Conditional Commitment for a Federal Loan Guarantee for Project Financing for Southwest Intertie Project-South, 65615-65618 [2010-27046]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 26, 2010 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Environmental Management SiteSpecific Advisory Board, Portsmouth
Issued at Washington, DC, on October 14,
2010.
Rachel Samuel,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
AGENCY:
[FR Doc. 2010–26444 Filed 10–25–10; 8:45 am]
ACTION:
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
Department of Energy (DOE).
Notice of Open Meeting.
This notice announces a
meeting of the Environmental
Management Site-Specific Advisory
Board (EM SSAB), Portsmouth. The
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.
L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that
public notice of this meeting be
announced in the Federal Register.
DATES: Thursday, November 4, 2010, 6
p.m.–8 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Ohio State University,
Endeavor Center, 1862 Shyville Road,
Piketon, Ohio 45661.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel
Bradburne, Deputy Designated Federal
Officer, Department of Energy
Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office, Post
Office Box 700, Piketon, Ohio 45661,
(740) 897–3822,
Joel.Bradburne@lex.doe.gov.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Board is to make recommendations
to DOE–EM and site management in the
areas of environmental restoration,
waste management and related
activities.
Tentative Agenda
• Call to Order, Introductions, Review
of Agenda
• Approval of September Minutes
• Deputy Designated Federal Officer’s
Comments
• Federal Coordinator’s Comments
• Liaisons’ Comments
• Ohio University Update
• Administrative Issues:
Æ Subcommittee Updates
Æ Recommendation on Public Tour
Æ Motions
• Second reading of amendment to the
Operating Procedures
• Public Comments
• Final Comments
• Adjourn
Public Participation: The meeting is
open to the public. The EM SSAB,
Portsmouth, welcomes the attendance of
the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to
accommodate persons with physical
disabilities or special needs. If you
require special accommodations due to
a disability, please contact Joel
Bradburne in advance of the meeting at
the phone number listed above. The
Deputy Designated Federal Officer is
empowered to conduct the meeting in a
fashion that will facilitate the orderly
conduct of business.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Oct 25, 2010
Jkt 223001
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Conditional Commitment for a Federal
Loan Guarantee for Project Financing
for Southwest Intertie Project—South
U.S. Department of Energy,
Loan Programs Office.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Record of decision.
The U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) has decided to offer Great
Basin Transmission, LLC (Great Basin),
a conditional commitment for a Federal
loan guarantee for partial financing of
the 235-mile southern portion of the
Southwest Intertie Project (SWIP), a
proposed 500-kilovolt (kV) transmission
line that would extend from southern
Nevada to southern Idaho. This Record
of Decision (ROD) is based on the
analysis in the Final Environmental
Impact Statement for Project Financing
for Southwest Intertie Project—South
(SWIP South) (DOE/EIS–0443, January
2010) (DOE FEIS). The DOE FEIS
consists of a cover sheet for the January
2010 adoption of the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) 1993 Southwest
Intertie Project Environmental Impact
Statement and Proposed Plan
Amendment (SWIP EIS) and the BLM
2008 Environmental Assessment for the
Southwest Intertie Project Southern
Portion NV–040–07–048 (SWIP South
EA). This ROD also reflects minor
modifications to the Great Basin
proposal and new information
developed since DOE issued its FEIS.
DOE’s offer of a conditional
commitment for a loan guarantee for
SWIP South is authorized under Title
XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005,
as amended by Section 406 of the
American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). This
conditional commitment to provide a
Federal loan guarantee is contingent
upon Great Basin satisfying all
precedent funding obligations, and all
other contractual, statutory, regulatory,
environmental compliance, and other
requirements specified by DOE. DOE
has prepared this ROD in accordance
with the Council on Environmental
Quality regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500–
1508) for implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and
DOE’s NEPA Implementing Procedures
(10 CFR Part 1021).
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65615
For
further information about DOE’s
decision, contact Carol Hammel-Smith,
NEPA Document Manager,
Environmental Compliance Division,
Loan Programs Office at carol.hammelsmith@hq.doe.gov. Ms. Hammel-Smith
can be reached by mail at the U.S.
Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., LP–10,
Washington, DC 20585. For information
on the DOE NEPA process, contact Carol
Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA
Policy and Compliance, at (202) 586–
4600 or (800) 472–2756, or by facsimile
at (202) 586–7031. Ms. Borgstrom can be
reached by mail at the U.S. Department
of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue,
SW., GC–54, Washington, DC 20585.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Project Background
SWIP South would begin at the
existing Harry Allen Substation, located
in Dry Lake, Nevada, approximately 20
miles northeast of Las Vegas, Nevada,
and would run north to the proposed
Thirtymile Substation, located
approximately 18 miles northwest of
Ely, Nevada, where it would
interconnect with Sierra Pacific Power
Company’s existing Falcon-Gonder 345–
kV transmission line. The SWIP South
would traverse approximately 235 miles
through parts of White Pine, Nye,
Lincoln, and Clark counties in Nevada,
and would consist of self-supporting
and guyed structures placed
approximately 1,200 to 1,500 feet apart.
Because of its location SWIP South
could be a vital link for distributing
power from renewable energy sources to
adjacent states that have adopted
specific renewable energy standards.
The SWIP South would have the
potential to provide up to 600
megawatts of renewable energy-derived
electricity to fulfill renewable energy
standards.
