Interconnection for the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project, 7886-7889 [E9-3655]
Download as PDF
7886
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Notices
compliance with Commission Order
712.
Filed Date: 02/12/2009.
Accession Number: 20090213–0163.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time
on Friday, February 20, 2009.
Docket Numbers: RP09–283–001.
Applicants: Iroquois Gas
Transmission System, L.P.
Description: Iroquois Gas
Transmission System, LP submits
Seventh Revised Sheet 50B to FERC Gas
Tariff, First Revised Volume 1.
Filed Date: 02/11/2009.
Accession Number: 20090212–0055.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time
on Monday, February 23, 2009.
Docket Numbers: RP09–294–001.
Applicants: Columbia Gas
Transmission, LLC.
Description: Columbia Gas
Transmission, LLC submits Eighth
Revised Sheet 351 to FERC Gas Tariff,
Second Revised Volume 1.
Filed Date: 02/11/2009.
Accession Number: 20090212–0261.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time
on Monday, February 23, 2009.
Docket Numbers: RP09–358–000.
Applicants: Dominion South Pipeline
Company, LP.
Description: Dominion South Pipeline
Company, LP submits for filing 1st
Revised Sheet 1000 et al. for inclusion
in FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1,
with a proposed effective date of 3/12/
09.
Filed Date: 02/11/2009.
Accession Number: 20090212–0271.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time
on Monday, February 23, 2009.
Docket Numbers: RP09–359–000.
Applicants: Dominion Cove Point
LNG, LP.
Description: Dominion Cove Point
LNG, LP submits for filing 8th Revised
Sheet 200 et al. for inclusion in FERC
Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1, with a
proposed effective date of 3/12/09.
Filed Date: 02/11/2009.
Accession Number: 20090212–0270.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time
on Monday, February 23, 2009.
Docket Numbers: RP09–360–000.
Applicants: Dominion Transmission,
Inc.
Description: Dominion Transmission,
Inc submits for filing 17th Revised Sheet
1000 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Third
Revised Volume 1, with a proposed
effective date 3/12/09.
Filed Date: 02/11/2009.
Accession Number: 20090212–0269.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time
on Monday, February 23, 2009.
Docket Numbers: RP09–361–000.
Applicants: Columbia Gas
Transmission, LLC.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:55 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
Description: Columbia Gas
Transmission submits First Revised
Sheet 25C to Second Revised Volume 1
under RP09–361, with a proposed
effective date of 4/1/09.
Filed Date: 02/11/2009.
Accession Number: 20090212–0268.
Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time
on Monday, February 23, 2009.
Any person desiring to intervene or to
protest in any of the above proceedings
must file in accordance with Rules 211
and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211
and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern
time on the specified comment date. It
is not necessary to separately intervene
again in a subdocket related to a
compliance filing if you have previously
intervened in the same docket. Protests
will be considered by the Commission
in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make
protestants parties to the proceeding.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or
protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. In reference
to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on
or before the comment deadline need
not be served on persons other than the
Applicant.
The Commission encourages
electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the
FERC Online links at https://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic
service, persons with Internet access
who will eFile a document and/or be
listed as a contact for an intervenor
must create and validate an
eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling
link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
Persons unable to file electronically
should submit an original and 14 copies
of the intervention or protest to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First St., NE., Washington, DC
20426.
The filings in the above proceedings
are accessible in the Commission’s
eLibrary system by clicking on the
appropriate link in the above list. They
are also available for review in the
Commission’s Public Reference Room in
Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the Web site that
enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added
to a subscribed dockets(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online
service, please e-mail
FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov. or call
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call
(202) 502–8659.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary. CNFGAS02132009
[FR Doc. E9–3634 Filed 2–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Western Area Power Administration
Interconnection for the Keystone Oil
Pipeline Project
AGENCY: Western Area Power
Administration, DOE.
ACTION: Record of Decision.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE), Western Area Power
Administration (Western), announces its
decision to modify three existing
Western substation facilities and
construct one new tap facility to
accommodate interconnection requests
from Minnkota Power Cooperative,
Central Power Electric Cooperative, and
East River Electric Power Cooperative
(the Applicants). The modifications,
construction, and interconnections are
connected actions to the TransCanada
Keystone Oil Pipeline Project, the
environmental impacts of which were
analyzed in the Final Environmental
Impact Statement for the Keystone Oil
Pipeline Project issued by the
Department of State (DOS) 1 and
adopted by DOE Western as DOE/EIS–
0410 on January 21, 2009.
