[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 13 (Friday, January 18, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2725-2728]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-1166]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY


Guntersville Reservoir Land Management Plan, Jackson and Marshall 
Counties, Alabama and Marion County, TN

AGENCY: Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).

ACTION: Issuance of record of decision.

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

SUMMARY: This notice is provided in accordance with the Council on 
Environmental Quality's regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 to 1508) and 
TVA's procedures implementing the National Environmental Policy Act. 
TVA has updated its 1983 land management plan for 40,236 acres of TVA-
managed land on Guntersville Reservoir in Alabama and Tennessee. TVA 
will use the plan to guide land use approvals, private water-use 
facility permitting, and resource management decisions. On September 
19, 2001, the TVA Board of Directors decided to adopt the preferred 
alternative (Alternative B3, Blended Alternative) identified in the 
Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Land Management Plan, 
Guntersville Reservoir. A Notice of Availability of the Final EIS was 
published in the Federal Register on August 11, 2001. Under the adopted 
land plan, TVA has allocated undeveloped lands for public recreation 
and natural resource conservation, and has also been responsive to 
local requests for use of TVA lands for water access and community 
development. Of the 40,236 acres of TVA lands on the reservoir which 
are available for allocation, 37,662 acres would be allocated to 
resource conservation, sensitive resource management, TVA project 
operation, or dispersed recreation uses; 1,704 acres would be allocated 
for developed recreation uses such as marinas, campgrounds, parks, and 
boat ramps; 543 acres would be allocated for residential lake access, 
and 327 acres for industrial access or commercial uses.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harold M. Draper, NEPA Specialist, 
Environmental Policy & Planning, Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West 
Summit Hill Drive, WT 8C, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902-1499; telephone 
(865) 632-6889 or e-mail [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Guntersville Reservoir is a 76-mile long 
reservoir completed in 1939. Although 109,671 acres were acquired for 
construction of the reservoir, 56,300 are covered by water. Subsequent 
transfers of land by TVA for economic, industrial, residential, or 
public recreation development have resulted in a current

[[Page 2726]]

balance of 40,236 acres of TVA public land above normal summer pool 
elevation of 595 mean sea level. TVA first announced its proposal to 
update its 1983 land management plan in 2000. Meetings were held to 
inform the public of the land allocation plan update and to solicit 
input on March 20, 2000 in South Pittsburgh, Tennessee; March 21, 2000 
in Scottsboro Alabama; and March 23, 2000 in Guntersville, Alabama. 
These meetings were attended by 112 people. In addition, written 
comments were invited through a news release, newspaper notices, and a 
web sit notice. Subsequent to the scoping meetings, TVA determined that 
the development of an EIS would allow a better understanding of the 
impacts of the alternatives. TVA published a Notice of Intent to 
Prepare an EIS on December 20, 2000 (Federal Register Vol. 65, page 
79912). During the scoping period, commenters expressed a desire for 
more environmental protection and discussed how they valued the scenic 
beauty and setting of the reservoir. In addition, 13 external proposals 
were received for use of TVA lands along the reservoir. These proposals 
were from local governments and adjacent residents requesting 
additional recreational or industrial access uses. TVA made an effort 
to identify parcels of land with sensitive resources and identified 
tracts that should be managed for protection of these resources. In 
addition, TVA used the proposals received to develop alternatives for 
public review in the draft EIS (DEIS), which was published in April 
2001. A Notice of Availability (NOA) for the DEIS appeared in the 
Federal Register on May 4, 2001.
    In addition to written materials, additional information on the 
proposals and other aspects of the DEIS was available to the public in 
three public meetings held in South Pittsburg, Tennessee (May 24, 
2001), Scottsboro, Alabama (May 29, 2001) and Guntersville, Alabama 
(May 31, 2001). Approximately 550 comments were received on the DEIS. 
These comments primarily related to recommendations for proposed uses 
of TVA land. Numerous comments and extensive public discussions took 
place regarding the use of several of the parcels. These discussions 
were especially focused on parcel 26a, adjacent to the Conners Island 
Industrial Park; parcel 40, proposed for a Guntersville Airport 
expansion; parcel 200a, proposed for a South Sauty Creek commercial 
recreation development; and parcel 257 in the City of Guntersville, 
which attracted three competing proposals. In the Final EIS (FEIS), TVA 
developed an alternative that would fully or partially zone parcels of 
land to accommodate 11 of the 13 initial requests. In addition, TVA 
received public suggestions for changes on other parcels. After 
considering all comments, the Final EIS was completed and distributed 
to commenting agencies and the public. A NOA for the Final EIS was 
published in the Federal Register on August 11, 2001.

