied in part by construction of the project. 

CUMULATIVE EFFECTS 

Cumulative effects would result from impacts of the proposed Burleigh County Wind Energy Center 

when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions occurring in the region. 

Significant cumulative impacts would result if impacts from the Proposed Action, when added to other 

actions in the region, resulted in one or more significant impacts as defined for each resource area 

analyzed in this chapter. 
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3-49 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

PAST AND PRESENT 

Agriculture practices; vehicle travel along township, county, state, and Federal roadways; railroad 

operation and use; and operation of existing electrical transmission lines are the primary activities that 

have occurred and are occurring in the project area and generally in the region. The cumulative effects of 

the proposed Burleigh County Wind Energy Center would be to wildlife when added to these past and 

present activities. 

Impacts to wildlife caused by implementing the Proposed Action would be the direct mortality of avian 

species, including waterfowl, upland birds, and raptors, from collisions with wind turbines or 

transmission lines. This anticipated increase in avian mortality would be additive to existing causes of 

impacts to wildlife from the aforementioned activities (i.e., human disturbance, vehicle collisions, and 

transmission line collisions and electrocutions), as well as natural predation, disease, and hunting. 

Although few data exist regarding wind generation project-caused wildlife mortality, Western expects 

that cumulative effects of the proposed Burleigh County Wind Energy Center and existing conditions 

would have little effect on wildlife populations in the area. Therefore, no significant cumulative impacts 

for wildlife would occur. 

REASONABLY FORSEEABLE FUTURE ACTION 

No reasonably foreseeable development scenario has been identified at this time. The potential for 

additional wind energy development does remain in the area; however, there are no known projects 

planned by Burleigh County Wind or others in the immediate area. 
Agencies Contacted/Consulted 4-1 

CHAPTER 4 

AGENCIES CONTACTED/CONSULTED 

FEDERAL AGENCIES 

Federal Aviation Administration 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

U.S. Department of Agriculture – Farm Service Agency 

U.S. Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Conservation Service 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES 

Burleigh County Board of County Commissioners 

Burleigh County, Ecklund, and Ghylin Township Boards 

North Dakota Aeronautics Commission 

North Dakota Department of Health, Division of Air Quality 

North Dakota Department of Health, Division of Water Quality 

North Dakota Department of Transportation 

North Dakota Indian Affairs Commission 

North Dakota Parks and Recreation Department 

North Dakota Public Service Commission 

North Dakota State Historic Preservation Office 

North Dakota State Land Department 

North Dakota State Water Commission 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 
4-2 Agencies Contacted/Consulted 

NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES AND RELATED BODIES 

Northern Cheyenne Tribe 

North Dakota Intertribal Reinternment Committee 

Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate 

Spirit Lake Nation 

Standing Rock Sioux Tribe 

Three Affiliated Tribes 

Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 
References 5-1 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

CHAPTER 5

REFERENCES 

APLIC (Avian Power Line Interaction Committee). 1994. Mitigating bird collisions with power lines: the 

state of the art for 1994. Waldorf, Maryland. Accessed online at: www.eei.org.

APLIC. 1996. Suggested practices for raptor protection of power lines: the state of the art for 1996. 

Avian Power Line Interaction Committee, Waldorf, Maryland. Accessed online at: www.eei.org.

APLIC and USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2005. Avian Protection Plan Guidelines. April. 

Bluemle, J.P. 1973. Guide to the geology of South-Central North Dakota. North Dakota Geological 

Survey, Educational Series 6, Bismarck, North Dakota. 

Bluemle, J.P. 1991. The face of North Dakota (Revised Edition). North Dakota Geological Survey, 

Educational Series 21, Bismarck, North Dakota. 

Bluemle, J.P. 1992. Oil exploration and development in the North Dakota Williston Basin: 1990 – 1991 

Update. North Dakota Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Series 77, Bismarck, North Dakota. 

California Department of Health Services. No date. An evaluation of the possible risks from electric and 

magnetic fields from poser lines, internal wiring and electrical occupations and appliances. 

Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and 

deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Washington, D.C. 

Crowder, M.R. 2000. Assessment of devices designed to lower the incidence of avian power line strikes. 

M.S. Thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana. 115p. 

Ellsworth, T. 2005. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Bismarck, North Dakota, Personal 

communication during Agency Consultation Meeting, March 7, 2005. 

Ellsworth, T. 2005. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Bismarck, North Dakota, Telephone 

conversation with Judd Stark (Tetra Tech, Inc.), August 17, 2005. 

Faanes, C.A. and R.E. Stewart. 1986. Revised checklist of North Dakota Birds. The Prairie Naturalist 

14(3):81-92. 
5-2 References 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

Ferris. K and B. Nadeau. 2005. A reconnaissance survey for traditional cultural properties at the Wilton 

Wind Farm Project, Burleigh County, North Dakota. Metis Cultural Resource Consultants. 

Grondal, C. No date. Small mammals of North Dakota. North Dakota Game and Fish Department, 

Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Bismarck, North Dakota. Accessed online at: 

www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/dist/mammals. 

Hoberg, T. and C. Gause. 1992. Reptiles and amphibians of North Dakota. North Dakota Outdoors 

55(1):7-19. 

Johnson, G.D., W.P. Erickson, M.D. Strickland, M.F. Shepard, D.A. Shepard, and S.A. Sarappo. 2002. 

Collision mortality of local and migratory birds at a large-scale windpower development on 

Buffalo Ridge, Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:879-887. 

Kantrud, H.A. and R.L. Kologiski. 1982. Ordination and classification of North Dakota grasslands. 

