[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33599-33601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15729]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Use of Lands Acquired for the Columbia Dam Component of the Duck
River Project and Future Water Supply Needs in the Upper Duck River
Basin
AGENCY: Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).
ACTION: Issuance of records of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice is provided in accordance with the Council on
Environmental Quality's regulations (40 CFR 1500 to 1508) and TVA's
implementing procedures. TVA has decided to implement Alternative D/C
(intermediate alternative) in its Final Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS), Use Of Lands Acquired For The Columbia Dam Component Of The Duck
River Project. In addition, TVA has decided to recommend to local
utilities, government agencies, and other interested parties in the
upper Duck River watershed that one or more of the action alternatives
addressed in the TVA Final EIS, Future Water Supply Needs in the Upper
Duck River Basin be pursued to meet the future water needs in that
area. TVA is not proposing to implement any of these water supply
alternatives itself.
The Columbia Land Use Final EIS was made available to the public in
April 1999. A Notice of Availability of the Final EIS was published in
the Federal Register on April 16, 1999. TVA made a decision to
implement Option 2 to stabilize the unfinished Columbia Dam structure
on May 17, 1999. Under Alternative D/C, the agency preferred land use
alternative, TVA seeks to balance public use and protection of project
lands and to be responsive to public comments received during the EIS
process.
To implement Land Use Alternative D/C, TVA has decided to transfer
all of the Columbia Project lands, 5200 hectares (12,800 acres) of land
in Maury County, Tennessee, to the state of Tennessee subject to
various easements and restrictions.
Under the deed restrictions, most of the land is to be managed to
enhance recreational use of the area and to protect natural and
cultural resources. Up to 800 hectares (2000 acres) of land could be
devoted to other recreational uses, including residential development
if the State decides to do this. An additional 1550 hectares (3800
acres) would be preserved for the possible construction of a water
supply and compatible recreation reservoir (Water Supply EIS
Alternative B). This reservoir was identified as one way to meet the
future water supply needs of the Maury/southern Williamson County Water
Service Area. In the interim, these preserved tracts would be managed
for wildlife and other recreation uses.
The Columbia Water Supply Final EIS was made available to the
public in February 2001. A Notice of Availability of the Final EIS was
published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2001. TVA's preferred
alternative is that one or more of the action alternatives should be
pursued by local utilities, government agencies, and other interested
parties in the upper Duck River watershed to meet the future water
needs in the Maury/southern Williamson County Water Service Area.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda B. Oxendine, Senior NEPA
Specialist, Environmental Policy & Planning, Tennessee Valley
Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT 8C, Knoxville, Tennessee
37902-1499; telephone (865) 632-3440 or e-mail [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1968, TVA proposed the Duck River
Project, a project that would have resulted in the construction of two
dams and reservoirs on the Duck River in middle Tennessee, south of
Nashville. As proposed, one dam was to be built at River Mile 248, near
Normandy, and the other at River Mile 136, near Columbia. Congress
began appropriating money for the Duck River Project in December 1969.
Construction of Normandy Dam and Reservoir began in June 1972 and was
completed in 1976. Construction of Columbia Dam and Reservoir was begun
in August 1973, but was halted in 1983 because of potential impacts to
at least two endangered mussel species which occur in the proposed
reservoir pool area.
In 1995, after conservation efforts for the endangered mussel
species had failed to meet established criteria, TVA decided that
Columbia Dam and Reservoir could not be completed. At that time, TVA
proposed to address two partially-related purposes of the original
project: future use of the lands that had been acquired, and water
supply needs in the upper Duck River watershed.
The Columbia Project lands are located along the Duck River between
the city of Columbia (on the west) and U.S. Route 431, Lewisburg-
Franklin Pike (on the east), in Maury County, Tennessee. The reach of
the Duck River included in this study extends from approximately River
Mile 130, in Columbia, upstream to River Mile 165, at Carpenters
Bridge, 3 kilometers (2 air miles) west of U.S. Route 431.