Alternatives Considered

    TVA initially considered three alternatives, including no action, 
for allocation of Guntersville Reservoir lands. The action alternatives 
were characterized as Alternative B1, ``Balanced Development and 
Recreation,'' and Alternative B2, ``Balanced Development and 
Conservation.'' Alternative B1 accommodated use requests and allocation 
changes for 13 parcels, while Alternative B2 did not accommodate 
allocation changes requests and instead allocated these lands to 
conservation-oriented uses or retained the lands in their previous 
designation under the 1983 plan. In response to public comments on the 
DEIS, TVA developed a fourth alternative, designated Alternative B3, or 
``Blended Alternative.'' This alternative was designed to provide zone 
allocations which partially accommodate the 13 requests, and make other 
adjustments in response to public comments.
    Under Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, TVA would not 
revise the 1983 allocation plan. Proposed land use requests received 
from external applicants or internal TVA interests would be evaluated 
for consistency with the 1983 plan. Requested land uses that are 
consistent would be approved or denied based on a review of potential 
environmental impacts and other administrative considerations. If the 
request is not consistent with the designated land use, and TVA staff 
believe the proposal has merit, then the TVA Board of Directors would 
be asked to amend the plan and change the allocation.
    The 1983 plan used 16 allocation categories to allocate 150 parcels 
(32,584 acres) of TVA land. Residential shoreline and other shoreline 
strips were not included in the allocations. In addition, the Murphy 
Hill coal gasification plant site and the Honeycomb Quarry Cave 
limestone quarry were not allocated. Many parcels in the 1983 plan were 
designated with multiple allocation tags, which means that they could 
be considered for a wide range of uses, with a wide range of resulting 
environmental consequences. Despite this uncertainty, TVA estimates 
that if the existing plan were used as a guide, 89 percent of reservoir 
lands would be used for resource protection or natural resource 
management, 19 percent would be used for industrial or other developed 
uses, and 13 percent would be used for recreation development. As 
explained in the EIS, the above figures total greater than 100 percent 
because certain parcels have multiple allocation tags under the 1983 
plan.
    Under Alternative B1, Balanced Development and Recreation, 80 
percent of project lands would be allocated to environmental protection 
and natural resource management uses, 13 percent would be allocated for 
developed uses or industrial uses, 6 percent for recreation 
development, and 1 percent for residential access. Tracts would be 
allocated to accommodate a Guntersville Airport expansion, 9 new 
recreational development proposals, and 3 new commercial or industrial 
proposals.
    Under Alternative B2, Balanced Development and Conservation, 82 
percent of project lands would be allocated to environmental protection 
and natural resource management uses, 13 percent for developed uses or 
industrial uses, 4 percent for recreation development, and 1 percent 
for residential access. Zone allocations for recreational, commercial 
or industrial proposals, or the airport expansion under Alternative B1 
would not be accommodated, and the tracts would stay in their existing 
allocation or be allocated to zone 4, natural resource conservation.
    Alternative B3, Blended Alternative, was developed in response to 
public comments on the DEIS. Approximately 81 percent of project lands 
would be allocated to environmental protection and natural resource 
management uses, 14 percent for developed uses or industrial uses, 4 
percent for recreation development, and 1 percent for residential 
access. Alternative B3 contains a mix of allocations from Alternatives 
B1 and B2 and attempts to address, respond to, or resolve suggestions 
made during public review of the DEIS. In some cases, parcel allocation 
revisions were made, or special commitments related to parcels have 
been included. In general, Alternative B3 differs from Alternative B1 
in that approximately 600 acres would be retained in buffers or natural 
resource management zones. Adjacent human communities would be buffered 
from visual and other impacts of parcel development. Alternative B3 was

[[Page 2727]]

designated as the TVA preferred alternative in the FEIS.
    The EIS considered the environmental consequences of the 
alternatives on a wide variety of environmental resources. Under any 
alternative, sensitive resources such as endangered and threatened 
federal and state-listed species, cultural resources, and wetlands 
would be protected. Adoption of Alternative B3 would balance the 
competing demands of development and conservation. Development 
activities would have the potential for adverse environmental impacts. 
However, through the inclusion of environmental safeguards to address 
water quality, visual buffers, and wetland protection, and through 
resource avoidance and parcel-specific protection measures, these 
impacts would be minimized.
    Because the potential effects on historic properties cannot be 
fully determined prior to implementation of the land plan, TVA will use 
a phased identification and evaluation process as allowed under 36 CFR 
800.4(b)(2) to fulfill its obligations under Section 106 of the 
National Historic Preservation Act. Letters from the Alabama and 
Tennessee State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs) dated September 
7, 2001 and August 16, 2001, respectively, concur with this phased 
approach. Further, in view of the regional scope of this project, TVA 
has initiated efforts to prepare a Programmatic Agreement (PA) 
consistent with the regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation (ACHP) implementing the National Historic Preservation 
Act. The PA includes provisions for monitoring of reservoir shorelines. 
A PA for the implementation of reservoir land management plans in 
Alabama is being reviewed by all requisite parties. ACHP, TVA, the 
Alabama SHPO, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, and the Chickasaw 
Nation are proposed signatories in the PA, and the Alabama Indian 
Affairs Commission is a concurring party. A PA is also under 
development for reservoir lands in the state of Tennessee, through 
coordination with the Tennessee SHPO, ACHP, and consulting parties. 
These measures ensure that the effects of the Guntersville Reservoir 
Land Management Plan on historic properties have been taken into 
account.

