[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 72 (Thursday, April 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22076-22078]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08620]
[[Page 22076]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Western Area Power Administration
[DOE/EIS-0474]
Southline Transmission Line Project Environmental Impact
Statement
AGENCY: Western Area Power Administration, DOE.
ACTION: Record of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Western Area Power Administration (Western) and the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), acting as joint lead agencies, issued
the Proposed Southline Transmission Line Project (Project) Final
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (DOE/EIS-0474) on November 6,
2015. The Agency Preferred Alternative developed by Western and the BLM
through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process and
described in the Final EIS is summarized in this Record of Decision
(ROD). This alternative is also the Environmentally Preferred
Alternative for most of the Project. One segment in the New Build
Section and some local alternatives in the Upgrade Section were
selected that reduce substantial existing resource conflicts while
creating only minor new impacts. All practicable means to avoid or
minimize environmental harm have been adopted.
Since the BLM and Western were joint lead agencies in the
preparation of the EIS, each agency will issue its own ROD(s)
addressing the overall Project and the specific matters within its
jurisdiction and authority. This ROD constitutes Western's decision
with respect to the alternatives considered in the Final EIS.
Western has selected the Agency Preferred Alternative identified in
the Final EIS as the route for the Project. This decision on the route
will enable design and engineering activities to proceed. This ROD also
commits Western and Southline Transmission, LLC (Southline) to
implement the proponent-committed environmental measures (PCEMs)
identified in table 2-8, Project PCEMs by Resource, of the Final EIS.
Selection of the Agency Preferred Alternative will also allow detailed
Project costs to be developed, which are necessary for future
participation and financing decisions. This ROD does not make decisions
about Western's participation in the Project or financing. Those
decisions are contingent on the successful development of participation
agreements and financial underwriting, and would be recorded in a
second ROD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on Western's
participation in the Project contact Stacey Harris, Public Utilities
Specialist, Transmission Infrastructure Program (TIP) Office A0700,
Headquarters Office, Western Area Power Administration, P.O. Box
281213, Lakewood, CO 80228-8213, telephone (720) 962-7714, facsimile
(720) 962-7083, email [email protected]. For information about the
Project EIS process or to request a CD of the document, contact Mark J.
Wieringa, NEPA Document Manager, Natural Resources Office A7400,
Headquarters Office, Western Area Power Administration, P.O. Box
281213, Lakewood, CO 80228-8213, telephone (720) 962-7448, facsimile
(720) 962-7263, email [email protected]. The Final EIS, this ROD, and
other Project documents are also available on the Project Web site at
http://www.blm.gov/nm/southline.
For general information on the Department of Energy (DOE) NEPA
process, please contact Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA
Policy and Compliance (GC-54), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, telephone (202) 586-4600
or (800) 472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Southline, a subsidiary of Hunt Power, LP,
is the Project proponent. Black Forest Partners, LP, is the manager for
the Project. In March 2011, Southline submitted a Statement of Interest
to Western for consideration of its Project. As part of their Project,
Southline proposed the upgrade of approximately 120 miles of Western's
existing Saguaro-Tucson and Tucson-Apache 115-kilovolt (kV) single-
circuit transmission lines to a double-circuit 230-kV transmission line
(Upgrade Section) using existing rights-of-way (ROWs). The New Build
Section of the Project would include 240 miles of new 345-kV double-
circuit transmission line on new ROWs between Afton Substation in New
Mexico and Apache Substation in Arizona. In addition, Southline
requested that Western consider providing financing for the Project
using the borrowing authority provided to Western under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 amendment of the Hoover Power
Plant Act of 1984. Southline's proposal prompted Western to initiate an
EIS process to determine the environmental impacts of the Project and
alternatives to inform Western's decisions regarding the Project.
Southline also filed a ROW application with the BLM pursuant to
Title V of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as
amended, proposing to construct, operate, maintain, and eventually
decommission a high-voltage electric transmission line on land managed
by the BLM. The BLM initiated its own NEPA process to address whether
to grant a ROW permit. Because both agencies had NEPA decisions to
consider, Western and the BLM agreed to be joint lead agencies in
accordance with NEPA, 40 CFR 1501.5(b), for the purpose of preparing
the EIS for the Project. The agencies issued the Final EIS for the
Project on November 6, 2015. Each agency will issue its own ROD(s)
addressing the overall Project and the specific matters within its
jurisdiction and authority. This ROD constitutes Western's decision
with respect to the alternatives considered in the Final EIS.
