[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 111 (Friday, June 9, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30511-30514]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-14093]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service


Application Power Company Transmission Line Construction-
Cloverdale, Virginia, to Oceana, West Virginia. Jefferson National 
Forest, Appalachian National Scenic Trail, the New River, and R.D. 
Bailey Lake Flowage Easement Land. Virginia Counties of Botetourt, 
Roanoke, Craig, Montgomery, Pulaski, Bland, and Giles and the West 
Virginia Counties of Monroe, Summers, Mercer, and Wyoming

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Revised Notice--Revises the publication date for the draft and 
final environmental impact statements; changes the length of the 
comment period for the draft environmental impact statement; changes 
the name of the responsible official for the US Army Corps of Engineers 
in West Virginia; changes the name of the responsible official for the 
USDA Forest Service; changes the name of the Jefferson National Forest 
to the George Washington and Jefferson National Forest; adds a new 
responsible official for the US Army Corps of Engineers in Virginia; 
and provides updated information on the federal agencies' analysis.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare a draft and final 
environmental impact statement on a proposed action to authorize the 
Appalachian Power Company to construct a 765,000-volt transmission line 
across approximately twelve miles of the George Washington and 
Jefferson National Forests, as well as portions of the Appalachian 
National Scenic Trail, the New River (at Bluestone Lake) and R.D. 
Bailey Lake Flowage Easement Land (at Guyandotte River).
    The federal agencies identified a study area in which alternatives 
to the proposed action were developed. The study area includes land 
located in the Virginia counties of Botetourt, Roanoke, Craig, 
Montgomery, Pulaski, Bland and Giles and the West Virginia counties of 
Monroe, Summers, Mercer and Wyoming.
    The Appalachian Power Company proposal involves federal land under 
the administrative jurisdiction of the USDA Forest Service (George 
Washington and Jefferson National Forests), the USDI National Park 
Service (Appalachian National Scenic Trail) and the US Army Corps of 
Engineers (New River and R.D. Bailey Lake Flowage Easement Land).
    The Forest Service is the lead agency and is responsible for the 
preparation of the environmental impact statement. The National Park 
Service and the US Army Corps of Engineers are cooperating agencies in 
accordance with 40 CFR 1501.6.
    In initiating and conducting the analysis the federal agencies are 
responding to the requirements of their respective permitting processes 
and the need for the Appalachian Power Company to cross federal lands 
with the proposed transmission line.
    The Forest Service additionally will assess how the proposed 
transmission line conforms to the direction contained in the Jefferson 
National Forest's Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). Changes in 
the LRMP could be required if the transmission line is authorized 
across the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests.
    The total length of the electric transmission line proposed by the 
Appalachian Power Company is approximately 115 miles.
    The Notice of Intent for the proposed action was published in the 
Federal Register on November 21, 1991 (56 FR 58677-58679). The Notice 
was revised on March 13, 1992 (57 FR 8859), April 24, 1992 (57 FR 
15049), June 16, 1993 (58 FR 33248-33250) and June 21, 1994 (59 FR 
31975-31978).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Bergmann, Forest Service Project 
Coordinator, George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, 5162 
Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, Virginia, 24019/(703) 265-6005.

TO PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE FEDERAL AGENCIES: Write to the George 
Washington and Jefferson National Forests, Attn: Transmission Line 
Analysis, 5162 Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, Virginia, 24019.

[[Page 30512]] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Appalachian Power Company 
submitted an application to the Jefferson National Forests (the name 
changed in 1995) for authorization to construct a 765,000-volt electric 
transmission line across approximately twelve miles of the National 
Forest. Portions of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, the New 
River (at Bluestone Lake), and R.D. Bailey Lake Flowage Easement Land 
(at Guyandotte River) would also be crossed by the proposed 
transmission line.
    Studies conducted by the Appalachian Power Company and submitted to 
the Virginia State Corporation Commission, as part of its application 
and approval process, indicate a need to reinforce its extra high 
voltage transmission system by the mid-to-late 1990s in order to 
maintain a reliable power supply for projected demands within its 
service territory in central and western Virginia and southern West 
Virginia.
    A study to evaluate potential route locations for the proposed 
transmission line was prepared for the Appalachian Power Company 
through a contract with Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State 
University (VPI) and West Virginia University (WVU). The information 
gathered by VPI and WVU, along with other information collected during 
the analysis process, will be utilized in the preparation of the 
environmental impact statement. General information about the 
transmission line route proposal is available from the Jefferson 
National Forest.
    The decisions to be made following the environmental analysis are 
whether the Forest Service, the National Park Service, and the US Army 
Corps of Engineers will authorize Appalachian Power Company to cross 
the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, the Appalachian 
National Scenic Trail, and the new River and R.D. Bailey Lake Flowage 
Easement Land, respectively, with the proposed 765,000-volt 
transmission line and, if so, under what conditions a crossing would be 
authorized.
    In preparing the environmental impact statement a range of routing 
alternatives will be considered to meet the purpose and need for the 
proposed action. A no action alternative will also be analyzed. Under 
the no action alternative APCO would not be authorized to cross the 
George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, the Appalachian 
National Scenic Trail, the New River or R.D. Bailey Lake Flowage 
Easement Land. The alternatives developed by VPI and WVU will also be 
considered.
    In July of 1994, the federal agencies identified a number of 
alternatives to the proposed action in the Virginia counties of 
Botetourt, Roanoke, Craig, Montgomery, Pulaski, Bland, and Giles and 
the West Virginia counties of Monroe, Summers, and Mercer.
    The federal analysis will include an analysis of the effects of the 
proposed transmission line along the entire proposed route as well as 
all alternative routes which are considered in detail.
    The significant issues identified for the federal analysis are 
listed below:

