[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 241 (Friday, December 14, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64800-64803]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-30860]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


B-Line Phase III (Sewer Export Pipeline Replacement), Lake Tahoe 
Basin Management Unit (LTBMU), El Dorado County, California; Notice of 
Intent

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) to address whether or

[[Page 64801]]

not to authorize the South Tahoe Public Utility District to construct 
Phase III of the B-Line Export Pipeline. This project would complete 
the replacement of the original effluent export pipeline that runs from 
South Lake Tahoe, CA to the Tahoe Basin boundary.

DATES: The public is asked to provide any additional information they 
believe the Forest Service may still not have at this time and to 
submit any issues (points of concern, debate, dispute or disagreement) 
regarding potential effects of the proposed action or alternatives by 
January 15, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Michael Rhoades, Associate Planner, 
Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, P.O. Box 1038, Zephyr Cove, NV 89448. 
Telephone: 775/588-4547, Fax: 775/588-4527, E-mail: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Rhoades at the above address.
    Decision to be Made: The Forest Supervisor will decide whether or 
not to authorize construction of the proposed pipeline and if so which 
route the new pipeline will follow.
    Purpose and Need: The South Tahoe Public Utility District's owns 
and operates an effluent export system that pumps treated effluent from 
the District's wastewater treatment plant in South Lake Tahoe to the 
Harvey Place Reservoir in Alpine County, CA. The original force main 
was installed in 1969/70 and utilized steel pipe that was installed 
using poorly monitored construction techniques. Problems developed soon 
after the installation was completed, and have continued as the line 
has aged. The existing pipeline is no longer reliable. Leaks and breaks 
in the existing line sometimes occur.
    Proposed Action: Authorize the South Tahoe Public Utility District 
(District) to construct Phase III of the B-Line Export Pipeline 
Replacement. The proposed action and alternatives are described in 
greater detail below.
    Lead Agencies: The USDA Forest Service will serve as lead agency 
under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Tahoe Regional 
Planning Agency (TRPA) will serve as lead agency under the TRPA rules 
of procedure (Ordinances Chapter 5). The South Tahoe Public Utility 
District will serve as the lead agency under the California 
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency will work closely with the Forest Service under NEPA. 
Implementation of the proposal would require permits from TRPA, the 
California Regional Water Quality Control Board Lahontan Region and the 
Forest Service.
    Scoping: The planning for this project is being coordinated by the 
three lead agencies. The environmental documents will be drafted to 
meet the requirements of NEPA, CEQA and TRPA. Scoping meetings are 
being held before the TRPA Advisory Planning Commission on December 12, 
2001 and the Governing Board on December 19, 2001. The CEQA/TRPA Notice 
of Preparation request comments by December 30, 2001. The Forest 
Service is requesting Scoping comments by January 15, 2002.
    Response Time: Please send your comments no later than January 15, 
2001 to Michael Rhoades, Associate Planner,--Tahoe Regional Planning 
Agency,--PO Box 1038,--Zephyr Cove, NV 89448. Telephone: 775/588-4547, 
Fax: 775/588-4527, E-mail: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Contact Michael Rhoades at the address or 
telephone number provided above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Project Name and Description and Background

