[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28562-28565]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14007]



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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service


Appalachian Power Company Transmission Line Construction-
Cloverdale, Virginia, to Oceana, West Virginia. George Washington and 
Jefferson National Forests, Appalachian National Scenic Trail, the New 
River, and R.D. Bailey Lake Flowage 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 
Environmental Impact Statements; and identifies the dates and locations 
for seven public information meetings on the Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare a draft and final 
environmental impact statement on a proposed action to authorize the 
Appalachian Power Company (name recently changed to American Electric 
Power) 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 Buyandotte 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 Applachian Power Company (APCo) 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 APCo 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.

[[Page 28563]]

    The total length of the electric transmission line proposed by the 
APCo 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), June 21, 1994 (59 FR 31975-
31978), June 9, 1995 (60 FR 30511-30514) and October 3, 1995 (60 FR 
51770-51773).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Bergmann, Forest Service Project 
Coordinator, George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, 5162 
Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, Virginia, 24019/ (540) 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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: APCo submitted an application to the 
Jefferson National Forest (name changed to George Washington and 
Jefferson National Forest 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 APCo 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 APCo 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. Information about the transmission line proposal is 
available from the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests.
    The decisions to be made following the Federal agencies' analysis 
are whether the Forest Service, the National Park Service, and the U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers will authorize APCO 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 draft environmental impact statement, a range of 
routing alternatives was considered to meet the purpose and need for 
the proposed action. A no action alternative was also 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. These 
alternative corridors were modified by the Federal agencies in May 
1995. A public comment period was afforded by the Federal agencies on 
these alternative corridor modifications between May 25 and Jun3 30, 
1995.
    The Federal analysis includes an analysis of the effects of the 
proposed transmission line along the entire proposed route as well as 
all alternative routes which were 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

[[Page 28564]]

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; (6) 
affect the scenic and/or recreational qualities of the Appalachian 
National Scenic Trail (Appalachian Trail); and (7) result in family 
displacement.
--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 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 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, Giles 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 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
--Right-of-Way Easement (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
--Consent to Easement (U.S. 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 APCo 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 draft environmental impact statement will be filed with the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review 
by June 28, 1996. This revises the April 12, 1996 date previously 
announced. At that time, EPA will publish a notice of availability of 
the draft environmental impact statement in the Federal Register.
    The federal agencies have established the following public meeting 
schedule to explain the analysis documented in the draft environmental 
impact statement and to hear comments related to the analysis. The 
public meetings will begin at 4:00 p.m. and end at 8:00 p.m. on the 
date and at the locations indicated:
July 31, 1996
McCleary Elementary School, Highway 615, New Castle, VA
August 2, 1996
Concord College, Vermillian Street, Athens, WV
August 6, 1996
Blacksburg High School, 520 Patrick Henry Drive, Blacksburg, VA
August 8, 1996
Twin Falls Resort State Park, Route 10, Mullens, WV
August 1, 1996
James Monroe High School, Weikel Road, Lindside, WV
August 5, 1996
Lord Botetourt High School, 755 Roanoke, Road (Highway 220), Daleville, 
VA
August 7, 1996
Giles County High School, Route 460 (Business), Pearisburg, VA.

    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

[[Page 28565]]

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 APCo 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 will announce the publication 
date of the final environmental impact statement.
    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 the proposal to cross federal lands with a 765,000-
volt transmission line. 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 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 Pamela Underhill, 
Park 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 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: May 28, 1996.
William E. Damon, Jr.,
Forest Supervisor, George Washington and Jefferson National Forests.
[FR Doc. 96-14007 Filed 6-4-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M