The proposed project seeking a DOE
loan guarantee also includes two
elements related to the Falcon-Gonder
transmission line: The Falcon
Substation Upgrades and a Backup
Communications System. Falcon
Substation is an existing 345–kV
switchyard owned by NV Energy (NVE)
and located in Boulder Valley
approximately 40 miles northeast of
Battle Mountain, Nevada. SWIP South
would connect to the Falcon-Gonder
transmission line at the proposed
Thirtymile Substation. The addition of
the SWIP South line necessitates
upgrades to NVE’s Falcon Substation to
improve the existing grid system’s
stability. The equipment included in the
upgrade would consist of a 345–kV
E:\FR\FM\26OCN1.SGM
26OCN1
65616
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 26, 2010 / Notices
fixed and/or series capacitor bank and
other facilities as required for system
stability mitigation. Access to Falcon
Substation during construction and
operation of the expanded facility
would be provided via existing access
roads.
The Backup Communications System
includes a communications network
consisting of 16 microwave towers (on
expanded existing sites and new sites)
that would provide additional
operational control to the primary fiber
optic communications technology. The
proposed communications towers
would range in height from 80 feet to
300 feet. For each proposed site, the
approximate area required would be up
to 200 feet by 150 feet (0.7 acre),
including ancillary support equipment
and a small buffer area surrounding the
site. Eight of the sites would require
new graded access roads and/or power
distribution lines.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Purpose and Need for Agency Action
Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of
2005 (42 U.S.C. 16511–16514), as
amended by Section 406 of the Recovery
Act, authorizes DOE to issue loan
guarantees in support of debt financing
for transmission infrastructure
investment projects located in the
United States. Title XVII as amended
authorizes a new program for rapid
deployment of renewable energy and
electric power transmission projects (the
Section 1705 Program). Section 1705
authorizes loan guarantees for ‘‘electric
power transmission projects, including
upgrading and reconductoring projects’’
that commence construction no later
than September 30, 2011.
DOE’s Proposed Action
DOE’s proposed action is to offer
Great Basin a conditional commitment
for a Federal loan guarantee for partial
financing of Great Basin’s interest in
SWIP South. Great Basin submitted an
application to DOE to obtain a loan
guarantee for financing Great Basin’s
interest in SWIP South—75%
ownership interest in the SWIP South
segment. The DOE loan guarantee
would apply to no more than 80% of
that share and other associated eligible
costs. The balance of SWIP South—25%
ownership interest—would be acquired
by NVE and financed separately. The
NVE subsidiaries with ownership in the
25% interest would include Nevada
Power Corporation and Sierra Pacific
Power Corporation.
NEPA Review
In July 1993, BLM completed the
SWIP EIS in cooperation with the U.S.
Forest Service, Bureau of Reclamation,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Oct 25, 2010
Jkt 223001
National Park Service, and Bureau of
Indian Affairs. The SWIP EIS analyzed
the environmental impacts that would
be associated with construction and
operation of SWIP South and SWIP
North, and addressed public comment.
The environmental mitigation measures
for SWIP South and SWIP North were
specified in the ROD issued by BLM on
December 14, 1994 (59 FR 30678),
herein referred to as the BLM ROD. In
2008, BLM prepared the SWIP South EA
to consider the impacts of amending the
previously approved Right-of-Way
(ROW) Grants to include a 4-mile
extension on the southern end of SWIP
South to allow interconnection with the
existing Harry Allen Substation. The
amendment included a shift in the
location on the northern end of less than
one mile to allow connection to the
newly proposed Thirtymile Substation
and to the existing Falcon-Gonder 345kV transmission line. The SWIP South
EA also provided an update on the key
resource areas and impacts from the
1993 SWIP EIS. BLM issued a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on the
SWIP South EA in July 2008.
In accordance with 40 CFR 1506.3,
DOE, through its Western Area Power
Administration (Western), on January
19, 2010, adopted the BLM’s 1993 SWIP
EIS or 2008 SWIP South EA to meet its
NEPA obligations related to a proposal
to finance part of SWIP South. The
notice of adoption was published by the
Environmental Protection Agency on
February 19, 2010 (75 FR 7479).
Western did not recirculate the SWIP
EIS or SWIP South EA as a draft DOE
EIS because the actions covered by the
original SWIP EIS and SWIP South EA
were substantially the same as those
proposed by Western. Although Western
has decided not to pursue its proposed
financial assistance, DOE has decided to
conditionally support SWIP South
through DOE’s Loan Guarantee Program.
BLM evaluated the Falcon Substation
Upgrades described above as part of
NVE’s proposed One Nevada Line (ON
Line) project, a transmission line similar
to the SWIP South in design and
geographic scope. BLM’s evaluation, the
Draft Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement for the ON Line
Project, herein referred to as ON Line
DSEIS (BLMNV/EL/EIS–GI–10/01+1793;
DES 09–50), was published on
November 20, 2009, and provides
detailed information on the
environmental effects of the Falcon
Substation Upgrades. None of the 19
comment letters received concern the
Falcon Substation Upgrades; therefore
no changes are expected with respect to
the Falcon Substation Upgrades when
BLM issues the final SEIS.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The NVE microwave system upgrades
were evaluated by BLM in the
Environmental Assessment—NV Energy
Microwave and Mobile Radio Project,
herein referred to as the Microwave EA,
(DOI–BLM–NV–L 020–2009–0024–EA),
published on August 27, 2010. BLM
simultaneously issued a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) and
Decision Record (BLM N–84551–84563;
N–85487 and DOI–BLM–NV–L000–
2009–0024 EA, respectively) based on
the environmental effects evaluated and
disclosed in the Microwave EA. The
Microwave EA evaluated 14 of the 16
communication sites proposed by Great
Basin. Two locations on private land
were not evaluated since BLM’s ROW
grant will not be applicable to those
sites. DOE has evaluated these sites, as
discussed below.