Western will modify three existing
Western facilities: The Lakota
Substation, Nelson County, North
Dakota; the Forman Substation, Sargent
County, North Dakota; the Groton
Substation, Brown County, South
Dakota; and construct one new facility,
the Enderlin Tap facility, Ransom
County, North Dakota.
Western has prepared this Record of
Decision (ROD) in accordance with the
regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) (40 CFR
1500–1508) for implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and DOE’s NEPA Implementing
Procedures (10 CFR 1021).
ADDRESSES: The Final Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) and project
information are available on the DOS
Keystone Pipeline Web site at https://
www.keystonepipeline.state.gov/
clientsite/keystone.nsf?Open. This ROD
and the EIS will be available on the DOE
NEPA Web site at https://
www.gc.energy.gov/NEPA/. In addition,
1 See Environmental Protection Agency, Notice of
Availability, 73 FR 2027 (January 11, 2008).
E:\FR\FM\20FEN1.SGM
20FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Notices
copies of this ROD may be requested by
contacting Mr. Nicholas Stas, NEPA
Compliance Officer, Western Area
Power Administration, P.O. Box 35800,
Billings, MT 59107, by telephone at
(406) 247–7399, by facsimile at (406)
247–7408, or by electronic mail at
stas@wapa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information about this ROD,
contact Mr. Stas as indicated in the
ADDRESSES section above. For
information about DOE’s NEPA process,
contact Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom,
Director, NEPA Policy and Compliance,
GC–20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585, telephone (202)
586–4600 or leave a message at (800)
472–2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOS was
the lead agency in the preparation of the
Final Environmental Impact Statement
for the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project.
Western participated as a cooperating
agency in preparation of this EIS in
order to address Western’s proposed
response to the Applicants’
interconnection request requiring
modification of three existing
substations and construction of one new
transmission line tap to support the
Keystone Oil Pipeline Project.
Background
Executive Order 13337 (69 FR 2529,
May 5, 2004), as amended, delegates to
the Secretary of State the President’s
authority to receive applications for
permits for the construction,
connection, operation, or maintenance
of facilities for the exportation or
importation of petroleum, petroleum
products, coal, or other fuels at the
border of the United States and to issue
or deny such Presidential permits. The
functions assigned to the Secretary have
been further delegated within DOS.
On April 19, 2006, TransCanada
Keystone Pipeline, LP (Keystone), filed
an application for a Presidential permit
for the construction, connection,
operation, and maintenance of pipeline
facilities at the border of the United
States and Canada for the transport of
crude oil across the U.S.-Canada
international boundary. Keystone is a
limited partnership, organized under
the laws of the State of Delaware.
Keystone is equally owned by
TransCanada Corporation, a Canadian
public company organized under the
laws of Canada, including the Canada
Business Corporation Act, and
ConocoPhillips Company, a Delaware
corporation.
The Keystone Pipeline will transport
crude oil from Hardisty, Alberta,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:55 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
Canada, to existing terminals and
refineries at Wood River and Patoka,
Illinois, (Mainline Project) with an
extension via Steele City, Nebraska, to
Ponca City and Cushing, Oklahoma
(Cushing Extension). As presented in
the application, the Mainline Project
crosses the U.S.-Canada border at
Pembina County, North Dakota, and
follows a southern track through North
Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska. At
Steele City, Nebraska, the route of the
Mainline Project turns east through the
northeast corner of Kansas and crosses
Missouri to the terminals in Illinois. The
Cushing Extension continues south from
Steele City, Nebraska, through Kansas to
Ponca City and Cushing, Oklahoma.2
A portion of the Keystone Oil Pipeline
Project is located within Western’s
Upper Great Plains Region, specifically
North Dakota and South Dakota.
Minnkota Power Cooperative, Central
Power Electric Cooperative, and East
River Electric Power Cooperative
submitted interconnection requests to
Western to serve pumping stations
associated with the Keystone Oil
Pipeline Project.
Western’s connected action is a small
part of the overall Keystone Oil Pipeline
Project, involving interconnection
requests for power to supply only four
of the required 23 pumping stations.
Three existing Western substation
facilities and one new tap facility were
identified as interconnection points to
serve the delivery of electricity to the
pumping stations. The existing facilities
identified were the Lakota Substation,
located in Nelson County, North Dakota,
the Forman Substation, located in
Sargent County, North Dakota, and the
Groton Substation, located in Brown
County, South Dakota. A new
transmission line tap, the Enderlin Tap,
will be located in Ransom County,
North Dakota, along Western’s existing
Valley City-Forman 115-kilovolt (kV)
transmission line.3
Western’s Federal action associated
with the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project
is approval or denial of the network
customers’ interconnection request for
2 DOS issued a permit on March 11, 2008,
authorizing TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP, to
construct, connect, operate, and maintain pipeline
facilities at border crossing facilities in connection
with the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project, which is
designed to transport incremental Canadian crude
oil production from the Western Canadian
Sedimentary Basin to existing terminals in Illinois
and Oklahoma.