Project Description
The Project includes:
The New Build Section (Afton-Apache), which includes construction
and operation of:
Approximately 205 miles of 345-kV double-circuit electric
transmission line in New Mexico and Arizona with a planned
bidirectional capacity of up to 1,000 MW. This section is defined by
endpoints at the existing Afton Substation, south of Las Cruces in
Do[ntilde]a Ana County, New Mexico, and the existing Apache Substation,
south of Willcox in Cochise County, Arizona;
Approximately 5 miles of 345-kV single-circuit electric
transmission line between the existing Afton Substation and the
existing Luna-Diablo 345-kV transmission line. This segment of the
Project is included in the analysis, but development of this segment
would be determined at a later date;
Approximately 30 miles of 345-kV double-circuit electric
transmission line between New Mexico State Route 9 and Interstate 10
east of Deming in Luna County, New Mexico, to provide access for
potential renewable energy generation sources in southern New Mexico.
This segment of the Project is included in the analysis, but
development of this segment would be determined at a later date;
A new substation in Luna County, New Mexico (proposed
Midpoint Substation), to provide an intermediate connection point for
future interconnection requests; and
Substation expansion for installation of new
communications equipment at, and connection to, two existing
substations in New Mexico and one in Arizona.
The Upgrade Section (Apache-Saguaro), which would replace and
[[Page 22077]]
upgrade a portion of Western's transmission system and includes:
Replacing 120 miles of Western's existing Saguaro-Tucson
and Tucson-Apache 115-kV single-circuit wood-pole H-frame electric
transmission lines with a 230-kV double-circuit electric steel-pole
transmission line. This section is defined by endpoints at the existing
Apache Substation, south of Willcox in Cochise County, Arizona, to the
existing Saguaro Substation, northwest of Tucson in Pima County,
Arizona;
Approximately 2 miles of new-build double-circuit 230-kV
electric transmission line to interconnect with the existing Tucson
Electric Power Company Vail Substation located southeast of Tucson and
just north of the existing 115-kV Tucson-Apache line; and
Connection to and upgrading, modification, and expansion
of 12 existing substations in southern Arizona, including installation
of new bays, transformers, breakers, switches, communications
equipment, and related facilities associated with the voltage increase
and compatibility with existing substations. Depending on design and
engineering considerations, some substation expansions may require
separate yards.
Alternatives
Based on a series of public meetings, routing workshops and
meetings with local, State, and other Federal agencies prior to
developing their Project, Southline published a Project routing study
(April 2012). Many different route segments were identified and
analyzed during this process. The route segments were designed to
maximize the paralleling of existing linear infrastructure, maximize
use of existing access roads, and identify and reject route segments
with substantial environmental conflicts. This process resulted in a
`Proponent Preferred' or northern route, and a `Proponent Alternative'
or southern route, for the New Build Section. Although other options
were considered, rebuilding the existing Western lines was the only
option that preserved connectivity with the 12 existing substations in
southern Arizona, an important feature of the Project.
Southline presented the Proponent Preferred and Proponent
Alternative routes to the BLM with their application for a ROW grant
and these alternatives were analyzed in the NEPA process. Because
Western and BLM participated in Southline's routing study and public
outreach, they each understood why various route segments were selected
and rejected. Both agencies analyzed both of the Southline proponent
alternatives and the No Action Alternative, and used the NEPA process
to identify other potentially reasonable, viable alternatives. Due to
Southline's thorough routing process, extensive stakeholder outreach,
and early route screening with Western and the BLM, agency alternatives
developed through the NEPA process resulted in only small route
variations which could potentially reduce or avoid local resource
conflicts.
The 360-mile-long Project was divided into four `route groups', two
in the New Build Section and two in the Upgrade Section, with Apache
Substation in Arizona being the point separating the two sections and
route groups 1 and 2 from route groups 3 and 4. Within the four route
groups various sub-routes including segments of the Proponent Preferred
and Proponent Alternative were identified. Some of the sub-routes also
include local alternatives that were departures from the proponent
alternatives due to potential resource conflicts or opportunities
identified during the NEPA process. The agencies' alternatives analyses
did not result in major new alternatives but did identify local
alternatives and route variations that avoided or reduced localized
resource conflicts. The division of the Project into smaller sections
provided a framework for a more meaningful and localized comparison of
resource impacts and provided the agencies with the ability to `mix and
match' route segments to create multiple full-length alternatives.
