Docstoc

Environmental Data Task Force SOW

Document Sample
Environmental Data Task Force SOW Powered By Docstoc
					 1                                                                                                                       SCOPE OF WORK
 2                                FOR SPSG ENVIRONMENTAL DATA TASK FORCE
 3                                                                                                                                                Version 1.1

 4                                                                                                                              November 17, 2010
 5                                                               Revisions based on discussions at November 8, 2010 SPSG Meeting


 6   CONTENTS
 7   Context .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
 8   Goals ............................................................................................................................................................. 1
 9   Benefits ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
10   Short-Term Tasks .......................................................................................................................................... 2
11   Short-Term Deliverables ............................................................................................................................... 3
12   Long-Term Tasks ........................................................................................................................................... 3
13   Key Considerations for EDTF Tasks ............................................................................................................... 4
14   Supporting Information ................................................................................................................................ 4
15


16   CONTEXT
17   The EDTF was formed by the Scenario Planning Steering Group (SPSG) in June 2010 (with membership
18   approved in September 2010) to develop recommendations on the type, quality, and sources of data on
19   land, wildlife, cultural, historical, archaeological, and water resources (in coordination with work
20   conducted via the State-Provincial Steering Committee), exploring ways to transform that data into
21   study cases and into the models. The EDTF will not create or analyze data; the EDTF will coordinate with
22   appropriate entities to acquire data and will use WECC and SPSG technical support contractors to
23   analyze data, as appropriate.

24   The EDTF, as a task force designated by the SPSG, provides recommendations to the SPSG for the SPSG’s
25   review and consideration. The EDTF has a diverse membership including both SPSG and non-SPSG
26   members.


27   GOALS
28         1.) Develop recommendations for a methodology to incorporate information on land, wildlife,
29             cultural, historical, archaeological, and water resources (in coordination with work conducted
                                                                                EDTF Scope of Work Version 1.1


 1           via the State-Provincial Steering Committee) into the transmission planning process (scenario
 2           development, transmission study planning and development of the 10-Year Regional
 3           Transmission Plan and the 20-Year Regional Transmission Target Plan).

 4       2.) Use information about environmental and other sensitivities to compare performance of
 5           regional transmission planning options to facilitate planning and decision making.


 6   BENEFITS
 7   Achieving the goals listed above will:

 8          Produce improved regional transmission planning that reflects more than reliability and cost by
 9           incorporating environmental and other resources including traditional and cultural uses;

10          Increase the likelihood of achieving public and political support for transmission plans identified
11           through this regional transmission planning process;

12          Save time and money by precluding some of the challenges with transmission development that
13           might occur in the absence of transmission plans that incorporate environmental attributes;

14          Serve as a model for subregional and state planning efforts; and

15          Produce the best basis for transmission planning possible given the tools and information
16           available.


17   SHORT-TERM TASKS
18       1.) Pursue a case study of applying existing environmental data to the current TEPPC Study
19           Program. Initial steps would be to:

20               a. Develop an “environmental/other resource screen case study” that cross-references a
21                  list of environmental and other resources including traditional and cultural uses
22                  developed by the EDTF with a sample set of known generation and associated
23                  transmission projects.

24                        i. Develop a list of environmental and other resources including traditional and
25                           cultural uses and corresponding datasets (in coordination with existing efforts
26                           and datasets) using examples from other similar efforts (e.g. RETI, WREZ, and
27                           others);

28                        ii. Select lines to apply environmental and other resources including traditional
29                            and cultural uses.

30               b. Once the environmental/other resource screen case study is conducted, analyze results
31                  and develop recommendations for Phase II, including considerations for EDTF


                                                    Page 2 of 7                                     11-17-2010
                                                                           EDTF Scope of Work Version 1.1


 1                 recommendations to the SPSG to include in the 2011 10-Year Regional Transmission
 2                 Plan.

 3                     i. Develop lessons learned from applying the “screen” to known projects,
 4                        including determining the sensitivities of the screen.