3 Independent of the Keystone Oil Pipeline, these
actions normally do not require an Environmental
Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement.
The actions listed can be classified as classes of
actions that DOE has determined do not
individually or cumulatively have significant effect
on the human environment (categorical exclusions)
(10 CFR Pt. 1021, Subpt. D, App. B4.11).
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7887
unplanned load delivery. Western, as
the network provider and a balancing
authority, is responsible for meeting
load growth requests from network
customers. In responding to the
Applicants’ requests, Western must
abide by the following:
• Addressing Interconnection
Requests. Western’s General
Requirements for Interconnection
establishes a process for addressing
applications for interconnection. The
process dictates that Western respond to
the application as presented by network
customers.
• Protecting Transmission System
Reliability and Service to Existing
Customers. Western’s purpose and need
is to ensure that existing reliability and
service is not degraded. Western’s
General Requirements for
Interconnection provides for
transmission and system studies to
ensure that system reliability and
service to existing customers is not
adversely affected. If the existing power
system cannot accommodate the
applicant’s request without
modifications or upgrades, the applicant
may be responsible for funding the
necessary work unless the changes
would provide overall system benefits.
Western’s purpose and need for action
is to respond to the interconnection
requests and ensure agency compliance
with applicable environmental laws
while considering the Applicants’
objectives.
NEPA Review
A Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS
was published by the DOS in the
Federal Register on October 11, 2006
(71 FR 59849). DOS held 13 scoping
meetings from October 24, 2006,
through November 16, 2006, in the
vicinity of the proposed Keystone Oil
Pipeline Project route to solicit public
comments. The official scoping period
ended on November 30, 2006; however,
additional comments received after this
date were considered in the draft
environmental impact statement (Draft
EIS). The Keystone Oil Pipeline Project
Draft EIS was issued for public review
on August 10, 2007. From September 4,
2007, through September 20, 2007, 13
public hearings were held to solicit
public comments on the Draft EIS. The
public comment period ended on
September 24, 2007; however,
additional comments were accepted
until November 2007. DOE reviewed
and provided comments to DOS on the
Draft and Final EIS. The Notice of
Availability of the Final EIS was
published by the Environmental
Protection Agency in the Federal
E:\FR\FM\20FEN1.SGM
20FEN1
7888
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Notices
Register on January 11, 2008 (73 FR
2027).
Alternatives Considered
The EIS evaluated the proposed
Keystone oil pipeline (preferred
alternative), the No Action alternative, a
Systems alternative, Major Route
alternative, Route Variations for the
Proposed alternative, and an
Aboveground Facility alternative.
Western considered alternative sites for
its connected actions but dismissed
them from consideration, as no viable
alternative locations were identified.
Therefore, Western limited its analysis
to the interconnection requests along
the preferred alternative route the
Applicants submitted for approval.
Under the No Action alternative, the
Keystone Oil Pipeline Project would not
be built and Western would not grant
the Applicant’s request to interconnect
to Western’s transmission system.
Western would not modify the three
existing substation facilities nor
construct one transmission line tap
facility. Without Western’s actions,
existing environmental conditions at the
four locations would remain unchanged.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
Western evaluated the alternatives to
determine which is environmentally
preferred, as required under 40 CFR
1505.2(b). The No Action alternative is
the environmentally preferred
alternative because no new disturbance
would result. No impacts to
environmental or social resources
would occur. The No Action alternative
would not, however, meet the
Applicants’ objectives.
Consultation
The DOS is the lead Federal agency
for Keystone Oil Pipeline Project
compliance with section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act
(NHPA) and Tribal consultation for all
components of the Project. Western is
responsible for compliance of its own
actions with section 106 of the NHPA.
Western reviewed the Lakota
Substation, Forman Substation, and
Groton Substation interconnection
requests and determined the
modifications would take place within
the existing facility boundaries;
therefore, no consultation would be
required. Western reviewed the
Enderlin Tap interconnection request
and determined consultation was
required. Western consulted with the
North Dakota State Historic Preservation
Officer (North Dakota SHPO) for the
Enderlin Tap facility. Concurrence was
received from the North Dakota SHPO
for the Enderlin Tap facility on
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:55 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
December 17, 2008. Western also
evaluated the location of its action in
relation to tribal lands. No tribal lands
will be impacted by the Western action.