When construction was halted in 1983, the Columbia Project was
about 45 percent complete. The concrete portion of the dam was about 90
percent complete and the earth-filled section was about 60 percent
complete. The river had been moved to flow through a 600-meter (2000-
foot) long diversion channel located along the east side of the work
site and a dike had been built to keep normal stream flow out of the
spillway construction site. Approximately 46 percent of the land
required for the reservoir (5200 of 11,140 hectares (12,800 of 27,500
acres)) had been acquired, and approximately half of the 72 kilometers
(45 miles) of roads affected by the reservoir had been relocated.
Present status of sensitive resources in the project area includes
the presence of at least four federal endangered species, unusually
diverse aquatic and terrestrial communities, and a number of important
archaeological sites. During the past decade, the Columbia Project
lands have become important public hunting grounds in middle Tennessee.
At the same time, increasing numbers of people are building homes and
businesses around the area.
On February 25, 1995, TVA issued a Notice of Intent (NOI) to
prepare an EIS on alternative uses for the land acquired as part of the
Columbia Project. A similar NOI for the Water Supply EIS was published
in the Federal Register on March 9, 1995. The Tennessee Duck River
Development Agency, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service decided to cooperate in the preparation of both
EIS documents. In addition, the Tennessee Department of Environmental
and Conservation decided to cooperate in the preparation of the Water
Supply EIS. Public scoping meetings were held at Culleoka School near
the Project site on April 18 and May 2, 1995, on the Land Use EIS and
Water Supply EIS, respectively. The Notice of Availability (NOA) on the
Draft Land Use EIS was published on January 6, 1997, and a
[[Page 33600]]
similar NOA on the Draft Water Supply EIS was published on September
15, 2000. The public and interested agencies were invited to submit
written comments on the draft Land Use EIS and to attend a public
meeting on January 27, 1997, at Columbia Senior High School. The public
and interested agencies were invited to submit written comments on the
draft Water Supply EIS and to attend a public meeting on September 28,
2000, at the same location.
For the Land Use EIS, TVA received a total of 2,890 separate sets
of comments which included input from over 4,600 individuals, three
federal agencies, four state agencies, six identified county and local
governmental agencies, and over 20 other organizations. The comments
indicated that most people and agencies want the bulk of the Columbia
Project lands to be available for a variety of public uses. Comments
also included making land available for public services, such as
schools and convenience centers, and to resolve access problems created
when only part of the proposed Columbia Reservoir lands were acquired.
The Notice of Availability of the Final EIS was published on April 16,
1999.
With regard to the Water Supply EIS, TVA received comments from 130
participants at the public meeting and a total of 364 letters, which
included input from 339 individuals, three federal agencies, seven
state agencies, two municipalities, eight state-level non-governmental
agencies, and four local-level non-governmental agencies. Many of the
comments made about the Land Use EIS also addressed issues covered in
the Water Supply EIS.
Alternatives Considered
Land Use Alternatives
Based on comments received during the scoping process, TVA
initially considered four land use alternatives and three dam
stabilization options in the Draft EIS. In response to public and
agency comments on the Draft EIS, TVA and the cooperating agencies
identified and evaluated a fifth, intermediate, alternative in the
Final EIS.
On May 17, 1999, TVA issued a Record of Decision on dam
stabilization and decided to implement Option 2 to stabilize flood
elevation at their present levels, address public safety concerns, and
avoid substantial additional construction in the river.
With respect to the land use alternatives, under Alternative A--
Continue Present Uses (No Action), there would be no wholesale change
in TVA ownership or use of the Columbia Project lands. Most of the land
would continue to be used for informal recreation while some would be
licensed for agricultural uses. Parcels of land could be transferred to
other agencies, sold at public auction, or used for specific purposes
following completion of appropriate NEPA reviews.
Under Alternative B--Protective River Corridor, only those Columbia
Project lands in a narrow corridor along the Duck River would remain in
public ownership. Informal recreation could occur on the river and in
the corridor, so long as it did not cause negative impacts on the
natural or cultural resources which occur there. Nearly all Columbia
Project lands outside of this corridor would be transferred to other
agencies or sold at public auction.
Under Alternative C--Protective and Recreation Corridor, additional
lands would remain in public ownership beyond those identified as part
of the protective river corridor. The additional land would provide
better protection for the river and enhance the potential for various
types of formal recreational development. Lands not included in this
larger corridor would be transferred to other agencies or sold at
public auction.