--The construction and maintenance of the 765kV transmission line and 
the associated access roads and right-of-way may (1) affect soil 
productivity by increasing soil compaction and erosion; (2) affect 
geologic resources (karst areas, Peters, Lewis, Potts Mountains, 
Arnolds Knob) and unique geologic features like caves through blasting, 
earthmoving or construction machinery operations; and (3) result in 
unstable structural conditions due to the placement of the towers.
--The construction and maintenance of the 765kV transmission line and 
the associated access roads and right-of-way may (1) degrade surface 
and ground water quality due to the application of herbicides; (2) 
degrade surface and ground water quality because of sedimentation 
resulting from soil disturbance and vegetation removal; (3) reduce the 
quantity of ground and spring water due to the disturbance of aquifers 
resulting from blasting, earthmoving or construction machinery 
operation; and (4) adversely affect the commercial use of ground and 
surface waters due to herbicide contamination and sedimentation.
--The construction and maintenance of the 765kV transmission line and 
the associated access roads and right-of-way may affect existing 
cultural resources, and historic structures and districts through the 
direct effects of the construction and maintenance activities and by 
changing the existing resource setting.
--The operation and maintenance of the 765kV transmission line and the 
associated access roads and right-of-way may adversely affect human 
health through (1) direct and indirect exposure to herbicides and (2) 
exposure to electromagnetic fields and induced voltage.
--The construction of the 765kV transmission line may adversely affect 
the safety of those operating aircraft at low altitudes or from 
airports located near the transmission line.
--The operation of the 765kV transmission line may (1) adversely affect 
communications by introducing a source of interference; (2) increase 
noise levels for those in close proximity to the line.
--The construction, operation and maintenance of the 765kV transmission 
line and the associated access roads and right-of-way may (1) adversely 
affect trails (including the Appalachian Trail) and trail facilities by 
facilitating vehicle access through new road construction and the 
upgrading of existing roads; and (2) reduce hiker safety by 
facilitating vehicle access to remote trail locations.
--The construction, operation and maintenance of the 765kV transmission 
line and the associated access roads and right-of-way may affect 
hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, boating and birding opportunities 
and experiences because (1) the setting in which these pursuits take 
place may be altered; and (2) the noise associated with the operation 
of the line may detract from the backcountry or recreation experience.
--The construction and operation of the 765kV transmission line and the 
associated access roads and right-of-way may affect local communities 
by (1) reducing the value of private lands adjacent to the line; (2) 
decreasing tax revenues due to the reductions in land value; and (3) 
influencing economic growth, industry siting, and employment.
--The construction, operation and maintenance of the 765kV transmission 
line and the associated access roads and right-of-way may (1) conflict 
with management direction contained in resource management plans and 
designations; (2) affect the uses that presently occur on and adjacent 
to the proposed right-of-way; (3) affect the wild, scenic and/or 
recreational qualities of the New River; (4) affect sensitive land uses 
like schools, churches, and community facilities; (5) affect the 
cultural attachment residents feel toward Peters Mountain; and (6) 
affect the scenic and/or recreational qualities of the Appalachian 
National Scenic Trail (Appalachian Trail).
--The construction, operation and maintenance of the 765kV transmission 
line and the associated access roads and right-of-way may adversely 
affect the visual attributes of the area because the line, the 
associated right-of-way, and access roads may (1) alter the existing 
landscape; and (2) conflict with the [[Page 30513]] standards 
established for scenic designations.
--The construction, operation and maintenance of the 765kV transmission 
line and the associated access roads and right-of-way may affect 
wildlife, plant and aquatic populations, habitat and livestock 
because(1) habitats are created, changed or eliminated; (2) herbicides 
are used and herbicides may be toxic; (3) the transmission line 
presents a flight hazard to birds; (4) electromagnetic fields and 
induced voltage may be injurious.

    The following significant issues were added by the federal agencies 
in 1995:

--The construction of the 765kV transmission line and the associated 
access roads and right-of-way may have a disproportionately high and 
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low 
income populations as indicated in Executive Order 12898.
--The construction and operation of the 765kV transmission line may 
adversely affect astronomical observation activities at the Martin 
Observatory (VPI) due to the introduction of obstructions to the sky 
(lines and towers), the introduction of light from coronal discharge, 
and the disruption of sensitive electronic equipment by electromagnetic 
fields.
--The construction and operation of the 765kV transmission line may 
adversely affect seismological observation activities at the VPI 
seismic stations located near Forest Hill and Potts Mountain.
--The construction and maintenance of the 765kV transmission line and 
the associated access roads and right-of-way may affect the cultural 
attachment that residents have for the valley between Blacksburg and 
Catawba, Craig County, Mercer County and portions of Montgomery County.