The DOS is also the lead for Keystone
Oil Pipeline Project compliance with
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1536). Western is
responsible for compliance of its own
actions with section 7 of the ESA.
Western committed in a letter dated
February 7, 2008, to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) of the
Department of the Interior to complete
the ESA section 7 consultation prior to
committing any resources or authorizing
electrical infrastructure for the Keystone
Project. Western determined that its
actions would not affect the listed
species for Nelson, Sargent, and Ransom
counties, North Dakota, and Brown
County, South Dakota. These species
include the gray wolf, whooping crane,
Topeka shiner, western prairie fringed
orchid, Eskimo curlew, and Dakota
skipper. Western’s determination was
submitted to the USFWS in a letter
dated December 16, 2008. Concurrence
was received from the South Dakota
Field Office of the USFWS on December
30, 2008, and from the North Dakota
Field Office of the USFWS on January
9, 2009.
Adoption
Western adopted the Final
Environmental Impact Statement for the
Keystone Oil Pipeline Project as DOE/
EIS–0410 on January 21, 2009. Per CEQ
regulations at 40 CFR 1506.3(c), Western
did not re-circulate the EIS because its
comments and suggestions on the EIS
content were satisfied. Western
acknowledges that the EIS is the subject
of two judicial actions, Natural
Resources Defense Council v. U.S.
Department of State, No. 08–CV–01363
(D.D.C., filed Aug. 6, 2008), and The
Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate v. U.S.
Department of State, No. 08–3023
(D.S.D., filed Nov. 24, 2008), which are
not final (40 CFR 1506.3(d)).
Decision
Western has decided to grant the
Applicants’ request to interconnect with
Western’s transmission system at the
existing substations in Nelson and
Sargent counties, North Dakota, and
Brown County, South Dakota, as well as
the new Ransom County, North Dakota,
facility. The actions would meet the
Applicants’ objectives to serve four
pumping stations for the Keystone Oil
Pipeline Project in North Dakota and
South Dakota. Construction, operation,
and maintenance of the actions would
not result in significant short- or longterm environmental impacts.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Western will modify the existing
Lakota Substation, Nelson County,
North Dakota, to include upgrading the
existing 69-kV transformer and ancillary
electrical substation equipment to
provide load delivery. The previously
disturbed existing footprint of the
Lakota Substation will not change with
the upgrade.
Western will modify the existing
Forman Substation, Sargent County,
North Dakota, to include the addition of
a 115-kV bay and ancillary electrical
substation equipment to provide load
delivery. The previously disturbed
existing footprint of the Forman
Substation will not change with the
upgrade.
Western will modify the existing
Groton Substation, Brown County,
South Dakota, to include the addition of
a 115-kV bay and ancillary electrical
substation equipment to provide load
delivery. The previously disturbed
existing footprint of the Groton
Substation will not change with the
upgrade.
Western will construct the new
Enderlin Tap facility, Ransom County,
North Dakota on Western’s existing
Valley City-;Forman 115-kV
transmission line to provide load
delivery. A transmission line tap is the
connection of a new transmission line to
an existing transmission line for the
purposes of supplying electricity to a
new location. The Enderlin Tap facility
consists of the connection between the
Valley City-Forman 115-kV
transmission line and the transmission
line serving the pumping station. The
tap would be at an existing transmission
line pole structure. The tap would not
result in any long-term disturbance.
Western’s connected action will not
involve Western constructing or
modifying any transmission lines.
Transmission system studies conducted
by Western confirmed that no new
transmission lines or upgrades to
Western’s grid are required. Western’s
action would not impact any wetlands
or floodplains.
Mitigation
Western will employ all practical
means to avoid or minimize
environmental harm as a result of the
connected actions. Western adopts the
mitigation measures documented in
section 3.4.3.1 of the EIS. These
measures include:
• Western or its contractor will
exercise care to preserve the natural
landscape and will conduct
construction operations so as to prevent
any unnecessary destruction, scarring,
or defacing of the natural surroundings
in the vicinity of the work. Except
E:\FR\FM\20FEN1.SGM
20FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Notices
where clearing is required for
permanent works, approved
construction roads, or excavation
operations, all trees, native shrubbery,
and vegetation will be preserved and
will be protected from damage by
construction operations and equipment.
• All construction equipment and
vehicles will be pressure-washed
(especially the undercarriage) to remove
foreign soil and debris that may
introduce weeds into the Project areas.
• If revegetation is required,
regionally native plants will be used.
Basis for Decision
Western has determined that the
potential environmental impacts from
its connected actions, with
implementation of the mitigation
measures, are expected to be
insignificant. Western did not select the
No Action alternative because it would
not meet the Applicants’ objectives. In
reaching this decision, Western
considered the low environmental
impacts in the U.S. from modifying the
three substations and construction of
one tap facility as connected actions to
the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project.
