AltaLink Management Ltd.

Transcription

1 Decision D Red Deer Area Transmission Development Amendment Application June 8, 2017

2 Decision D Red Deer Area Transmission Development Amendment Application Proceeding Applications A001 and A002 June 8, 2017 Published by the: Fifth Avenue Place, Fourth Floor, 425 First Street S.W. Calgary, Alberta T2P 3L8 Telephone: Fax: Website:

3 Calgary, Alberta Decision D Red Deer Area Transmission Development Proceeding Amendment Application Applications A001 and A002 1 Decision summary 1. In this decision, the must decide whether to approve applications from (AltaLink) to amend the approved route of transmission lines 419L and 420L. After consideration of the record of the proceeding, and for the reasons outlined in this decision, the Commission finds that approval of the amendment is in the public interest, having regard to the social, economic and other effects of the amendment, including its effect on the environment. 2 Introduction and background 2. In Decision , the Commission granted approvals to AltaLink to construct and operate the Red Deer Area Transmission Development (RDATD). 1 AltaLink filed a letter of enquiry application with the on September 26, 2016, seeking the following amendments to those approvals: Application A001: a) to alter the route of transmission line 419L within the southwest quarter of Section 31, Township 35, Range 27, west of the Fourth Meridian, near the Hazelwood 287S Substation b) to alter the route of transmission line 419L near Range Road 283 Application A002: a) to alter the route of transmission line 420L within the southwest quarter of Section 31, Township 35, Range 27, west of the Fourth Meridian, near the Hazelwood 287S Substation b) to alter the route of transmission line 420L near Range Road 283 Application A003: to decommission and salvage an additional 700-metre portion of transmission line 80L near the Innisfail 214S Substation Application A004: to alter the access road to Hazelwood 287S Substation to be north of transmission lines 419L and 420L 1 Decision : Red Deer Area Transmission Development, Proceeding 2669, Application , July 29, Decision D (June 8, 2017) 1

4 Red Deer Area Transmission Development Amendment Application 3. The applications were filed pursuant to Section 11 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Regulation. 4. On October 13, 2016, a group of interveners known as the Antler Hill Group submitted a statement of intent to participate outlining concerns with respect to Application A001, Part b) and Application A002, Part b). 5. The Commission issued notices of application for Proceeding on October 27, 2016 and on January 12, The notices were sent directly to landowners, companies and agencies within 800-metres of the project and published on the AUC website. The notices were also published on the Commission s efiling System and notification was automatically ed to efiling System users who had chosen to be notified of notices of application issued by the Commission. 6. On March 9, 2017, the Commission granted standing to the Antler Hill Group on the basis that its members had rights that may be directly and adversely affected by the proposed amendments to the route of transmission lines 419L and 420L along Range Road On March 21, 2017, AltaLink wrote to the Commission and requested approvals for the portions of the applications that the Antler Hill group was not objecting to. The Antler Hill Group did not object to that request. 8. On April 24, 2017, the Commission issued Decision D and approved the uncontested portions of the applications. Subsequently, the Commission decided to proceed by way of oral hearing and issued a notice of hearing for Application A001, Part b) and Application A002, Part b) on April 24, On May 16, 2017, the Antler Hill Group and AltaLink advised the Commission that they had come to an agreement that AltaLink would construct Route Option 2 for transmission lines 419L and 420L along Range Road 283. AltaLink stated that there were now no outstanding concerns with the proposed amendments and requested that the Commission approve Route Option 2 for transmission lines 419L and 420L. Because there were no other outstanding objections to the applications the Commission issued a notice of hearing cancellation on May 18, Discussion 10. Pursuant to permits and licences D and D , 3 AltaLink has approval to construct and operate transmission lines 419L and 420L. 11. AltaLink proposed to shift the approved alignment of transmission lines 419L and 420L approximately six metres west, within the road allowance of Range Road 283 as identified as Route Option 2 in its applications. AltaLink also analyzed other route options, including the originally approved route and a route on the opposite side of Range Road Transmission Line Permit and Licence D , Proceeding 22580, Application A003, May 5, Transmission Line Permit and Licence D , Proceeding 22580, Application A004, May 5, Decision D (June 8, 2017)

5 Red Deer Area Transmission Development Amendment Application 12. AltaLink stated Route Option 2 would have the lowest overall impacts associated with Waskasoo Creek, would cross one wetland as opposed to two wetlands and would minimize tree clearing when compared with the other route options. AltaLink indicated that Route Option 2 would also likely not require relocating the transmission lines to accommodate future road development of Range Road 283. Additionally, AltaLink indicated that Route Option 2 would have lower costs than the other route options and that the majority of the necessary tree clearing has already been completed. 13. AltaLink stated that Alberta Environment and Parks had no concerns with the proposed project. AltaLink requested CH2M Hill Energy Canada, Ltd. (CH2M), the environmental consultant that assisted with AltaLink s environmental evaluation of the RDATD project, to review the amendments. CH2M stated that all route options would be environmentally satisfactory if AltaLink applies the mitigations recommended within the environmental specification and requirements and the mitigation suggestions by CH2M, and if AltaLink consults with the appropriate environmental regulators. CH2M concluded that Route Option 2 would have the least potential for environmental impacts. AltaLink does not expect the project to result in any additional environmental impacts. 14. AltaLink submitted that the Historical Resources Act approval for the project was received from Alberta Culture and Tourism on July 29, AltaLink indicated that the overall cost of the project is expected to be within the range of the cost estimate filed for the RDATD. 4 Findings 16. The Commission is satisfied that the application meets the information and public involvement requirements stipulated in Rule 007: Applications for Power Plants, Substations, Transmission Lines, Industrial System Designations and Hydro Developments. The Commission observes, in that respect, that AltaLink addressed all outstanding public concerns with respect to its proposed amendments. 17. The Commission also finds that there are no outstanding technical, environmental or noise concerns associated with the project. The Commission acknowledges that the amendments to the project would result in less tree clearing and accepts AltaLink s assertion that it does not expect the project to result in any additional environmental impacts. Given that no additional noise producing equipment will be installed as part of the project, the Commission is also satisfied that the project meets the requirements of Rule 012: Noise Control. 18. Based upon the information provided, AltaLink has demonstrated that the proposal is of a minor nature, no other person is directly and adversely affected by the proposal and no additional adverse environmental impact will be caused by the proposed alteration, thereby meeting the requirements of Section 11 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Regulation. 19. Given the considerations discussed above, the Commission finds that approval of the project is in the public interest pursuant to Section 17 of the Act. Decision D (June 8, 2017) 3

6 Red Deer Area Transmission Development Amendment Application 5 Decision 20. Pursuant to sections 14, 15, and 19 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Act and sections 11 and 12 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Regulation, the Commission approves applications A001 and A Due to the minor nature of the applications, no amendments are required to permits and licences D and D Dated on June 8, (original signed by) Neil Jamieson Commission Member 4 Decision D (June 8, 2017)