 5     2.) In support of Long-Term Task #1, develop a screening methodology for the 20-year Regional
 6         Transmission Plan, including a list of known environmental and other resources including
 7         traditional and cultural uses data available now, and to be available, and by when.

 8     3.) Enlist assistance of technical support to develop a work plan to:

 9             a. Collect and document all relevant environmental and other resources including
10                traditional and cultural uses data (see considerations, below, on incorporating data) and
11                know how and when to apply them;

12             b. Develop a methodology for capturing environmental and other resources including
13                traditional and cultural uses considerations into WECC’s 20-Year Regional Transmission
14                Target Plan model.


15   SHORT-TERM DELIVERABLES
16     1.) List of environmental and other resources including traditional and cultural uses and available
17         data (Timing: November 2010)

18     2.) Work plan for data collection (Timing: November-December 2010)

19     3.) Results from environmental and other resource screen case study (Timing: January 2011)

20     4.) Lessons learned from environmental/other resource screen case study, to be incorporated into
21         the first 10-Year Regional Transmission Plan (Timing: January-February 2011)

22     5.) Environmental and other resource screen methodology for the 20-Year Regional Transmission
23         Target Plan (Timing: Spring 2011)


24   LONG-TERM TASKS
25     1.) Apply lessons learned from the case study to the 20-year planning process and to subsequent
26         10-year planning efforts. Use the lessons learned to form recommendations that inform the
27         long-term process. Create a methodology to incorporate environmental/other resources
28         including traditional and cultural uses data into 20-year model runs, ensuring continual,
29         effective integration with WECC and TEPPC activities and methodologies.

30     2.) Refine the list of identified data sources and approaches as new and improved data and
31         approaches become available.



                                                 Page 3 of 7                                   11-17-2010
                                                                             EDTF Scope of Work Version 1.1


 1          Note: Long-term deliverables and their associated timing will be determined at a later date.


 2   KEY CONSIDERATIONS FOR EDTF TASKS
 3      1.) Data are available in different qualities and at different scales; the challenges will be to make
 4          the available data uniform enough to apply them to the entire Western Interconnection and to
 5          identify and determine how to handle data gaps. The EDTF will need to discuss and concur on
 6          scales that are appropriate for regional transmission planning, and should look for lessons
 7          learned from the application of data at difference scales.
 8      2.) The EDTF should identify a process for identifying and incorporating updated information as it
 9          becomes available.

10      3.) The EDTF should identify opportunities for meaningful participation from a broader group of
11          stakeholders.

12      4.) The EDTF will need to work closely with WECC to ensure that data can be incorporated into
13          existing models, and that it is provided in a manner and at a time that it can fit within the
14          Regional Transmission Expansion Planning (RTEP) project. The EDTF should get a clear
15          understanding of the WECC modeling process before undertaking activities. Additionally, the
16          EDTF should work with WECC to prepare for future modeling work that may include geospatial
17          capacity.

18      5.) The EDTF should partner with appropriate organizations that have relevant products and
19          processes, to avoid duplicating efforts.

20      6.) The EDTF should develop a classification for protected and priority conservation sites relevant
21          for energy development activities, and should consider whether irrigated agricultural land
22          should be included in the EDTF data sets. The EDTF should also develop a common
23          understanding of the terms “data,” “inventory,” and “transects.”

24      7.) The EDTF should ensure that its activities and products are transparent, available, and easily
25          interpretable for stakeholders not directly involved with the EDTF.

26      8.) The EDTF may need to discuss how to incorporate wild lands and wildlife data distinct from
27          water because those data have a different relation to transmission; a separate discussion may
28          be needed for resource selection (if the EDTF addresses this).

29      9.) The EDTF should explore climate change impacts of transmission. Exploring the impacts on
30          water can be an example or a variable to consider when studying the effects of climate change.