Dated: February 13, 2009.
Timothy J. Meeks,
Administrator
[FR Doc. E9–3655 Filed 2–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2008–0717; FRL–8401–4]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Pressed Wood
Manufacturing Industry Survey; EPA
ICR No. 2328.01, OMB Control No.
2070–new; Extension of Comment
Period
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice; extension of comment
period.
SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the
Federal Register of December 24, 2008,
concerning a new Information
Collection Request (ICR) entitled:
‘‘Pressed Wood Manufacturing Industry
Survey’’ and is identified by EPA ICR
No. 2328.01 and OMB Control No.
2070–new, on which EPA was soliciting
comments. This document extends the
comment period for 30 days, from
February 23, 2009 to March 25, 2009.
DATES: Comments, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:55 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
OPPT–2008–0717, must be received on
or before March 25, 2009.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Follow the detailed
instructions as provided under
ADDRESSES in the Federal Register
document of December 24, 2008.
7889
[ER–FRL–8590–7]
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general information contact: Colby
Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator,
Environmental Assistance Division
(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (202) 554–1404; e-mail address:
TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.
For technical information contact:
William Silagi, Economics, Exposure
and Technology Division (7406M),
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (202) 564–8788; fax number:
(202) 564–8893; e-mail address:
silagi.william@epa.gov.
This
document extends the public comment
period established in the Federal
Register of December 24, 2008 (73 FR
79083) (FRL–8393–3). In that document,
EPA announced that it is planning to
submit a request for a new ICR to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) in compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The ICR is entitled:
‘‘Pressed Wood Manufacturing Industry
Survey’’ and is identified by EPA ICR
No. 2328.01 and OMB Control No.
2070–new. Before submitting the ICR to
OMB for review and approval, EPA was
soliciting comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection.
EPA is hereby extending the comment
period, which was set to end on
February 23, 2009, to March 25, 2009.
To submit comments, or access the
public docket, please follow the detailed
instructions as provided under
ADDRESSES in the December 24, 2008
Federal Register document. If you have
questions, consult the technical person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
List of Subjects
Environmental protection, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: January 29, 2009.
James Jones,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of
Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.
[FR Doc. E9–2557 Filed 2–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Environmental Impact Statements and
Regulations; Availability of EPA
Comments
Availability of EPA comments
prepared pursuant to the Environmental
Review Process (ERP), under section
309 of the Clean Air Act and Section
102(2)(c) of the National Environmental
Policy Act as amended. Requests for
copies of EPA comments can be directed
to the Office of Federal Activities at
202–564–7146.
An explanation of the ratings assigned
to draft environmental impact
statements (EISs) was published in FR
dated April 6, 2008 (73 FR 19833).
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20080072, ERP No. D–IBR–
J39038–C0, Southern Delivery System
Project, Water Supply Development,
Execution of up to 40-year Contracts
for Use of Fryingpan-Arkansas Project
Facilities, Special Use Permit, El Paso
County, CO.
Summary: EPA raised environmental
concerns about potential impacts to
water quality, including the potential to
exacerbate existing water quality
impairments to water bodies within the
Arkansas River Basin and the lack of
mitigation for these impacts. EPA also
raised concerns over the potential for
increased flooding and erosion due to
return flows into Fountain Creek. EPA
strongly encouraged Reclamation to
include mitigation commitments to
offset the water quality impacts in the
Final EIS and Record of Decision. Rating
EC2.
EIS No. 20080333, ERP No. D–IBR–
J39040–CO, Windy Gap Firming
Project, Construct a New Water
Storage Reservoir to Deliver Water to
Front Range and West Slope
Communities and Industries,
Funding, NPDES and U.S. Army COE
Section 404 Permit, Grand and
Larimer Counties, CO.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental objections to this
proposal because of the potential for the
project to worsen water quality in
already impaired waters without the
assurance of adequate mitigation. EPA
also requested additional information
regarding impacts to water quality and
stream morphology. Rating EO2.
EIS No. 20080343, ERP No. D–FRC–
L03014–OR, Jordan Cove Energy and
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline
Project, Construction and Operation,
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Import
E:\FR\FM\20FEN1.SGM
20FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 33 (Friday, February 20, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7886-7889]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-3655]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Western Area Power Administration
Interconnection for the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project
AGENCY: Western Area Power Administration, DOE.