Environmental Impacts of the Falcon
Substation Upgrades and the Backup
Communications System
This section describes the potential
environmental impacts of the Falcon
Substation Upgrades and the Backup
Communications System. This
discussion is based on the ON Line
DSEIS and the Microwave EA.
DOE evaluated the environmental
impacts of the Falcon Substation
Upgrades that were analyzed by BLM in
the ON Line DSEIS. Chapters 3 and 4
identify minor environmental effects to
air emissions (mitigatable through
gravelling) and housing in Eureka or
Elko Counties (during construction);
low potential for encountering
paleontological resources; and no
adverse impacts to other resources.
DOE also evaluated the impacts of the
Backup Communications System as
analyzed in the Microwave EA, and
found that impacts would be small or
not adverse with adoption of mitigation
measures and best management
practices.
A migratory bird survey would be
required prior to any disturbance during
migratory bird breeding and nesting
seasons; monitoring/reporting would be
implemented. DOE also evaluated the
two proposed communications sites on
private land that were not analyzed in
the BLM Microwave EA. Due to their
location at existing facilities with access
roads and power, the impacts of
constructing and operating these new
communications towers would be low.
Both sites include pre-disturbed
vegetation and wildlife habitat, and low
potential for impacts to cultural
resources due to hilltop locations.
The environmental impacts associated
with the NVE communications system
expansion, including the sites to be
located on BLM land and on private
E:\FR\FM\26OCN1.SGM
26OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 26, 2010 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
land, would be brief in duration and
would be minor or would be minimized
or offset by the mitigation measures
required by BLM. Further, the
equipment associated with the NVE
communications system expansion is
not substantially different from the
project features previously evaluated in
DOE’s EIS. Further, these projects are
covered by DOE’s NEPA categorical
exclusion B1.19 (Appendix B to Subpart
D, 10 CFR Part 1021), which is
applicable to siting, construction, and
operation of microwave and radio
communications towers and associated
facilities.
Review of Comments Received on
DOE’s 2010 Adoption of the 1993 SWIP
EIS and 2008 SWIP South EA
As part of its decision process, DOE
considered comments received on the
DOE FEIS. In addition, DOE reviewed
BLM’s 2007 ‘‘Documentation of Land
Use Plan Conformity and NEPA
Adequacy’’ for SWIP South; the BLMapproved Construction, Operation &
Maintenance Plan for the SWIP–
Southern Portion (August 2010); and the
BLM-approved Biological Assessment
(2007) and the Biological Opinion (2007
and as amended in 2010) for SWIP
South.
DOE reviewed comments received on
February 22, 2010, from the Western
Watersheds Project (WWP) in response
to DOE’s January 2010 adoption. WWP’s
comment attached two comment letters
that WWP had previously submitted to
BLM on November 11, 2007, as well as
WWP’s October 10, 2008, response to
BLM and the Intervenors in the Interior
Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) (which
ruled against WWP’s appeal on
November 12, 2008).
In its February 2010 communication
to Western, WWP recommended that
DOE deny funding for SWIP South and
instead award to decentralized energy
projects that would be accessed locally.
DOE has determined that decentralized
projects would not be eligible for loan
guarantees under this loan solicitation
since DOE was granted Recovery Act
authority to provide funding for
transmission projects, with priority to
those that facilitate the delivery of
renewable power. WWP’s
recommendation would not meet DOE’s
purpose and need for its loan guarantee
action. WWP also raised concerns that
the SWIP project could facilitate
industrial development that could cause
the destruction of sagebrush wild lands.
DOE reviewed the 1994 SWIP EIS and
the 2008 Interior Board of Land Appeals
Westerm Watersheds Project v Bureau of
Land Management and Great Basin
Transmission, LLC (IBLA No.2008–252
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Oct 25, 2010
Jkt 223001
addressing WWP’s challenge to the 2008
BLM EA and FONSI for the SWIP–
Southern Portion). DOE has determined
that BLM adequately addressed
potential development in the FEIS and
that the 2008 appeals process
established that there has not been
sufficient change in anticipated
cumulative impacts considered for the
SWIP line to require a supplemental
EIS. DOE also notes that other energy
projects that might be located in
sagebrush habitat on public lands would
only be permitted if they have been
reviewed under NEPA and are
consistent with Federal law and policy.
WWP’s comments included claims of
segmentation of NEPA review for the
SWIP project; failure to consider
alternatives; and inadequate review of
impacts associated with invasive weeds,
the desert tortoise and sage grouse, soil
erosion, off-highway vehicle use, wild
horse management, global warming, and
cumulative impacts.In evaluating
WWP’s claims, DOE reviewed and
considered the relevant materials in the
BLM administrative record for SWIP
South and found that these issues had
been adequately considered.
DOE reviewed the 19 comments that
BLM received on its 2009 analyses
addressing the Falcon Substation
Upgrades and the Backup
Communications System. None concern
the Falcon Substation Upgrades, and
therefore few changes are expected for
the Final SEIS that BLM plans to issue
at the end of October 2010. After a 30day protest period, BLM expects to issue
its ROD and ROW by December 2010.
DOE also reviewed four comment
letters received on the Microwave EA. A
30-day comment period began on April
12, 2010, and closed on May 14, 2010.