Agency Preferred Alternative
The Agency Preferred Alternative developed in the Final EIS varies
somewhat from the one described in the Draft EIS due to consideration
and incorporation of comments from the public, interested parties and
the agencies. In the New Build Section, the Agency Preferred
Alternative consists of a combination of the Proponent Preferred,
Proponent Alternative, and local alternative segments. Draft EIS local
alternative LD4 would have included the shared use of approximately 50
miles of ROW with the proposed SunZia Project to consolidate linear
facility impacts into one utility corridor, an important BLM management
objective. However, a Western Electricity Coordinating Council Regional
Business Practice standard requires separation between large, main
system transmission lines, which could largely negate the environmental
benefits of constructing transmission lines in adjacent ROWs.
Additionally, if one line were not constructed, the remaining line
would traverse previously undeveloped land and create a new utility
corridor of its own, precisely the situation the BLM is trying to
prevent by consolidating development. Accordingly, the Agency Preferred
Alternative in the Final EIS was shifted south to another route segment
that parallels an existing natural gas pipeline ROW.
Both the Department of Defense and the Arizona Game and Fish
Department (AZGFD) expressed concerns about alternatives in the area
near Willcox Playa and north and east of Apache Substation. The route
selected in the Draft EIS that runs parallel to an existing
transmission line east of the playa presented conflicts with wintering
sandhill cranes and waterfowl, and routes to Apache Substation on the
west side of the playa conflicted with activities on the Buffalo
Soldier Electronic Testing Range. Options east of developed
agricultural areas near the playa that turned directly west to enter
Apache Substation were prepared and analyzed, but were found to
conflict with agricultural interests. Ultimately, mitigation of
potential effects on sandhill cranes and waterfowl acceptable to the
AZGFD was agreed upon and the route on the east side of the Willcox
Playa that was originally included as part of the Agency Preferred
Alternative was retained.
The Agency Preferred Alternative for the Upgrade Section consists
of a combination of the Proponent Preferred, a route variation south of
the Tucson International Airport, and local alternatives at Tumamoc
Hill and near the Marana Airport. The Agency Preferred Alternative
maximizes the use of existing Western ROWs for the Saguaro-Tucson and
Tucson-Apache transmission lines while also addressing existing impacts
and opportunities where appropriate. The route skirts the edge of the
culturally and visually sensitive Tumamoc Hill property and allows the
removal of the section of existing line that crosses through the middle
of the property, relocates a portion of the existing line to facilitate
Pima County future development plans south of Tucson International
Airport, relocates a segment of existing line out of the Summit
community where development is encroaching on the ROW, and relocates a
segment of existing line near the Marana Airport to reduce conflicts
with military training operations.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
Except for one segment the Environmentally Preferred Alternative
for the New Build Section is the same
[[Page 22078]]
as the Agency Preferred Alternative. This is due to the emphasis placed
on routing the Project to parallel existing linear infrastructure and
consolidating development to the maximum extent possible. Consolidation
also maximizes the opportunity to use existing access roads for the
Project. This approach minimizes new disturbance and, in turn,
environmental impacts.
The Environmentally Preferred Alternative for the Upgrade Section
involves an upgrade of the existing single-circuit 115-kV wood pole
lines and use of the existing Western ROWs for the entire length of the
section from Apache Substation to Saguaro Substation. The existing
lines have been operated and maintained for over 60 years and have
well-established access roads. New construction disturbance would be
minimal and little or no new impacts to environmental resources would
occur except that new monopole steel structures would be taller and
have an incrementally larger visual impact. Any existing impacts on the
human environment are already included in the baseline condition.
Responsible transmission planning also looks for opportunities to
reduce existing impacts or address changing attitudes about the values
and weights of impacts. Each of the three local alternatives included
in the Agency Preferred Alternative would have associated new
environmental impacts, but in each case it was determined that the
reduction in present or future conflicts more than offset the new
impacts.