ACTION: Record of Decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Western Area Power
Administration (Western), announces its decision to modify three
existing Western substation facilities and construct one new tap
facility to accommodate interconnection requests from Minnkota Power
Cooperative, Central Power Electric Cooperative, and East River
Electric Power Cooperative (the Applicants). The modifications,
construction, and interconnections are connected actions to the
TransCanada Keystone Oil Pipeline Project, the environmental impacts of
which were analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the
Keystone Oil Pipeline Project issued by the Department of State (DOS)
\1\ and adopted by DOE Western as DOE/EIS-0410 on January 21, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Environmental Protection Agency, Notice of Availability,
73 FR 2027 (January 11, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western will modify three existing Western facilities: The Lakota
Substation, Nelson County, North Dakota; the Forman Substation, Sargent
County, North Dakota; the Groton Substation, Brown County, South
Dakota; and construct one new facility, the Enderlin Tap facility,
Ransom County, North Dakota.
Western has prepared this Record of Decision (ROD) in accordance
with the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) (40
CFR 1500-1508) for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and DOE's NEPA Implementing Procedures (10 CFR 1021).
ADDRESSES: The Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and project
information are available on the DOS Keystone Pipeline Web site at
https://www.keystonepipeline.state.gov/clientsite/keystone.nsf?Open.
This ROD and the EIS will be available on the DOE NEPA Web site at
https://www.gc.energy.gov/NEPA/. In addition,
[[Page 7887]]
copies of this ROD may be requested by contacting Mr. Nicholas Stas,
NEPA Compliance Officer, Western Area Power Administration, P.O. Box
35800, Billings, MT 59107, by telephone at (406) 247-7399, by facsimile
at (406) 247-7408, or by electronic mail at stas@wapa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about this
ROD, contact Mr. Stas as indicated in the ADDRESSES section above. For
information about DOE's NEPA process, contact Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom,
Director, NEPA Policy and Compliance, GC-20, U.S. Department of Energy,
1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, telephone (202)
586-4600 or leave a message at (800) 472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOS was the lead agency in the preparation
of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Keystone Oil
Pipeline Project. Western participated as a cooperating agency in
preparation of this EIS in order to address Western's proposed response
to the Applicants' interconnection request requiring modification of
three existing substations and construction of one new transmission
line tap to support the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project.
Background
Executive Order 13337 (69 FR 2529, May 5, 2004), as amended,
delegates to the Secretary of State the President's authority to
receive applications for permits for the construction, connection,
operation, or maintenance of facilities for the exportation or
importation of petroleum, petroleum products, coal, or other fuels at
the border of the United States and to issue or deny such Presidential
permits. The functions assigned to the Secretary have been further
delegated within DOS.
On April 19, 2006, TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP (Keystone),
filed an application for a Presidential permit for the construction,
connection, operation, and maintenance of pipeline facilities at the
border of the United States and Canada for the transport of crude oil
across the U.S.-Canada international boundary. Keystone is a limited
partnership, organized under the laws of the State of Delaware.
Keystone is equally owned by TransCanada Corporation, a Canadian public
company organized under the laws of Canada, including the Canada
Business Corporation Act, and ConocoPhillips Company, a Delaware
corporation.
The Keystone Pipeline will transport crude oil from Hardisty,
Alberta, Canada, to existing terminals and refineries at Wood River and
Patoka, Illinois, (Mainline Project) with an extension via Steele City,
Nebraska, to Ponca City and Cushing, Oklahoma (Cushing Extension). As
presented in the application, the Mainline Project crosses the U.S.-
Canada border at Pembina County, North Dakota, and follows a southern
track through North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska. At Steele City,
Nebraska, the route of the Mainline Project turns east through the
northeast corner of Kansas and crosses Missouri to the terminals in
Illinois. The Cushing Extension continues south from Steele City,
Nebraska, through Kansas to Ponca City and Cushing, Oklahoma.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ DOS issued a permit on March 11, 2008, authorizing
TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP, to construct, connect, operate,
and maintain pipeline facilities at border crossing facilities in
connection with the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project, which is designed
to transport incremental Canadian crude oil production from the
Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin to existing terminals in Illinois
and Oklahoma.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A portion of the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project is located within
Western's Upper Great Plains Region, specifically North Dakota and
South Dakota. Minnkota Power Cooperative, Central Power Electric
Cooperative, and East River Electric Power Cooperative submitted
interconnection requests to Western to serve pumping stations
associated with the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project.