The State Historic Preservation Officer
indicated completion of a Section 106
consultation for the Lower Spruce site;
the Nevada Department of Wildlife
recommended installing gates and antiperching measures; the Southern
Nevada Water Authority recommended
construction coordination; and the Elk
County Commissioners indicated
support of the project. On August 27,
2010, BLM issued a FONSI for the
Microwave EA.
Based on review of the documents
pertaining to the IBLA review, DOE
finds that the issues raised by WWP
have been adequately addressed.
Further, as a result of its review of the
comments on the ON Line DSEIS and
Microwave EA, DOE concludes that the
comments do not present any significant
new circumstances or information
relevant to environmental concerns
bearing on SWIP South, or associated
potential environmental impacts.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65617
Alternatives Considered
DOE considered two alternatives: The
Proposed Action and No Action. Under
the Proposed Action, DOE would offer
Great Basin a conditional commitment
to partially finance the proposed SWIP
South transmission line. Under No
Action, SWIP South most likely would
not be built and the potential impacts
discussed above and their related
mitigation would not occur, nor would
this transmission line be available to
transmit power to meet the renewable
energy standards in adjoining states.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
The Proposed Action is the
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
for several reasons. First, the Proposed
Action furthers the goals of Section
1705 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
to promote the rapid deployment of
renewable energy and electric power
transmission projects that could reduce
the generation of greenhouse gas and
other air pollutants created by nonrenewable, fossil-fuel generation
sources.
Also, because neighboring states that
could be serviced by SWIP South have
renewable energy standards, SWIP
South provides the capacity to deliver
up to 600 megawatts of renewable
energy-derived electricity to fulfill the
requirements of these states.
Specifically, Nevada is required to
deliver 20% of its megawatt capacity
generated by renewable energy sources
by 2015; Arizona, 15% by 2025;
California, 33% by 2030, and Colorado,
20% by 2020.
Consultation
A Section 106 review under the
National Historic Preservation Act
(NHPA) and Tribal consultation have
been completed by BLM for the
proposed SWIP South project. An
NHPA Section 106 programmatic
agreement was finalized during the DOE
FEIS process, requiring that prior to
construction, a preconstruction field
survey and a mitigation plan be
completed and approved. In July, 2010,
the BLM submitted to the Nevada State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) the
Historic Properties Treatment Plans for
SWIP South entitled: ‘‘Historic
Properties Treatment Plan, Southwest
Intertie Project, Southern Portion White
Pine, Nye, Lincoln, and Clark Counties,
Nevada, Volumes 1a–c (BLM Report
Number 8111NG040–2009–1593d
Volumes 1a–c).’’ The SHPO concurred
with the BLM determination that the
three submitted historic treatment
plans, and BLM Archaeologist
E:\FR\FM\26OCN1.SGM
26OCN1
65618
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 26, 2010 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
monitoring and consulting activities
would be adequate treatment.
An Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16
U.S.C. 1536) Section 7 consultation was
completed by BLM during the DOE FEIS
NEPA process. The Service has issued
four Biological Opinions for the
proposed project: (1) May 1993; (2)
March 1994, which included an analysis
of potential effects to the desert tortoise
and its designated critical habitat; (3)
December 2007, which incorporated
project realignments and the use of Hframes with perching deterrents within
desert tortoise critical habitat; and (4)
June and July 2010, which respectively
amended the 2007 Biological Opinion to
incorporate an additional tower design
(tubular guyed-V tower) with perching
deterrents, and modifications to include
additional disturbance of desert tortoise
habitat due to a minor calculation error.
Mitigation
DOE will require Great Basin to
employ all practicable means to avoid or
minimize environmental harm as a
result of the proposed action. The loan
guarantee agreement between DOE and
Great Basin would require that Great
Basin implement all project-specific
environmental protection measures
specified in the ‘‘Construction,
Operation, and Maintenance Plan for
the Southwest Intertie Project 500-kV
Transmission Line; SWIP—Southern
Portion; SWIP Central Portion (COM
Plan),’’ and in the BLM Notice to
Proceed, issued in August 2010. After
the DOE loan guarantee is retired,
enforcement of environmental
protection will continue through the
BLM ROW grant provisions for the life
of the project.
The NEPA analysis completed in the
DOE FEIS indicates that SWIP South
would result in low environmental
impacts after mitigation measures
required for BLM’s ROW are
implemented. The mitigation measures
are a condition of BLM issuance of the
ROW that provides Great Basin access to
construct, operate, and maintain SWIP
South on BLM land. The BLM
documents the conditions under which
Great Basin must operate in the COM
Plan approved by BLM in 2010. The
COM Plan incorporates the mitigation
measures required by the DOE FEIS, the
2010 Historic Properties Treatment
Plan, and the 2010 Biological Opinion.
Decision
DOE has decided to offer Great Basin
a conditional commitment for a Federal
loan guarantee for partial financing of
SWIP South. This decision is contingent
on Great Basin satisfying all precedent
funding obligations, and all other
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Oct 25, 2010
Jkt 223001
contractual, statutory, regulatory,
environmental compliance, and other
requirements specified by DOE.
In reaching this decision, DOE
reviewed the SWIP NEPA
documentation and considered the
potential impacts of the selected
alternative with implementation of the
stipulated mitigation measures.
DOE has prepared this ROD in
accordance with the Council on
Environmental Quality regulations (40
CFR Parts 1500–1508) for implementing
NEPA and DOE’s NEPA Implementing
Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021).