Response to Comments

    Appendix E of the Final EIS contains summaries of and responses to 
the comments TVA received during the Draft EIS process. TVA received 
comments from 550 individuals and organizations on the DEIS. As 
indicated above, TVA believes that the open public process and 
discussion on a number of community proposals substantially enhanced 
its decision making. TVA also received comments on the FEIS from EPA, 
Alabama Historical Commission, and Tennessee Historical Commission. EPA 
appreciated that timber harvesting, an allowable activity in Zone 4, 
was redefined to include ``timber management to promote forest 
health.'' They requested that the ROD offer management options for unit 
plans. Further, EPA was concerned that Alternative B3 favored 
development proposals and was closer to Alternative B1 than the EPA-
favored Alternative B2. EPA also provided specific comments on parcel 
allocations. EPA expressed concerns about industrial and commercial 
development such as the proposed Guntersville Airport expansion, 
industrial park, interchange development and industrial site, and also 
pointed out that marinas, boat ramps and campgrounds proposed to be 
allowed under Alternative B3 could have reservoir water quality 
impacts. For parcel 257, EPA expressed a preference to allocate the 
parcel to for zone 4 and stated that Alternative B3 would allow partial 
development of the tract by allowing the siting of a headquarters for 
United Cherokee Intertribal.
    TVA appreciates the EPA comments and will emphasize water quality 
considerations during its land use and Section 26a decision making 
processes for facilities on Guntersville Reservoir. Although TVA has 
attempted to accommodate a number of development proposals, these are 
typically of limited area and are often for water access for adjacent 
private landowners. TVA will use site-specific reviews to incorporate 
additional environmental protection, including water quality protection 
measures, into these proposals. Typical forest management options for 
unit plans (zones 3 and 4) on Guntersville Reservoir are expected to 
include some, but not all of, the following types of activities:
     Pine thinning and prescribed burning to maintain healthy 
pine stands
     Salvage activities to control southern pine beetle 
infestations
     Creation of brush piles for wildlife habitat
     Daylighting of road shoulders and selected other areas by 
selective timber removal to create conditions favorable for grasses and 
forbs preferred by wildlife species, and to enhance aesthetics
     Planting of areas adjacent to the reservoir with 
appropriate species
     Treatment of invasive exotic species infestations
     Timber stand improvements to encourage oak regeneration 
and growth
     Harvesting mature pine stands and allow stands to 
regenerate
     Harvests of limited size over a period of years to create 
a mosaic of hardwood forest cover types and age classes
     Controlled burn implementation during late winter to 
increase advanced oak regeneration
    All of these activities would be oriented toward maintenance and 
enhancement of forest health on public lands. Other public use 
management and wildlife management activities would be conducted to 
preserve and enhance forest ecosystem health and productivity. Each 
unit plan would be subjected to agency and public review, and site-
specific environmental safeguards incorporated into the proposed 
management activities. With regard to Parcel 257, TVA did not zone this 
parcel to accommodate the United Cherokee Intertribal request for a 
headquarters and interpretive center. However, TVA did decide to allow 
use of a limited area for an annual tribal conference and ceremonial 
event (pow-wow).
    In other agency comments, the Tennessee Historical Commission 
concurred that phased compliance is an appropriate strategy, and 
requested that TVA submit all historic property survey reports to the 
office for review and comment. In accordance with standard Section 106 
compliance procedures, TVA will do this for all properties in 
Tennessee. The Alabama Historical Commission indicated that they 
preferred Alternative B2, but that they could agree with Alternative B3 
provided that a phase II archaeological investigation be conducted for 
every site which is potentially eligible for the National Register of 
Historic Places. TVA will conduct archaeological and historic structure 
surveys to identify historic properties, and will submit phase II 
proposals to the Alabama Historical Commission for approval prior to 
testing for projects in Alabama. TVA also received two comments from 
adjoining landowners on the Final EIS that were not made on the draft 
EIS questioning some proposed allocation decisions. An adjoining 
landowner objected to a buffer zone that TVA proposed to establish 
between a recreational development zone (proposed for a campground) and 
a subdivision. The landowner felt that the buffer zone would be subject 
to abuse from uncontrolled camping and motorized recreation. A second