Western's connected action is a small part of the overall Keystone
Oil Pipeline Project, involving interconnection requests for power to
supply only four of the required 23 pumping stations. Three existing
Western substation facilities and one new tap facility were identified
as interconnection points to serve the delivery of electricity to the
pumping stations. The existing facilities identified were the Lakota
Substation, located in Nelson County, North Dakota, the Forman
Substation, located in Sargent County, North Dakota, and the Groton
Substation, located in Brown County, South Dakota. A new transmission
line tap, the Enderlin Tap, will be located in Ransom County, North
Dakota, along Western's existing Valley City-Forman 115-kilovolt (kV)
transmission line.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Independent of the Keystone Oil Pipeline, these actions
normally do not require an Environmental Assessment or Environmental
Impact Statement. The actions listed can be classified as classes of
actions that DOE has determined do not individually or cumulatively
have significant effect on the human environment (categorical
exclusions) (10 CFR Pt. 1021, Subpt. D, App. B4.11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western's Federal action associated with the Keystone Oil Pipeline
Project is approval or denial of the network customers' interconnection
request for unplanned load delivery. Western, as the network provider
and a balancing authority, is responsible for meeting load growth
requests from network customers. In responding to the Applicants'
requests, Western must abide by the following:
Addressing Interconnection Requests. Western's General
Requirements for Interconnection establishes a process for addressing
applications for interconnection. The process dictates that Western
respond to the application as presented by network customers.
Protecting Transmission System Reliability and Service to
Existing Customers. Western's purpose and need is to ensure that
existing reliability and service is not degraded. Western's General
Requirements for Interconnection provides for transmission and system
studies to ensure that system reliability and service to existing
customers is not adversely affected. If the existing power system
cannot accommodate the applicant's request without modifications or
upgrades, the applicant may be responsible for funding the necessary
work unless the changes would provide overall system benefits.
Western's purpose and need for action is to respond to the
interconnection requests and ensure agency compliance with applicable
environmental laws while considering the Applicants' objectives.
NEPA Review
A Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS was published by the DOS in
the Federal Register on October 11, 2006 (71 FR 59849). DOS held 13
scoping meetings from October 24, 2006, through November 16, 2006, in
the vicinity of the proposed Keystone Oil Pipeline Project route to
solicit public comments. The official scoping period ended on November
30, 2006; however, additional comments received after this date were
considered in the draft environmental impact statement (Draft EIS). The
Keystone Oil Pipeline Project Draft EIS was issued for public review on
August 10, 2007. From September 4, 2007, through September 20, 2007, 13
public hearings were held to solicit public comments on the Draft EIS.
The public comment period ended on September 24, 2007; however,
additional comments were accepted until November 2007. DOE reviewed and
provided comments to DOS on the Draft and Final EIS. The Notice of
Availability of the Final EIS was published by the Environmental
Protection Agency in the Federal
[[Page 7888]]
Register on January 11, 2008 (73 FR 2027).
Alternatives Considered
The EIS evaluated the proposed Keystone oil pipeline (preferred
alternative), the No Action alternative, a Systems alternative, Major
Route alternative, Route Variations for the Proposed alternative, and
an Aboveground Facility alternative. Western considered alternative
sites for its connected actions but dismissed them from consideration,
as no viable alternative locations were identified. Therefore, Western
limited its analysis to the interconnection requests along the
preferred alternative route the Applicants submitted for approval.
Under the No Action alternative, the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project
would not be built and Western would not grant the Applicant's request
to interconnect to Western's transmission system. Western would not
modify the three existing substation facilities nor construct one
transmission line tap facility. Without Western's actions, existing
environmental conditions at the four locations would remain unchanged.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
Western evaluated the alternatives to determine which is
environmentally preferred, as required under 40 CFR 1505.2(b). The No
Action alternative is the environmentally preferred alternative because
no new disturbance would result. No impacts to environmental or social
resources would occur. The No Action alternative would not, however,
meet the Applicants' objectives.
Consultation
The DOS is the lead Federal agency for Keystone Oil Pipeline
Project compliance with section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) and Tribal consultation for all components of
the Project. Western is responsible for compliance of its own actions
with section 106 of the NHPA. Western reviewed the Lakota Substation,
Forman Substation, and Groton Substation interconnection requests and
determined the modifications would take place within the existing
facility boundaries; therefore, no consultation would be required.
Western reviewed the Enderlin Tap interconnection request and
determined consultation was required. Western consulted with the North
Dakota State Historic Preservation Officer (North Dakota SHPO) for the
Enderlin Tap facility. Concurrence was received from the North Dakota
SHPO for the Enderlin Tap facility on December 17, 2008. Western also
evaluated the location of its action in relation to tribal lands. No
tribal lands will be impacted by the Western action.