    The South Tahoe Public Utility District's (District) owns and 
operates an effluent export system that pumps treated effluent from the 
District's wastewater treatment plant in South Lake Tahoe to the Harvey 
Place Reservoir in Alpine County, CA. The export system is divided into 
three segments, the A-Line, B-Line, and C-Line. The B-Line consists of 
the portion of the pipeline between the Luther Pass Pump Station and 
the top of Luther Pass where the force main breaks to gravity. The 
original force main was installed in 1969/70 and utilized steel pipe 
that was installed using poorly monitored construction techniques. 
Problems developed soon after the installation was completed, and have 
continued as the line has aged. Construction is currently being 
completed on the reach that extends from the 1980 replacement to the 
gravity break at Luther Pass (approximately 9,982 lineal feet known as 
B-Line Phase II). The current proposal will extend from the Luther Pass 
Pump Station to the middle of the Forest Service campground (where the 
Phase I replacement began) and will result in the complete replacement 
of the original B-Line pipeline. The proposal is to authorize the 
District to construct Phase III of the B-Line Export Pipeline. The 
project includes the construction of a new effluent export pipeline 
between the Luther Pass Pump Station and the project's terminus within 
the campground east of State Route 89. This segment of the B-Line 
pipeline is located approximately 3.5 miles south of Meyers, CA. The 
project would consist of a pressurized 24-inch-diameter pipeline placed 
below ground level. The pipeline trench would be a minimum of 7 feet 
deep and approximately four to six feet wide, depending upon soil 
conditions. The 24-inch diameter pipeline replaces an existing 20-inch 
diameter pipeline. Following replacement, the existing pipeline would 
be abandoned in place.
    The pipeline would be constructed using excavators and rubber-tired 
loaders, with the steel pipe welded onsite. The welding and coating 
activity would take place adjacent to and above the trench. Following 
welding and pipeline coating activities, the pipe segments (up to 1,000 
feet in length) would be placed into the trench. Due to the need to 
conduct welding along side the pipeline trench, all ground vegetation 
will need to be removed within the immediate trench corridor to avoid 
the risk of wild fire. The proposed widths for the construction 
corridor are provided below.
    Within the campground road, an option exists to use a rock-trencher 
for trenching activities. The benefit of using a rock-trencher is that 
it requires a narrower construction corridor than traditional 
construction methods (vehicles can work front to back rather than side 
by side). However, the rock trencher is much heavier than an excavator 
or other rubber-tired equipment and requires a more stable base from 
which to operate.
    A 50-foot-wide temporary construction easement has been requested 
by the District for the pipeline construction within forested areas. 
Within the 50-foot easement, a 25-foot-wide construction corridor will 
be established to allow construction of the trench. Within the 25-foot-
wide construction corridor, trees, surface vegetation and top soil 
would either be removed or significantly disturbed by construction 
equipment. The trench does not need to be centered within this 
corridor, rather the corridor can be shifted to allow for significant 
trees and rock outcrops to be preserved. However, 25-feet is the 
minimum clearance area needed for construction of the pipeline. 
Adjacent to the 25-foot corridor, and within the 50-foot temporary 
easement, tree removal would only occur if approved beforehand by the 
Forest Service and TRPA. Within this portion of the easement, 
disturbance would occur from construction equipment access and material 
storage. Following construction, the 50-foot construction easement and 
any adjacent soil disturbance caused by construction activities will be 
revegetated pursuant to

[[Page 64802]]