Basis for Decision
DOE has determined that the potential
environmental impacts analyzed in the
DOE FEIS will be minor after
implementation of the mitigation
provisions for the SWIP South BLM
ROW. The mitigation measures will be
reflected in the DOE Loan Guarantee
Common Agreement, and will remain in
the BLM COM Plan for the duration of
the granted ROW.
DOE has also determined that
potential environmental impacts
associated with the Falcon Substation
Upgrades and the Backup
Communications System would not be
adverse or can be characterized as
minor. DOE has determined that no
further analysis is required, and
incorporates by reference the
environmental analyses conducted on
these project elements. Further, DOE
has also considered the Congressional
direction specified in Section 2003 of
H.R. 4899, the 2010 Supplemental
Appropriations Act, Public Law 111–
212, effective on July 29, 2010 (the 2010
Supplemental Appropriations Act) in its
decision to issue this ROD. The 2010
Supplemental Appropriations Act
allows DOE to provide or facilitate
Federal financing for SWIP under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111–5; 123 Stat.
115), or the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(42 U.S.C. 15801 et seq.), based on the
comprehensive reviews and
consultations performed by BLM under
the Secretary of the Interior.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 18,
2010.
Jonathan M. Silver,
Executive Director, Loan Programs Office.
[FR Doc. 2010–27046 Filed 10–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. IC11–725B–000]
Commission Information Collection
Activities (FERC–725B); Comment
Request; Extension
October 19, 2010.
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed information
collection and request for comments.
AGENCY:
In compliance with the
requirements of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A) (2006), (Pub. L.
104–13), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is
soliciting public comment on the
proposed information collection
described below.
DATES: Comments in consideration of
the collection of information are due
December 27, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Commenters must send an
original of their comments to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission,
Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
Comments may be filed either on paper
or on CD/DVD, and should refer to
Docket No. IC11–725B–000. Documents
must be prepared in an acceptable filing
format and in compliance with
Commission submission guidelines at
https://www.ferc.gov/help/submissionguide.asp. eFiling and eSubscription are
not available for Docket No. IC11–725B–
000, due to a system issue.
All comments and FERC issuances
may be viewed, printed or downloaded
remotely through FERC’s eLibrary at
https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
elibrary.asp, by searching on Docket No.
IC11–725B. For user assistance, contact
FERC Online Support by e-mail at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or by phone
at: (866) 208–3676 (toll-free), or (202)
502–8659 for TTY.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ellen Brown may be reached by e-mail
at DataClearance@FERC.gov, telephone
at (202) 502–8663, and fax at (202) 273–
0873.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
information collected by the FERC–
725B, Reliability Standards for Critical
Infrastructure Protection (OMB Control
No. 1902–0248), is required to
implement the statutory provisions of
section 215 of the Federal Power Act
(FPA) (16 U.S.C. 824o). On August 8,
2005, the Electricity Modernization Act
of 2005, which is Title XII, Subtitle A,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26OCN1.SGM
26OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65615-65618]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27046]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Conditional Commitment for a Federal Loan Guarantee for Project
Financing for Southwest Intertie Project--South
AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy, Loan Programs Office.
ACTION: Record of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has decided to offer Great
Basin Transmission, LLC (Great Basin), a conditional commitment for a
Federal loan guarantee for partial financing of the 235-mile southern
portion of the Southwest Intertie Project (SWIP), a proposed 500-
kilovolt (kV) transmission line that would extend from southern Nevada
to southern Idaho. This Record of Decision (ROD) is based on the
analysis in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Project
Financing for Southwest Intertie Project--South (SWIP South) (DOE/EIS-
0443, January 2010) (DOE FEIS). The DOE FEIS consists of a cover sheet
for the January 2010 adoption of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
1993 Southwest Intertie Project Environmental Impact Statement and
Proposed Plan Amendment (SWIP EIS) and the BLM 2008 Environmental
Assessment for the Southwest Intertie Project Southern Portion NV-040-
07-048 (SWIP South EA). This ROD also reflects minor modifications to
the Great Basin proposal and new information developed since DOE issued
its FEIS.
DOE's offer of a conditional commitment for a loan guarantee for
SWIP South is authorized under Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of
2005, as amended by Section 406 of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). This conditional commitment to
provide a Federal loan guarantee is contingent upon Great Basin
satisfying all precedent funding obligations, and all other
contractual, statutory, regulatory, environmental compliance, and other
requirements specified by DOE. DOE has prepared this ROD in accordance
with the Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR Parts
1500-1508) for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), and DOE's NEPA Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about DOE's
decision, contact Carol Hammel-Smith, NEPA Document Manager,
Environmental Compliance Division, Loan Programs Office at
carol.hammel-smith@hq.doe.gov. Ms. Hammel-Smith can be reached by mail
at the U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., LP-10,
Washington, DC 20585. For information on the DOE NEPA process, contact
Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, at
(202) 586-4600 or (800) 472-2756, or by facsimile at (202) 586-7031.
Ms. Borgstrom can be reached by mail at the U.S. Department of Energy,
1000 Independence Avenue, SW., GC-54, Washington, DC 20585.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Project Background
SWIP South would begin at the existing Harry Allen Substation,
located in Dry Lake, Nevada, approximately 20 miles northeast of Las
Vegas, Nevada, and would run north to the proposed Thirtymile
Substation, located approximately 18 miles northwest of Ely, Nevada,
where it would interconnect with Sierra Pacific Power Company's
existing Falcon-Gonder 345-kV transmission line. The SWIP South would
traverse approximately 235 miles through parts of White Pine, Nye,
Lincoln, and Clark counties in Nevada, and would consist of self-
supporting and guyed structures placed approximately 1,200 to 1,500
feet apart. Because of its location SWIP South could be a vital link
for distributing power from renewable energy sources to adjacent states
that have adopted specific renewable energy standards. The SWIP South
would have the potential to provide up to 600 megawatts of renewable
energy-derived electricity to fulfill renewable energy standards.