[[Page 2728]]

landowner requested that lands classified as Zone 4 because of their 
incorporation into a state wildlife management area be changed to zone 
7 to allow residential access. Because the land in question has 
historically been used as part of the Mud Creek Wildlife Management 
Area and the wildlife management area easement with the state is 
proposed for extension, TVA plans to leave this property in zone 4, but 
to recognize the residential access rights for a 1.7-acre parcel. As 
part of any future conveyance to the state for wildlife management 
purposes, TVA would include both a general and specific reservation 
acknowledging these residential access rights.

Decision

    The TVA Board decided to adopt the Guntersville Reservoir Land 
Management Plan as described in Alternative B3 on September 19, 2001. 
TVA believes that Alternative B3 responds to community development and 
recreational development needs on Guntersville Reservoir, but also 
recognizes and preserves the aesthetic and sensitive resources which 
make the reservoir unique. Like the other alternatives considered, 
Alternative B3 sets aside parcels containing sensitive resources and 
habitats in the Sensitive Resource Protection and Natural Resource 
Conservation categories. For lands where TVA proposes to consider 
development proposals, following site-specific review of development 
plans, Alternative B3 adopts commitments that would further minimize 
the potential for adverse impacts to the environment. These commitments 
are listed below, under Environmental Commitments.

Environmentally Preferable Alternative

    TVA has concluded that Alternative B2, which would not grant 
recreational and industrial access requests on 13 parcels, is the 
environmentally preferable alternative. However, TVA's responsibilities 
for unified development of the Tennessee River system and adjoining 
properties encourage the use of portions of the reservoir lands to 
foster the economic development of the area. Local governments and a 
number of people commenting also support these projects. TVA believes 
that Alternative B3 helps to meet the multiple objectives of the 
Guntersville project, and would result in substantially better 
environmental protection than previous shoreline development practices. 
Further the environmental impacts of TVA's preferred alternative would 
be less than Alternative B1 and the No Action Alternative.

Environmental Commitments

    The land plan envisioned in Alternative B3 advances TVA's 
commitment to resource stewardship and habitat protection through 
strong conservation approaches. Alternative B3 was formulated using 
environmentally protective measures. Some of these measures include use 
of a sensitive resource protection zone and incorporation of buffers 
between development proposals and adjoining landowners. In addition, 
TVA is adopting the following measures to minimize environmental 
impacts:
     Wetlands will be avoided on residential access properties 
on parcels 12, 69, and 22 and any portion of parcel 26a and 165 
allocated for recreational development.
     Recreational development on parcels 143, 154a, 159 and 168 
will be designed to avoid historic properties and designed to enhance 
their interpretation.
     Agricultural licensing on Parcels 26a, 45, 121, 124, 132, 
and 260 will include buffers to avoid impacts to the reservoir and 
wetlands.
     All land disturbing activities shall be conducted in 
accordance with Best Management Practices as defined by Section 208 of 
the Clean Water Act and implementing regulations to control erosion and 
sedimentation. Forest management activities will be conducted in 
accordance with practices prescribed for forestry. Best Management 
Practices for agriculture, including maintenance of vegetative buffers, 
will be included in agricultural licenses.
     Visual and water quality enhancement buffers, between 50 
feet and 100 feet wide, will be provided to screen timber harvest areas 
from public thoroughfares and shorelines and to minimize the potential 
for sediments or other nonpoint source pollutants to enter Guntersville 
Reservoir.
     Controlled burns will be conducted in accordance with the 
open burning regulations of the appropriate state.
     On parcel 2, TVA will place special emphasis on visual 
analysis during consideration of any management activities.
    With the implementation of the above environmental protection 
measures, TVA has determined that adverse environmental impacts of 
future development proposals on the reservoir would be substantially 
reduced. These protective measures represent all of the practicable 
measures to avoid or minimize environmental harm that are associated 
with this alternative.
    As TVA implements the Guntersville Reservoir Land Management Plan, 
the agency will continue to work with all affected interests to promote 
environmentally sound stewardship of public lands.

    Dated: October 29, 2001.
Kathryn J. Jackson,
Executive Vice President, River System Operations and Environment.
[FR Doc. 02-1166 Filed 1-17-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8120-08-M