Under Alternative D--Resource Management Area, most of the Columbia
Project lands would be transferred to a federal or state agency to be
managed, in part, to protect natural and cultural resources. The extent
of recreational development and other compatible uses of the land would
be determined by the receiving agency. Only a few outlying parcels of
Columbia Project land would be sold at public auction.
Under Alternative D/C--Public Use and Protection--all of the
Columbia Project lands would be transferred to the state of Tennessee
or some specific state or federal agency. The extent of recreational
development and other compatible uses of this land would be determined
by the State or receiving agency but would have to meet land use and
environmental restrictions included in the transfer document. Up to 800
hectares (2000 acres) of land (Possible Development Areas) could be
devoted to other recreational-based uses, including residential
development. An additional 1550 hectares (3800 acres) in the Fountain
Creek area would be set aside for a possible water supply and
compatible recreation reservoir in the future. In the interim, this
land would be managed for wildlife and recreation activities.
While the land use alternatives differ from each other in several
ways, each proposed setting aside the 1550 hectares (3800 acres) of
project lands in the Fountain Creek watershed for a water supply and
compatible recreation reservoir project later described as Alternative
B in the Water Supply EIS. Of the five alternatives, four (Alternatives
A, B, C, and D/C) include varying amounts of residential, commercial,
and/or industrial development on parts of the Columbia Project lands;
Alternative D/C includes no industrial development.
Water Supply Alternatives
The Water Supply EIS was developed to achieve three purposes: (1)
To document if one or more of the three water service areas in the
upper Duck River basin has a projected need for additional water before
about 2050, (2) to identify potential ways to meet any identified water
needs in the three water service areas, and (3) to determine the likely
environmental effects of the water-supply alternatives that were
identified.
The results from the needs analysis indicate that water releases
from Normandy Dam would meet projected needs in the Bedford County and
Marshall County Water Service Areas through 2050; however, the Maury/
southern Williamson County Service Area (the area around Columbia)
would need additional water starting some time after 2015. Five broad
concepts for meeting water supply needs were evaluated in detail,
including the No Action alternative. Under Alternative A--No Action, no
new source of water would be developed to meet the projected future
needs of the Maury/southern Williamson County Water Service Area. Under
Alternative B--Fountain Creek Reservoir, a water supply reservoir would
be constructed on Fountain Creek along with a five-mile long pipeline
to transport water from the reservoir to a new treatment plant and to
the existing water-distribution system. Under Alternative C--Downstream
Intake, a water-supply intake and pumping station would be constructed
on the Duck River in western Maury County along with a 13-mile pipeline
to transport water to a new treatment plant and to the existing water-
distribution system. Under Alternative D--Raise Normandy Pool Level,
the pool level on Normandy Reservoir would be raised and the minimum
discharge from Normandy Dam would be increased. Under Alternative E--
Tims Ford Intake, a water-supply intake and pumping station would be
constructed on Tims
[[Page 33601]]
Ford reservoir along with a 20-mile pipeline to transport water to a
discharge point on the Duck River near Shelbyville in Bedford County.
In the Water Supply EIS, TVA found that three alternatives would
meet the future needs of the Columbia area through 2050. Raising the
pool level on Normandy Reservoir would meet projected water needs
through 2035; however, the use of available water conservation measures
could extend the utility of this alternative through 2050. Preliminary
reviews presented in the EIS indicated that all four conceptual action
alternatives could be constructed and operated without seriously
harming the environment.
Decisions
Land Use EIS
TVA has decided to implement Alternative D/C (Public Use and
Protection). TVA will transfer all of the Columbia Project lands to the
state of Tennessee subject to certain easements and restrictions. This
alternative, which incorporates components of both Alternative D
(Resource Management Area) and C (Protective and Recreational
Corridor), responds to the public comments TVA received during the EIS
process. The bulk of the lands will be retained in public ownership and
devoted to recreation and natural resource management. This will
protect the cultural and natural resources, including endangered
species and wetlands, which exist in the area. Under restrictions in
the document transferring ownership of the property, the State could
choose to make up to 800 hectares (2,000 acres) of land in the Possible
Development Areas available for other recreational uses including
residential development which would help respond to some of the
development pressures in the area. Prior to the transfer, TVA will
convey certain easements to address property access issues and to
provide for specific public uses, such as a site for a new school.