The DOS is also the lead for Keystone Oil Pipeline Project
compliance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16
U.S.C. 1536). Western is responsible for compliance of its own actions
with section 7 of the ESA. Western committed in a letter dated February
7, 2008, to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) of the
Department of the Interior to complete the ESA section 7 consultation
prior to committing any resources or authorizing electrical
infrastructure for the Keystone Project. Western determined that its
actions would not affect the listed species for Nelson, Sargent, and
Ransom counties, North Dakota, and Brown County, South Dakota. These
species include the gray wolf, whooping crane, Topeka shiner, western
prairie fringed orchid, Eskimo curlew, and Dakota skipper. Western's
determination was submitted to the USFWS in a letter dated December 16,
2008. Concurrence was received from the South Dakota Field Office of
the USFWS on December 30, 2008, and from the North Dakota Field Office
of the USFWS on January 9, 2009.
Adoption
Western adopted the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the
Keystone Oil Pipeline Project as DOE/EIS-0410 on January 21, 2009. Per
CEQ regulations at 40 CFR 1506.3(c), Western did not re-circulate the
EIS because its comments and suggestions on the EIS content were
satisfied. Western acknowledges that the EIS is the subject of two
judicial actions, Natural Resources Defense Council v. U.S. Department
of State, No. 08-CV-01363 (D.D.C., filed Aug. 6, 2008), and The
Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate v. U.S. Department of State, No. 08-3023
(D.S.D., filed Nov. 24, 2008), which are not final (40 CFR 1506.3(d)).
Decision
Western has decided to grant the Applicants' request to
interconnect with Western's transmission system at the existing
substations in Nelson and Sargent counties, North Dakota, and Brown
County, South Dakota, as well as the new Ransom County, North Dakota,
facility. The actions would meet the Applicants' objectives to serve
four pumping stations for the Keystone Oil Pipeline Project in North
Dakota and South Dakota. Construction, operation, and maintenance of
the actions would not result in significant short- or long-term
environmental impacts.
Western will modify the existing Lakota Substation, Nelson County,
North Dakota, to include upgrading the existing 69-kV transformer and
ancillary electrical substation equipment to provide load delivery. The
previously disturbed existing footprint of the Lakota Substation will
not change with the upgrade.
Western will modify the existing Forman Substation, Sargent County,
North Dakota, to include the addition of a 115-kV bay and ancillary
electrical substation equipment to provide load delivery. The
previously disturbed existing footprint of the Forman Substation will
not change with the upgrade.
Western will modify the existing Groton Substation, Brown County,
South Dakota, to include the addition of a 115-kV bay and ancillary
electrical substation equipment to provide load delivery. The
previously disturbed existing footprint of the Groton Substation will
not change with the upgrade.
Western will construct the new Enderlin Tap facility, Ransom
County, North Dakota on Western's existing Valley City-;Forman 115-kV
transmission line to provide load delivery. A transmission line tap is
the connection of a new transmission line to an existing transmission
line for the purposes of supplying electricity to a new location. The
Enderlin Tap facility consists of the connection between the Valley
City-Forman 115-kV transmission line and the transmission line serving
the pumping station. The tap would be at an existing transmission line
pole structure. The tap would not result in any long-term disturbance.
Western's connected action will not involve Western constructing or
modifying any transmission lines. Transmission system studies conducted
by Western confirmed that no new transmission lines or upgrades to
Western's grid are required. Western's action would not impact any
wetlands or floodplains.
Mitigation
Western will employ all practical means to avoid or minimize
environmental harm as a result of the connected actions. Western adopts
the mitigation measures documented in section 3.4.3.1 of the EIS. These
measures include:
Western or its contractor will exercise care to preserve
the natural landscape and will conduct construction operations so as to
prevent any unnecessary destruction, scarring, or defacing of the
natural surroundings in the vicinity of the work. Except
[[Page 7889]]
where clearing is required for permanent works, approved construction
roads, or excavation operations, all trees, native shrubbery, and
vegetation will be preserved and will be protected from damage by
construction operations and equipment.
All construction equipment and vehicles will be pressure-
washed (especially the undercarriage) to remove foreign soil and debris
that may introduce weeds into the Project areas.
If revegetation is required, regionally native plants will
be used.
Basis for Decision
Western has determined that the potential environmental impacts
from its connected actions, with implementation of the mitigation
measures, are expected to be insignificant. Western did not select the
No Action alternative because it would not meet the Applicants'
objectives. In reaching this decision, Western considered the low
environmental impacts in the U.S. from modifying the three substations
and construction of one tap facility as connected actions to the
Keystone Oil Pipeline Project.
Dated: February 13, 2009.
Timothy J. Meeks,
Administrator
[FR Doc. E9-3655 Filed 2-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P