The proposed project seeking a DOE loan guarantee also includes two
elements related to the Falcon-Gonder transmission line: The Falcon
Substation Upgrades and a Backup Communications System. Falcon
Substation is an existing 345-kV switchyard owned by NV Energy (NVE)
and located in Boulder Valley approximately 40 miles northeast of
Battle Mountain, Nevada. SWIP South would connect to the Falcon-Gonder
transmission line at the proposed Thirtymile Substation. The addition
of the SWIP South line necessitates upgrades to NVE's Falcon Substation
to improve the existing grid system's stability. The equipment included
in the upgrade would consist of a 345-kV
[[Page 65616]]
fixed and/or series capacitor bank and other facilities as required for
system stability mitigation. Access to Falcon Substation during
construction and operation of the expanded facility would be provided
via existing access roads.
The Backup Communications System includes a communications network
consisting of 16 microwave towers (on expanded existing sites and new
sites) that would provide additional operational control to the primary
fiber optic communications technology. The proposed communications
towers would range in height from 80 feet to 300 feet. For each
proposed site, the approximate area required would be up to 200 feet by
150 feet (0.7 acre), including ancillary support equipment and a small
buffer area surrounding the site. Eight of the sites would require new
graded access roads and/or power distribution lines.
Purpose and Need for Agency Action
Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16511-
16514), as amended by Section 406 of the Recovery Act, authorizes DOE
to issue loan guarantees in support of debt financing for transmission
infrastructure investment projects located in the United States. Title
XVII as amended authorizes a new program for rapid deployment of
renewable energy and electric power transmission projects (the Section
1705 Program). Section 1705 authorizes loan guarantees for ``electric
power transmission projects, including upgrading and reconductoring
projects'' that commence construction no later than September 30, 2011.
DOE's Proposed Action
DOE's proposed action is to offer Great Basin a conditional
commitment for a Federal loan guarantee for partial financing of Great
Basin's interest in SWIP South. Great Basin submitted an application to
DOE to obtain a loan guarantee for financing Great Basin's interest in
SWIP South--75% ownership interest in the SWIP South segment. The DOE
loan guarantee would apply to no more than 80% of that share and other
associated eligible costs. The balance of SWIP South--25% ownership
interest--would be acquired by NVE and financed separately. The NVE
subsidiaries with ownership in the 25% interest would include Nevada
Power Corporation and Sierra Pacific Power Corporation.
NEPA Review
In July 1993, BLM completed the SWIP EIS in cooperation with the
U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Reclamation, National Park Service, and
Bureau of Indian Affairs. The SWIP EIS analyzed the environmental
impacts that would be associated with construction and operation of
SWIP South and SWIP North, and addressed public comment. The
environmental mitigation measures for SWIP South and SWIP North were
specified in the ROD issued by BLM on December 14, 1994 (59 FR 30678),
herein referred to as the BLM ROD. In 2008, BLM prepared the SWIP South
EA to consider the impacts of amending the previously approved Right-
of-Way (ROW) Grants to include a 4-mile extension on the southern end
of SWIP South to allow interconnection with the existing Harry Allen
Substation. The amendment included a shift in the location on the
northern end of less than one mile to allow connection to the newly
proposed Thirtymile Substation and to the existing Falcon-Gonder 345-kV
transmission line. The SWIP South EA also provided an update on the key
resource areas and impacts from the 1993 SWIP EIS. BLM issued a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on the SWIP South EA in July 2008.
In accordance with 40 CFR 1506.3, DOE, through its Western Area
Power Administration (Western), on January 19, 2010, adopted the BLM's
1993 SWIP EIS or 2008 SWIP South EA to meet its NEPA obligations
related to a proposal to finance part of SWIP South. The notice of
adoption was published by the Environmental Protection Agency on
February 19, 2010 (75 FR 7479). Western did not recirculate the SWIP
EIS or SWIP South EA as a draft DOE EIS because the actions covered by
the original SWIP EIS and SWIP South EA were substantially the same as
those proposed by Western. Although Western has decided not to pursue
its proposed financial assistance, DOE has decided to conditionally
support SWIP South through DOE's Loan Guarantee Program.
BLM evaluated the Falcon Substation Upgrades described above as
part of NVE's proposed One Nevada Line (ON Line) project, a
transmission line similar to the SWIP South in design and geographic
scope. BLM's evaluation, the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement for the ON Line Project, herein referred to as ON Line DSEIS
(BLMNV/EL/EIS-GI-10/01+1793; DES 09-50), was published on November 20,
2009, and provides detailed information on the environmental effects of
the Falcon Substation Upgrades. None of the 19 comment letters received
concern the Falcon Substation Upgrades; therefore no changes are
expected with respect to the Falcon Substation Upgrades when BLM issues
the final SEIS.
The NVE microwave system upgrades were evaluated by BLM in the
Environmental Assessment--NV Energy Microwave and Mobile Radio Project,
herein referred to as the Microwave EA, (DOI-BLM-NV-L 020-2009-0024-
EA), published on August 27, 2010. BLM simultaneously issued a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and Decision Record (BLM N-84551-
84563; N-85487 and DOI-BLM-NV-L000-2009-0024 EA, respectively) based on
the environmental effects evaluated and disclosed in the Microwave EA.