TVA closely coordinated the formulation of Alternative D/C with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Tennessee state natural resource
management agencies. The Service has agreed with TVA's determination
that implementation of Alternative D/C will not jeopardize the
continued existence of any of the endangered or threatened species that
are present on, or could be affected by, the restricted use of the
former Columbia Project lands. This action will preserve a substantial
block of land for open space, wildlife management, and natural resource
protection in an area that is under increasing development pressures.
Devoting lands to these uses is important now and will become
increasingly important to future generations in the middle Tennessee
region.
Water Supply EIS
Although agencies typically identify only one EIS alternative as
preferable, agencies can identify multiple alternatives as preferable
under CEQ's NEPA regulations. 40 CFR Sec. 1502.14.(e). Considering the
programmatic nature of the Water Supply EIS and TVA's lack of
involvement in future implementation of the action alternatives, TVA
identified all of the action alternatives as preferable to not taking
any action at all. Accordingly, TVA has concluded that one or more of
the action alternatives should be pursued to meet the future water
needs in the Maury/southern Williamson County Water Service Area. TVA
is not proposing to design or construct any of the facilities. However
as a regional water resource agency, TVA can assist in evaluating
available alternatives and encourage cooperation among all communities
that are dependent on common water resources. Local utilities,
government agencies, and other interested parties in the upper Duck
River watershed will be the ones to actually decide which water supply
alternatives should be pursued.
Environmentally Preferable Alternative
TVA has concluded that Alternative D, Resource Management Area, is
the environmentally preferable alternative in the Land Use EIS.
Alternative D would likely result in little disturbance of project
lands and would best protect natural resources in the area. Little or
no land would be transferred or sold out of public ownership. The
federal or state agency recipient would commit to manage these lands to
protect natural and cultural resources and to enhance recreational use
of the area. Most of the Columbia Project lands would become a resource
management area. However, TVA decided that Alternative D/C adequately
protects the area's natural resources and is the second-most
environmentally preferable alternative.
With regard to the Water Supply EIS, TVA has concluded that any of
the action alternatives could be implemented with acceptable impacts on
the environment. However, the extent of potential environmental effects
of the conceptual alternatives is related to the amount of land area
that would be modified or disturbed. TVA agrees with EPA that the two
alternatives which would involve the least amount of land disturbance
(Alternative C--Downstream Water Intake, and Alternative E--Tims Ford
Pipeline) also appear likely to have the least potential for adverse
effects on the environment (almost exclusively short-term effects
associated with construction of the pipelines and other facilities).
Both of the other alternatives (Alternative B--Fountain Creek
Reservoir, and Alternative D--Raise Normandy Pool Level) would involve
modifications in much larger areas and would have substantially more
potential for adverse environmental effects. Each of the alternatives
also would result in some level of benefits to water quality, aquatic
life, and recreation on parts of the Duck River where at least the
minimum flow would be higher than under the No Action Alternative.
Assuming that the construction impacts per mile of waterline would be
comparable, the small size of the intake site and the shorter length of
pipeline that would be involved would combine to make Alternative C the
most environmentally-preferable alternative.
Environmental Mitigation
Although implementation of Alternative D would have resulted in
heightened environmental protection on more land, Alternative D/C was
purposefully formulated to safeguard the sensitive natural resources
found on the Columbia Project lands. Setting aside land in an expanded
river corridor and protecting such lands with a set of comprehensive
restrictions substantially avoids the risks of adverse environmental
impacts. These comprehensive restrictions also require appropriate
review and mitigation of any subsequent potential impacts on natural
and cultural resources.
In the Water Supply EIS, the action alternatives have been
generally described in light of their conceptual nature at this early
stage. If and when a decision is made to provide some additional water
for the Maury/southern Williamson County Water Service Area, the
sponsors would determine the specific purposes of each project and
would develop site-specific plans for the various facilities. As those
plans are developed and proposals are made, detailed, site-specific
evaluations of environmental effects would be conducted, if required
and as appropriate, under the National Environmental Policy Act.
Dated: June 18, 2001.
Kathryn J. Jackson,
Executive Vice President, River System Operations & Environment.
[FR Doc. 01-15729 Filed 6-21-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8120-08-U