Minimization of environmental impacts was an integral part of
Project routing and planning, and all practicable means have been
adopted to avoid or minimize environmental harm. Table 2-8 in section
2.4.6, Typical Design Features and Agency Mitigation Measures, of the
Final EIS is a compilation of PCEMs that would be implemented to
minimize impacts. If the Project moves into the construction phase,
this table will be incorporated into the construction contract to
ensure the PCEMs are an integral part of the construction process. The
PCEMs include design features that minimize impacts, agency identified
best management practices, known regulatory and permit requirements,
and other project-specific measures developed during the EIS process.
As described in section 2.4.1 of the Final EIS, Site Preparation and
Preconstruction Activities, Southline and the BLM have developed an
extensive Plan of Development (Appendix N to the Final EIS). Numerous
framework plans (appendices to the Plan of Development) are being
developed that include specific best management practices and resource
protection measures that condition the ROW grant. The Plan of
Development only applies to activities on BLM-managed public lands.
Western may implement applicable provisions of the Plan of Development
and its attached framework plans on State and private lands as
appropriate.
Changes to Final EIS
The Town of Marana, Arizona, in consultation with the AZGFD,
requested that a clarification be made to PCEM in table 2-8 concerning
a bat colony under the Ina Road bridge. The agencies are incorporating
the requested clarification in the BLM Plan of Development and table 2-
8. The revised language will read as follows: ``To avoid impacting
roosting bats at the Ina Road bridge, blasting activities will be
restricted to less than 130 decibels (dB) at the project site if
possible, and if that is not possible, then blasting activities will
occur at night after most bats have left their roost. No blasting will
occur in April or May when the maternity colony is present.''
The Benson/San Pedro Valley Chamber of Commerce and J-6/Mescal
Community Development Organization also raised questions after the
Final EIS was published. Both parties indicated a preference for Local
Alternative H, a route developed for analysis based on public comment.
Local Alternative H departs from the existing alignment and bypasses
Benson and the Mescal residential development on the north before
rejoining the existing alignment east of Benson and the Mescal
residential development. The parties raised concerns about visual
impacts, EMF, and future development in the area, which were all
analyzed in the EIS. Local Alternative H was not selected as part of
the Agency Preferred Alternative. The existing transmission line has
been in place since the early 1950s, and development has been planned
around the existing ROW. Moving to Local Alternative H would only shift
impacts from one set of landowners to a new set of landowners.
Additionally, staying on the existing ROW would use the existing
crossing of the San Pedro River, a sensitive environmental resource.
The issues expressed by the parties do not present any significant new
circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns.
Section 7 and Section 106 Consultation
The BLM, as the main affected Federal land management agency,
retained the lead role for Section 7 and Section 106 consultation.
Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service resulted in the
issuance of a final Biological Opinion on November 10, 2015. The
requirements of the Biological Opinion will apply to the entire
Project, whether on BLM managed land or not. The Biological Opinion is
provided as Appendix M of the Final EIS and can also be found on the
Project Web site. Western also participated as an invited signatory in
the Section 106 process, which led to a Programmatic Agreement that
will govern Section 106 actions as they apply to the Project. The
Programmatic Agreement, Appendix L of the Final EIS, is also posted on
the Project Web site.
Western's Decision
Informed by the analyses and environmental impacts documented in
the Final EIS, Western has selected \1\ the Agency Preferred
Alternative identified in the Final EIS as the route for the Project.
The Agency Preferred Alternative route will be the basis for design and
engineering activities that will finalize the centerline, ROW, and
access road locations, particularly in the New Build Section.
Additionally, this ROD commits Western and Southline to implement the
PCEMs identified in the Final EIS in table 2-8 to minimize
environmental impacts. Selection of the Agency Preferred Alternative
will also allow detailed Project costs to be developed, which are
necessary for future participation and financing decisions. These
decisions are contingent on the successful development of participation
agreements and financial underwriting, and would be recorded in a
second ROD. Participation and financing agreements will address Project
details such as interconnections, ownership, operations, maintenance,
marketing, financing, and land acquisition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On November 16, 2011, DOE's Acting General Counsel restated
the delegation to Western's Administrator all the authorities of the
General Counsel respecting environmental impact statements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This ROD was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the
Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing NEPA (40
CFR parts 1500 through 1508) and U.S. Department of Energy NEPA
regulations (10 CFR part 1021).
Dated: April 5, 2016.
Mark A. Gabriel,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-08620 Filed 4-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P