31   SUPPORTING INFORMATION
32   Draft Data Collection Process (to be edited/refined by EDTF members and technical support):



                                                   Page 4 of 7                                     11-17-2010
                                                                             EDTF Scope of Work Version 1.1


 1         Generate a draft list (to be added to by the technical guidance contractor) of available landscape
 2          scale, geospatial data sources for the west that are well documented for land, wildlife, cultural,
 3          historical, archaeological, and water resources (in coordination with work conducted by the
 4          State-Provincial Steering Committee) potentially useful for the scenario plan analyses.

 5         Categorize each by type of data (wildlife, etc.), availability (now or future), geographic scope
 6          (should include all or a significant part of the western interconnect), and cost (if any).

 7         Classify resource types based on simple categories of development, such as:

 8              o   being totally off limits (exclusion areas) or

 9              o   potentially accessible and further divided among two or three categories based on the
10                  relative expense of avoidance, restoration, and/or mitigation costs (high, medium, low).
11                  This could be similar to what is being used by BLM for the SunZia transmission line in
12                  southern NM and AZ.

13          Additionally, classify data as to the phase of planning, design, or permitting for which the data
14          would be most applicable.

15         Methodology should be determined for establishing costs associated with avoidance,
16          restoration, and mitigation cost categories. Such methodology could be based on data derived
17          from actual projects already completed or in construction. Costs should additionally reflect
18          engineering costs and the long-term cost ramifications of engineering design.

19   Additional Data Considerations

20         Avoidance, restoration and mitigation costs categories could be based on data derived from
21          actual projects already completed or in construction. For instance, what might the additional
22          costs be if a line:

23              o   Were rerouted to avoid a large wetland associated with an endangered salamander,
24                  compared to the cost of a more direct route.

25              o   Were buried beneath a flight corridor of large colony of birds or adjacent to a military
26                  establishment.

27              o   Needed to cross BLM land known for its biodiversity (but had no endangered species)
28                  and the land impacted (directly and indirectly) had to be protected through acquisitions
29                  elsewhere.

30              o   Crossed BLM land harboring a candidate species under the federal ESA and the impact
31                  had to be mitigated according to US Fish and Wildlife Service guidance.




                                                     Page 5 of 7                                  11-17-2010
                                                                               EDTF Scope of Work Version 1.1


 1      These mitigation costs could be expressed in percent increases over what the costs would have
 2       been absent the constraint. For example, one could designate a 25% increase as “low,” a 75%
 3       increase as “medium,” and an increase of 125% or more as “high.”

 4      Initially, the EDTF could use existing digitized maps produced through the WREZ, one of the
 5       national labs, state wildlife agency, or a non-governmental organization (see potential list
 6       below).

 7      The EDTF could include geographically-specific drought scenario data in the 20-year analysis.
 8       The drought scenarios could potentially be determined for each watershed but this will require
 9       more thought and coordination, especially with WGA.

10      The scale for information will likely be variable at first, starting as coarse grained and becoming
11       finer grained over time.

12      Data should be able to be updated at least every two years as increasingly refined data become
13       available. In partnership with relevant organizations and efforts, the EDTF should maintain
14       dynamic links to the relevant data sources and a model for applying the categories dynamically.

15      Each data set should describe the location of source and include contact info.

16      Potential, but not all inclusive sources and types of data include:

17          Nature Serve biodiversity data prioritized by level of endangerment

18          Protected areas data produced during the WREZ, potentially updated with data from the
19           Protected Area Database or other sources
20          State Wildlife Agency data such as in the Decision Support Systems they are developing
21           (Montana's DSS system is ready and available)
22          Wildlife corridor data such as those provided by partners of the Spine of the Continent
23           Initiative

24          Conservation easement data
25          Audubon's sage-grouse core area data being compiled
26          Audubon Important Bird Areas
27          California wildlife data used in the CA RETI

28          TNC Ecoregion and Energy By Design data
29          Federal agency data, if appropriate
30          Aesthetic/scenic data
31          Irrigated agricultural land data



                                                 Page 6 of 7                                      11-17-2010
                                             EDTF Scope of Work Version 1.1


1      Recreation land data




                               Page 7 of 7                      11-17-2010

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:14
posted:2/27/2012
language:
pages:7