The Microwave EA evaluated 14 of the 16 communication sites proposed by
Great Basin. Two locations on private land were not evaluated since
BLM's ROW grant will not be applicable to those sites. DOE has
evaluated these sites, as discussed below.
Environmental Impacts of the Falcon Substation Upgrades and the Backup
Communications System
This section describes the potential environmental impacts of the
Falcon Substation Upgrades and the Backup Communications System. This
discussion is based on the ON Line DSEIS and the Microwave EA.
DOE evaluated the environmental impacts of the Falcon Substation
Upgrades that were analyzed by BLM in the ON Line DSEIS. Chapters 3 and
4 identify minor environmental effects to air emissions (mitigatable
through gravelling) and housing in Eureka or Elko Counties (during
construction); low potential for encountering paleontological
resources; and no adverse impacts to other resources.
DOE also evaluated the impacts of the Backup Communications System
as analyzed in the Microwave EA, and found that impacts would be small
or not adverse with adoption of mitigation measures and best management
practices.
A migratory bird survey would be required prior to any disturbance
during migratory bird breeding and nesting seasons; monitoring/
reporting would be implemented. DOE also evaluated the two proposed
communications sites on private land that were not analyzed in the BLM
Microwave EA. Due to their location at existing facilities with access
roads and power, the impacts of constructing and operating these new
communications towers would be low. Both sites include pre-disturbed
vegetation and wildlife habitat, and low potential for impacts to
cultural resources due to hilltop locations.
The environmental impacts associated with the NVE communications
system expansion, including the sites to be located on BLM land and on
private
[[Page 65617]]
land, would be brief in duration and would be minor or would be
minimized or offset by the mitigation measures required by BLM.
Further, the equipment associated with the NVE communications system
expansion is not substantially different from the project features
previously evaluated in DOE's EIS. Further, these projects are covered
by DOE's NEPA categorical exclusion B1.19 (Appendix B to Subpart D, 10
CFR Part 1021), which is applicable to siting, construction, and
operation of microwave and radio communications towers and associated
facilities.
Review of Comments Received on DOE's 2010 Adoption of the 1993 SWIP EIS
and 2008 SWIP South EA
As part of its decision process, DOE considered comments received
on the DOE FEIS. In addition, DOE reviewed BLM's 2007 ``Documentation
of Land Use Plan Conformity and NEPA Adequacy'' for SWIP South; the
BLM-approved Construction, Operation & Maintenance Plan for the SWIP-
Southern Portion (August 2010); and the BLM-approved Biological
Assessment (2007) and the Biological Opinion (2007 and as amended in
2010) for SWIP South.
DOE reviewed comments received on February 22, 2010, from the
Western Watersheds Project (WWP) in response to DOE's January 2010
adoption. WWP's comment attached two comment letters that WWP had
previously submitted to BLM on November 11, 2007, as well as WWP's
October 10, 2008, response to BLM and the Intervenors in the Interior
Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) (which ruled against WWP's appeal on
November 12, 2008).
In its February 2010 communication to Western, WWP recommended that
DOE deny funding for SWIP South and instead award to decentralized
energy projects that would be accessed locally. DOE has determined that
decentralized projects would not be eligible for loan guarantees under
this loan solicitation since DOE was granted Recovery Act authority to
provide funding for transmission projects, with priority to those that
facilitate the delivery of renewable power. WWP's recommendation would
not meet DOE's purpose and need for its loan guarantee action. WWP also
raised concerns that the SWIP project could facilitate industrial
development that could cause the destruction of sagebrush wild lands.
DOE reviewed the 1994 SWIP EIS and the 2008 Interior Board of Land
Appeals Westerm Watersheds Project v Bureau of Land Management and
Great Basin Transmission, LLC (IBLA No.2008-252 addressing WWP's
challenge to the 2008 BLM EA and FONSI for the SWIP-Southern Portion).
DOE has determined that BLM adequately addressed potential development
in the FEIS and that the 2008 appeals process established that there
has not been sufficient change in anticipated cumulative impacts
considered for the SWIP line to require a supplemental EIS. DOE also
notes that other energy projects that might be located in sagebrush
habitat on public lands would only be permitted if they have been
reviewed under NEPA and are consistent with Federal law and policy.
WWP's comments included claims of segmentation of NEPA review for
the SWIP project; failure to consider alternatives; and inadequate
review of impacts associated with invasive weeds, the desert tortoise
and sage grouse, soil erosion, off-highway vehicle use, wild horse
management, global warming, and cumulative impacts.In evaluating WWP's
claims, DOE reviewed and considered the relevant materials in the BLM
administrative record for SWIP South and found that these issues had
been adequately considered.
DOE reviewed the 19 comments that BLM received on its 2009 analyses
addressing the Falcon Substation Upgrades and the Backup Communications
System. None concern the Falcon Substation Upgrades, and therefore few
changes are expected for the Final SEIS that BLM plans to issue at the
end of October 2010. After a 30-day protest period, BLM expects to
issue its ROD and ROW by December 2010.
DOE also reviewed four comment letters received on the Microwave
EA. A 30-day comment period began on April 12, 2010, and closed on May
14, 2010. The State Historic Preservation Officer indicated completion
of a Section 106 consultation for the Lower Spruce site; the Nevada
Department of Wildlife recommended installing gates and anti-perching
measures; the Southern Nevada Water Authority recommended construction
coordination; and the Elk County Commissioners indicated support of the
project. On August 27, 2010, BLM issued a FONSI for the Microwave EA.
