U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District; Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP; Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Cove Point Expansion Project, 26491-26493 [E6-6844]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
• Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 87 (Friday, May 5, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26491-26493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-6844]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP05-130-000, CP05-132-000, Corps Application  
CENAB-OP-RMS200565510-4; Docket No. CP05-131-000]


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District; Dominion Cove 
Point LNG, LP; Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Availability of 
the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Cove Point Expansion 
Project

April 28, 2006.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or 
Commission) in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
(Corps) and U.S. Coast Guard, (Coast Guard) has prepared a final 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a liquefied natural gas (LNG) 
import terminal expansion

[[Page 26492]]

and natural gas pipeline facilities proposed by Dominion Cove Point 
LNG, L.P. and Dominion Transmission, Inc. (collectively referred to as 
Dominion) in the above-referenced dockets. The final EIS was prepared 
to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA). The final EIS addresses federally listed species, cultural 
resources, and essential fish habitat issues. A draft General 
Conformity Determination was also prepared by the FERC to assess the 
potential air quality impacts associated with construction and 
operation of the proposed project and is included as Appendix H of the 
final EIS.
    The FERC staff concludes that approval of the proposed project with 
appropriate mitigating measures, as recommended, would have limited 
adverse environmental impact.
    The final EIS addresses the potential environmental effects of the 
construction and operation of the following LNG terminal and natural 
gas (steel) pipeline facilities:
     Two new 160,000 cubic meter single containment LNG storage 
tanks;
     Additional vaporization capacity consisting of shell and 
tube vaporizers and associated equipment;
     Additional power generation equipment consisting of two 
21.7 megawatt gas turbine generators and three emergency generators;
     Infrastructure associated with the LNG terminal expansion 
including roads and storage and work areas at the existing site;
     About 47.8 miles of 36-inch-diameter, loop pipeline in 
Calvert, Prince Georges, and Charles County, Maryland (TL-532 
Pipeline);
     Ancillary areas for pipeline construction, including 
access roads, staging areas, and work spaces;
     About 81 miles of 24-inch-diameter pipeline lateral in 
Juniata, Mifflin, Huntingdon, Centre, and Clinton Counties, 
Pennsylvania (PL-1 EXT2 Pipeline);
     Two new compressor stations in Juniata County (Perulack 
Station) and Centre County (Centre Relay Station), Pennsylvania;
     About 11 miles of 24-inch diameter pipeline loop in Wetzel 
County, West Virginia and Greene County, Pennsylvania (TL-492 EXT3 
Pipeline);
     About 12 miles of 24-inch-diameter pipeline loop in Potter 
County, Pennsylvania (TL-453 EXT1 Pipeline);
     About 10 miles of 20-inch-diameter pipeline loop in Potter 
County, Pennsylvania (TL-536 Pipeline);
     Replacement of about 0.6 mile and pressure testing and 
possible replacement of about 0.4 mile of 30-inch-diameter pipeline in 
Franklin County, Pennsylvania (PL-1 Pipeline Pressure Restoration 
Sites);
     Minor modifications to the existing Loudoun Measuring and 
Regulating (M&R) Station in Loudoun County, Virginia;
     About 2,800 horsepower (hp) of additional compression at 
the existing Mockingbird Hill Compressor Station in Wetzel County, West 
Virginia;
     Minor modifications to the existing Leesburg Compressor 
Station in Loudoun County, Virginia;
     Minor modifications to the existing Chambersburg 
Compressor Station in Franklin County, Pennsylvania;
     Additional facilities and pipeline replacement at the 
existing Leidy M&R Station located at the Leidy Hub complex in Clinton 
County, Pennsylvania;
     About 3,550 hp of additional compression at Dominion's 
previously approved Wolf Run Compressor Station in Lewis County, West 
Virginia; and
     Minor modifications to Dominion's previously approved 
Quinlan Compressor Station in Cattaraugus County, New York.
    Dominion's proposed LNG terminal expansion would increase the send-
out capability by 800,000 dekatherms per day (Dth/d) and increase the 
storage capacity by 6.8 MMDth/d. Dominion's proposed pipeline and 
related facilities in Maryland and Virginia would allow it to deliver 
an additional 800,000 Dth/d from its LNG terminal to its connections 
with other interstate pipelines. Dominion's proposed pipelines and 
related facilities in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and New York would 
allow it to transport an additional 700,000 Dth/d to various delivery 
points on its system, and offer a new underground storage service of 
6.0 MMDth, with an additional demand of 100,000 Dth/d.
    Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP has applied, concurrently, to the Corps 
for a Department of the Army Individual Permit pursuant to Section 404 
of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) and section 10 of the Rivers 
and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403) for proposed structures in and 
under navigable waters and the discharge of dredged, excavated, and/or 
fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands to 
construct the preferred alternative identified in the final EIS. The 
decision whether to issue the permits will be based on an evaluation of 
the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed 
projects on the public interest. The decision will reflect the national 
concern for the protection and utilization of important resources. The 
benefits, which would be reasonably expected to accrue from the 
proposed projects, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable 
detriments. All factors, which may be relevant to the proposed work, 
will be considered, including the cumulative effects thereof; among 
those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental 
concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values, flood 
hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shore erosion and 
accretion, recreation, water supply, and conservation, water quality, 
energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, consideration of 
property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of the 
people.
    The Corps solicited comments from the public; Federal, State, and 
local agencies and officials; Indian tribes; and other interested 
parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of the proposed 
project. Comments received will be considered by the Corps to determine 
whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for the proposal. 
To make this decision, the Corps uses comments received to access 
impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, 
general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors 
listed above.
    The evaluation of the impact of the work described above on the 
public interest will also include application, by the Corps, of the 
guidelines [Section 404(b)(1)] promulgated by the Administrator, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, under authority of Section 404 of the 
Clean Water Act.
    For Corps permitting purposes, if applicable, the applicant is 
required to obtain a Water Quality Certification in accordance with 
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act from the Maryland Department of the 
Environment (MDE), the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental 
Protection, and the State of West Virginia Division of Environmental 
Protection. The Section 401 certifying agencies have a statutory limit 
of one year in which to make their decisions. Additionally, for Corps 
permitting purposes, the applicant is required to obtain Coastal Zone 
Management Consistency concurrence from the MDE, as well. It should be 
noted that the MDE has a statutory limit of 6 months in which to make 
its consistency determination.
    The U.S. Coast Guard (Coast Guard) within the U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security is also participating as a cooperating agency in the 
preparation of the EIS because it exercises regulatory authority over 
LNG