Forest Service and TRPA approved plans.
    Pipeline Replacement Alternatives A and B (described below) would 
cross Highway 89 in one location. At the crossing locations, project 
construction activities would be timed to avoid the simultaneous 
closure of both travel lanes on Highway 89. Delays due to lane closure 
shall not exceed 30 minutes. Open trenches in Highway 89 would be 
backfilled or covered with non-skid plates during times when 
construction activities are stopped.
    Pipeline Replacement Alternative C would follow Highway 89 from its 
intersection with Grass Lake Road to the intersection with the 
campground road. Within this corridor, 24-hour lane closures would be 
required seven days a week, including the use of ``K'' rail to separate 
construction activities from the open travel lane. Blasting would be 
required for trenching within the right-of-way. During blasting 
activities, traffic would be held in both directions.
    To prevent erosion and discharge into down-slope drains or low 
lying drainages, pipeline trench erosion control practices shall be 
used. Erosion control practices would require filter fabric fencing 
down slope of construction activities. No erosion or runoff shall be 
allowed to reach any adjacent creeks. Under alternatives B and C, the 
pipeline will cross Grass Lake Creek. In these locations, more detailed 
erosion control and restoration plans will be required to ensure 
adequate diversion of the creek flows during pipeline construction. The 
pipeline will cross Grass Lake Creek in two of the three action 
alternatives (Alternatives B and C). One of the creek crossings would 
occur in an undisturbed area to the north of the South Upper Truckee 
Road (Alternative B). At this creek crossing location, the project 
would require the construction of a temporary roadway to facilitate 
equipment access. The creek will be temporarily diverted using pumps or 
placed in a culvert under the temporary roadway during construction. 
After construction is completed, the roadway material will be removed 
and the creek will be restored to pre-project conditions. Two other 
creek crossings would occur within Highway 89 for Alternative C and 
within the campground road for Alternatives B and C. In both locations, 
the creek flows through a culvert. The Highway 89 crossing would occur 
within the roadway prism and above the existing box culvert. The 
campground road crossing would also occur within the roadway prism, but 
could either be constructed underneath or above the existing corrugated 
metal pipe (cmp). Construction of the pipeline underneath the cmp would 
require removal and replacement of the culvert. Construction of the 
pipeline above the cmp would avoid effects to the cmp but would require 
raising the road grade.
    It is anticipated that some groundwater will be intercepted during 
trenching activities. In order to prevent the discharge of trench 
waters, water collected from dewatering operations shall be disposed as 
follows: (1) Water from the pipeline trench will be pumped into a 
settling tank or water trucks with sufficient volume to handle 
projected water quantities, (2) water will be decanted from the 
settling tanks or trucks for use as construction water during 
backfilling operations, (3) settled water will be taken to the Luther 
Pass summit and placed in the gravity export pipeline (C-Line) that 
flows to the Harvey Place reservoir, or (4) settled water will be 
placed in the sanitary sewer in Grass Lake Road.
    The South Upper Truckee Road is proposed for temporary material 
stockpiling and equipment staging. To use the roadway for material 
stockpiling and staging, the District will request its closure. This 
roadway is under the control of the El Dorado County Department of 
Transportation. The proposed closure would be located between Highway 
89 and the roadway's crossing of the Upper Truckee River (west of 
Highway 89). Stockpile areas will be surrounded by filter fabric 
fencing, and covered with plastic sheeting prior to storm events. 
Historic trail resources adjacent to the roadway will be protected by 
temporary construction fencing.
    To protect trees within the 50-foot construction easement (outside 
of the 25-foot construction corridor), vegetation protection fencing 
will be installed around every live tree or group of trees greater than 
6 inches dbh. In addition, no tree roots greater than 1.5 inches in 
diameter shall be cut without the prior authorization of the Forest 
Service and TRPA. In situations where tree roots greater than 1.5 
inches must be cut, the contractor shall treat the roots in accordance 
with standard practices. All areas disturbed by construction activity 
shall be revegetated. The revegetation shall be with a matching seed 
mix to restore the loss of vegetation that will result from pipeline 
construction. A goal of vegetation/site restoration following 
construction shall be to ensure that the pipeline corridor does not 
become a new trail for recreational bicyclists.
    Groundwater channeling would be minimized by using an aggregate 
(Class 2) fill for the pipeline bedding zone (this zone is the area 6 
inches under the pipeline to one foot above the pipeline). Any 
excavated soils that are wet require air drying to proper moisture 
content or mixing with drier soils prior to being used as compacted 
backfill. In addition, the installation of trench cutoff walls or 
``coffer dams'' is proposed in areas where high groundwater and the 
slope of the terrain would dictate that groundwater channeling is a 
probability.
    During pipeline trenching, field inspections of the trenches would 
be performed to make final determinations regarding the need for cutoff 
walls to control potential high groundwater flows. During construction, 
the pipeline will be pressure tested at 2,000 foot intervals. The 
pressure testing will be performed using potable water. At the 
conclusion of construction, the entire segment of new pipeline will be 
tested before it is placed into operation.
    The construction of the pipeline must comply with TRPA's standard 
conditions of approval and the Handbook of Best Management Practices 
(BMPs) Standards. The use of BMPs will be documented in a Stormwater 
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prepared for approval by CA. Regional 
Water Quality Ccontrol Board, Lahontan Region. The purpose of the SWPPP 
is to provide a site-specific plan for preventing storm water pollution 
caused by construction activities, including land disturbance. The 
SWPPP will be designed to comply with the federal requirements to 
achieve compliance with the effluent limits and receiving water 
objectives set forth in the California General NPDES Permit for 
Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activities 
through implementation of BMPs. The SWPPP will be implemented 
concurrent with the commencement of construction activities.
    Alternatives: Four alternatives have been identified for further 
study in the STPUD B-Line Phase III Export Pipeline Replacement Project 
EIR/EIS. Alternative A--Parallel Existing Pipeline Alignment would 
parallel the existing pipeline alignment through National Forest lands 
from the Luther Pass Pump Station to the project's terminus in the 
Forest Service campground. However, the pipeline would not use the 
existing pipeline's trench because it would still be in operation 
during construction. The pipeline would parallel the existing pipeline 
with at least 50 feet of separation from the existing pipeline to avoid 
damage during construction activities, such as blasting. This 
alternative would be approximately