    The following permits and/or licenses would be required to 
implement the proposed action:

--Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (Virginia State 
Corporation Commission)
--Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (West Virginia Public 
Service Commission)
--Special Use Authorization (Forest Service)
--Right-of-Way Authorization (National Park Service)
Section 10 Permit (US Army Corps of Engineers)
Right-of-Way Easement (US Army Corps of Engineers)
Consent to Easement (US Army Corps of Engineers)

    Other authorizations may be required from a variety of Federal and 
State agencies.
    Public participation will occur at several points during the 
federal analysis process. The first point in the analysis was the 
scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7). The Forest Service obtained 
information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State and local 
agencies, the proponent of the action, and other individuals or 
organizations who are interested in or affected by the electric 
transmission line proposal. This input will be utilized in the 
preparation of the draft environmental impact statement. The scoping 
process included, (1) identifying potential issues, (2) identifying 
issues to be analyzed in depth, (3) eliminating insignificant issues or 
those which have been covered by a relevant previous environmental 
analysis.
    Public participation was solicited through contacts with known 
interested and/or affected groups, and individuals; news releases; 
direct mailings; and/or newspaper advertisements. Public meetings were 
also held to hear comments concerning the Appalachian Power Company 
proposal and to develop the significant issues to be considered in the 
analysis.
    A similar process of public involvement was implemented by the 
federal agencies for the Preliminary Alternative Corridors announced in 
July of 1995.
    Other public participation opportunities will be provided 
throughout the federal analysis process.
    The Forest Service will be publishing a number of reports in 1995 
regarding the federal agencies' analysis of the transmission line 
proposal. In February a newsletter was published to update those 
interested in the federal agencies' analysis of the transmission line 
proposal. Similar newsletters are scheduled for publication in May and 
July of 1995. In March a report describing the public comments received 
by the federal agencies was published and distributed to a number of 
public repositories. An update to this report will be published and 
similarly distributed in May of 1995.
    The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be filed 
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public 
review by October 20, 1995. This revises the February 28, 1995 date 
previously announced. At that time, EPA will publish a notice of 
availability of the draft environmental impact statement in the Federal 
Register. The comment period on the draft environmental impact 
statement will be 90 days from the date the EPA publishes the notice of 
availability in the Federal Register. This changes the 45-day comment 
period previously announced.
    Reviewers need to be aware of several court rulings related to 
public participation in the environmental impact statement review 
process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must 
structure their participation in the environmental review of the 
proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the 
reviewer's position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. 
v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that 
could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage but 
that are not raised until after completion of the final environmental 
impact statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of 
Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin 
Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). 
Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those 
interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the 90-
day comment period so that substantive comments and objections are made 
available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully 
consider them and respond to them in the final environmental impact 
statement.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft 
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is 
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the 
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft 
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives 
formulated and discussed in the statement. (Reviewers may wish to refer 
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing 
the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.)
    After the comment period ends on the draft environmental impact 
statement, the comments will be analyzed, considered, and responded to 
by the three federal agencies in preparing the final environmental 
impact statement. The federal agencies have decided to await the 
decisions of the Virginia State Corporation Commission and the West 
Virginia Public Service Commission on the Appalachian Power Company 
proposal before publishing the final environmental impact statement. It 
is not known when the two Commission's will issue their decisions. When 
these decisions are made the federal agencies [[Page 30514]] will 
announce the publication date of the final environmental impact 
statement. This revises the August 1, 1995 date previously announced.
    The responsible officials will consider the comments, responses, 
environmental consequences discussed in the final environmental impact 
statement, and applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making a 
decision regarding this document. The responsible officials will 
document their decisions and reasons for their decisions in a Record of 
Decision.
    The responsible official for the Forest Service is changed from Joy 
E. Berg to William E. Damon, Jr., Forest Supervisor, George Washington 
and Jefferson National Forests, 5162 Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, 
Virginia, 24019. The responsible official for the National Park Service 
is Don King, Acting Project Manager, Appalachian National Scenic Trail, 
National Park Service, Harpers Ferry Center, Harpers Ferry, West 
Virginia 25425. The responsible official for the US Army Corps of 
Engineers in West Virginia is changed from Colonel Earle C. Richardson 
to Colonel Richard Jemiola, US Army Corps of Engineers, Huntington 
District, 508 8th Street, Huntington, West Virginia 25701-2070. The 
responsible official for the US Army Corps of Engineers in Virginia is 
Colonel Andrew M. Perkins, Jr., US Army Corps of Engineers, Norfolk 
District, 803 Front Street, Norfolk, Virginia 23510.

    Dated: June 2, 1995.
William E. Damon, Jr.,
Forest Supervisor, George Washington and Jefferson National Forests.
[FR Doc. 95-14093 Filed 6-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M