[[Page 26493]]

facilities that affect the safety and security of port areas and 
navigable waterways under Executive Order 10173; the Magnuson Act (50 
U.S.C. 191); the Ports and Waterways Safety Act of 1972, as amended (33 
U.S.C. 1221, et seq.); and the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 
2002 (46 U.S.C. 701). The Coast Guard also has authority for LNG 
facility plan review, approval and compliance verification as provided 
in title 33 CFR part 105, and siting as it pertains to the management 
of vessel traffic in and around the LNG facility. As required by its 
regulations, the Coast Guard is responsible for issuing a Letter of 
Recommendation (LOR) as to the suitability of the waterway for LNG 
marine traffic.
    The final EIS has been placed in the public files of the FERC and 
is available for distribution and public inspection at: Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., 
Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 208-1371.
    Copies of the final EIS have been mailed to Federal, State, and 
local agencies; public interest groups; individuals and affected 
landowners who requested a copy of the final EIS or provided comments 
during scoping; libraries; newspapers; and parties to this proceeding. 
A limited number of documents and CD-ROMs are available from the Public 
Reference Room identified above. In addition, hard-copies of the 
document are also available for reading at public libraries along the 
proposed project route.
    In accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) 
regulations implementing NEPA, no agency decision on a proposed action 
may be made until 30 days after the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency publishes a notice of availability of a final EIS. However, the 
CEQ regulations provide an exception to this rule when an agency 
decision is subject to a formal internal appeal process which allows 
other agency review or the public to make their views known. In such 
cases, the agency decision may be made at the same time the notice of 
the final EIS is published, allowing both periods to run concurrently. 
The Commission decision for this proposed action is subject to a 30-day 
rehearing period.
    Additional information about the project is available from the 
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at 1-866-208-FERC or on the 
FERC Internet Web site (https://www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. 
Click on the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the 
docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number 
field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For 
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at 
FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, 
contact (202) 502-8659. The eLibrary link on the FERC Internet Web site 
also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the 
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called 
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances 
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time 
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with 
notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to 
the documents. Go to the eSubscription link on the FERC Internet Web 
site.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-6844 Filed 5-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P