Proceedings of the North Dakota Academy of Science 36:35. 

Kuchler, A.W. 1964. Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous United States. American 

Geographical Society, Special Publication No. 36, New York, New York. 

Kume, J. and D.E. Hansen. 1965. Geology and groundwater resources of Burleigh, North Dakota. North 

Dakota Geological Survey, Bulletin 42, Grand Forks, North Dakota. 

Lowie, R.H. 1963. Indians of the Plains. Natural History Press. Garden City, New York. 

Murphy, E. 2005. North Dakota Geological Survey. Personal Communication. June 20, 2005. 

NWCC (National Wind Coordinating Committee). 2004. Wind turbine interactions with birds and bats: 

a summary of research, results and remaining questions. November. 

NatureServe. 2005. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 4.5. 

NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Accessed online at: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. July 

15, 2005. 

Nelson, H.K. and R.C. Curry. 1995. Assessing avian interactions with windplant development and 

operation. Transactions of the North American Wildlife Conference, 60:226-287. 

NDDoC (North Dakota Department of Commerce). 2005. Letter from Paul T. Govig (NDDOC) to 

Matthew Kearns (Tetra Tech EC). July 7. 

NDDoH (North Dakota Department of Health). 1987. Ambient air quality standards. Chapter 33-15-02. 

North Dakota Dept. of Health, Air Quality Program. 
References 5-3 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

NDGFD (North Dakota Game and Fish Department). 2004. North Dakota’s 100 species of conservation 

priority. North Dakota Outdoors. July. 

North Dakota State Water Commission. 2005. Data resources. Accessed online on June 21, 2005 at: 

www.swc.state.nd.us/4DLink2/4dcgi/getwell/41171.14191. 

Northwest Area Foundation. 2005. Indicator Web site: queries of Burleigh County and State of North 

Dakota. Accessed online at: http://www.indicators.nwaf.org/. 

Novitzki, R.D., Smith, and J.D. Frewell. 1999. Wetlands, function, values and assessments. In: National 

Water Summary on Wetland Resources. USGS Water Supply Paper 2425. Accessed online at: 

http://water.usgs.gov/nwsum/WSP2425. 

Ogart, L. 2005. North Dakota Public Service Commission. Personal Communication. June 16, 2005. 

Osborn, R.G., K.F. Higgins, R.E. Usgaard, and C.D. Dieter. 2000. Bird mortality associated with wind 

turbines at the Buffalo Ridge Wind Resource Area, Minnesota. American Midland Naturalist, 

143:41-52. 

State Historical Society of North Dakota. 1990. The North Dakota comprehensive plan for historic 

preservation: archaeological component. Archaeology and Historic Preservation Division, State 

Historical Society of North Dakota, Bismarck, North Dakota. 

Stewart, R.E. 1975. Breeding birds of North Dakota. Tri-College Center for Environmental Studies, 

Fargo, North Dakota. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. Accessed online at: 

www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/distr/birds/bb_of_nd/bb_of_nd.htm. 

Stine, Ed. 2005. Burleigh County wind energy center: a Class III cultural resource inventory in Burleigh 

County, North Dakota. Unpublished report prepared by Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 

June. 

Tetra Tech, Inc. 2005. Biological resource report. Burleigh County Wind Energy Center. Tetra Tech 

division Maxim Technologies. Billings, Montana. July. 

Towner, J.K. 2005. Letter from J.K. Towner (USFWS, Bismarck, North Dakota) to Judd Stark (Maxim 

Technologies), April 6. 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 2000. American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Government Policy. 

Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs. Washington, D.C. October. 
5-4 References 

Burleigh County Wind Energy Center Environmental Assessment 

U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. United States Census 2000. Accessed online on June 21, 2005 at: 

http://www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html. 

U.S. Census Bureau. 2003. American fact finder: population estimate for Bismarck city, North Dakota. 

Accessed online on June 28, 2005 at: 

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFPopulation?_event=Search&go_id=16000US38. 

U.S. Census Bureau. 2004. State and county quick facts. Last revised July 09, 2004. Accessed online 

at: http://www.quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/38/38015.html 

U.S. Census Bureau. 2005a. North Dakota quick facts: Burleigh County, North Dakota. Accessed 

online on June 21, 2005 at: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/38/38015.html. 

U.S. Census Bureau. 2005b. North Dakota quick facts: North Dakota. Accessed online on June 21, 2005 

at: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/38000.html. 

USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 1974. Soil survey of Burleigh County, North Dakota. 

USDA. 2005. Programmatic environmental assessment for implementation of the conservation reserve 

enhancement program agreement for North Dakota. Farm Service Agency, Washington, DC. 

March. 

USEPA. 1978. Protective Noise Levels (Condensed Version of EPS Levels Document), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency. November. (PB82-138827). 

USFWS. 1970. Final rule to list the whooping crane as an endangered species. Fed. Reg. 34:8495. 

UWFWS. 1995. North Dakota's Federally-Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species - 

1995. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bismarck, ND. 42pp. USGS (U.S. Geologic Survey). 

1996. Ground water atlas of the United States. Segment 8. Reston, Virginia. 

Western (Western Area Power Administration). 2001. Construction Standard 13, Environmental Quality 

Protection. 

Western. 2003. Environmental assessment wind energy center Edgely Kulm project, North Dakota. 

DOE/EA-1465. Accessed online at: www.wapa.gov/interconn/intedg.htm April. 

Wilkins, R.P. and W.H. Wilkins. 1977. North Dakota: a bicentennial history. W.W. Norton and Co, 

Inc., New York and the American Association for State and Local History, Nashville, Tennessee.