[[Page 64803]]

4,400 feet in length. Alternative B--Proposed Action would begin at the 
Luther Pass Pump Station and end within the Forest Service campground 
at a connection with the B-Line Phase I replacement project. The total 
length of the proposed action is approximately 5,900 feet. The proposed 
action would begin at the pump station, generally follow the hillside 
contours to the south, cross Grass Lake Creek, cross South Upper 
Truckee Road twice, continue on to Highway 89, cross Highway 89, follow 
the campground access road, and end at the terminus of the B-Line Phase 
I replacement project that was constructed in 1996. Alternative C--
Parallel Existing Roadways would follow existing roadway rights-of-way. 
This alternative would use Grass Lake Road to the intersection of 
Highway 89. At the intersection of Grass Lake Road and Highway 89, the 
alternative would follow Highway 89 south to the campground access 
road. At this intersection, Alternative C would follow the same route 
as Alternative B to the project's terminus. This alternative would be 
approximately 16,000 feet in length. Approximately 8,700 feet of the 
pipeline alignment would be located within Highway 89. Of this total, 
approximately 60 percent (5,200 feet) would have to be located inside 
the fog line of the highway (within the roadway pavement). Due to the 
pipeline's length, additional storage capacity may be needed at the 
Luther Pass Pump Station to allow for the draining of the pipeline 
during maintenance operations. This additional storage capacity would 
require construction of a third storage tank, or enlargement of an 
existing tank. As a sub-alternative to Alternative C, the Luther Pass 
Pump Station may be relocated to a location near the intersection of 
Grass Lake Road and Highway 89. Alternative D--No Project/No Action 
would maintain the existing pipeline that was constructed in 1969. 
While no immediate action would occur, the continued use of the 
existing pipeline will increase the chances of a pipeline break. 
Pipeline breaks require immediate repair by the District.
    Commenting: The draft environmental impact statement is expected to 
be available for public review and comment in May 2002. The comment 
period on the draft statement will be at least 45 days from the date of 
availability published in the Federal Register by the Environmental 
Protection Agency. The final environmental impact statement and its 
Record of Decision is expected in October 2002.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important 
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of 
draft EIS's 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 EIS stage but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final EIS may be waived or dismissed by 
the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Circut, 
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 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 EIS. To assist the 
Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on 
the proposed action, comments should be as specific as possible. It is 
helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft 
statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft EIS 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. The decision will be appealable under applicable Forest Service 
regulations.

    Dated: December 7, 2001.
Maribeth Gustafson,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 01-30860 Filed 12-13-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P