Based on review of the documents pertaining to the IBLA review, DOE
finds that the issues raised by WWP have been adequately addressed.
Further, as a result of its review of the comments on the ON Line DSEIS
and Microwave EA, DOE concludes that the comments do not present any
significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental
concerns bearing on SWIP South, or associated potential environmental
impacts.
Alternatives Considered
DOE considered two alternatives: The Proposed Action and No Action.
Under the Proposed Action, DOE would offer Great Basin a conditional
commitment to partially finance the proposed SWIP South transmission
line. Under No Action, SWIP South most likely would not be built and
the potential impacts discussed above and their related mitigation
would not occur, nor would this transmission line be available to
transmit power to meet the renewable energy standards in adjoining
states.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
The Proposed Action is the Environmentally Preferred Alternative
for several reasons. First, the Proposed Action furthers the goals of
Section 1705 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to promote the rapid
deployment of renewable energy and electric power transmission projects
that could reduce the generation of greenhouse gas and other air
pollutants created by non-renewable, fossil-fuel generation sources.
Also, because neighboring states that could be serviced by SWIP
South have renewable energy standards, SWIP South provides the capacity
to deliver up to 600 megawatts of renewable energy-derived electricity
to fulfill the requirements of these states. Specifically, Nevada is
required to deliver 20% of its megawatt capacity generated by renewable
energy sources by 2015; Arizona, 15% by 2025; California, 33% by 2030,
and Colorado, 20% by 2020.
Consultation
A Section 106 review under the National Historic Preservation Act
(NHPA) and Tribal consultation have been completed by BLM for the
proposed SWIP South project. An NHPA Section 106 programmatic agreement
was finalized during the DOE FEIS process, requiring that prior to
construction, a preconstruction field survey and a mitigation plan be
completed and approved. In July, 2010, the BLM submitted to the Nevada
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) the Historic Properties
Treatment Plans for SWIP South entitled: ``Historic Properties
Treatment Plan, Southwest Intertie Project, Southern Portion White
Pine, Nye, Lincoln, and Clark Counties, Nevada, Volumes 1a-c (BLM
Report Number 8111NG040-2009-1593d Volumes 1a-c).'' The SHPO concurred
with the BLM determination that the three submitted historic treatment
plans, and BLM Archaeologist
[[Page 65618]]
monitoring and consulting activities would be adequate treatment.
An Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1536) Section 7
consultation was completed by BLM during the DOE FEIS NEPA process. The
Service has issued four Biological Opinions for the proposed project:
(1) May 1993; (2) March 1994, which included an analysis of potential
effects to the desert tortoise and its designated critical habitat; (3)
December 2007, which incorporated project realignments and the use of
H-frames with perching deterrents within desert tortoise critical
habitat; and (4) June and July 2010, which respectively amended the
2007 Biological Opinion to incorporate an additional tower design
(tubular guyed-V tower) with perching deterrents, and modifications to
include additional disturbance of desert tortoise habitat due to a
minor calculation error.
Mitigation
DOE will require Great Basin to employ all practicable means to
avoid or minimize environmental harm as a result of the proposed
action. The loan guarantee agreement between DOE and Great Basin would
require that Great Basin implement all project-specific environmental
protection measures specified in the ``Construction, Operation, and
Maintenance Plan for the Southwest Intertie Project 500-kV Transmission
Line; SWIP--Southern Portion; SWIP Central Portion (COM Plan),'' and in
the BLM Notice to Proceed, issued in August 2010. After the DOE loan
guarantee is retired, enforcement of environmental protection will
continue through the BLM ROW grant provisions for the life of the
project.
The NEPA analysis completed in the DOE FEIS indicates that SWIP
South would result in low environmental impacts after mitigation
measures required for BLM's ROW are implemented. The mitigation
measures are a condition of BLM issuance of the ROW that provides Great
Basin access to construct, operate, and maintain SWIP South on BLM
land. The BLM documents the conditions under which Great Basin must
operate in the COM Plan approved by BLM in 2010. The COM Plan
incorporates the mitigation measures required by the DOE FEIS, the 2010
Historic Properties Treatment Plan, and the 2010 Biological Opinion.
Decision
DOE has decided to offer Great Basin a conditional commitment for a
Federal loan guarantee for partial financing of SWIP South. This
decision is contingent on Great Basin satisfying all precedent funding
obligations, and all other contractual, statutory, regulatory,
environmental compliance, and other requirements specified by DOE.
In reaching this decision, DOE reviewed the SWIP NEPA documentation
and considered the potential impacts of the selected alternative with
implementation of the stipulated mitigation measures.
DOE has prepared this ROD in accordance with the Council on
Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) for
implementing NEPA and DOE's NEPA Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Part
1021).
Basis for Decision
DOE has determined that the potential environmental impacts
analyzed in the DOE FEIS will be minor after implementation of the
mitigation provisions for the SWIP South BLM ROW. The mitigation
measures will be reflected in the DOE Loan Guarantee Common Agreement,
and will remain in the BLM COM Plan for the duration of the granted
ROW.
DOE has also determined that potential environmental impacts
associated with the Falcon Substation Upgrades and the Backup
Communications System would not be adverse or can be characterized as
minor. DOE has determined that no further analysis is required, and
incorporates by reference the environmental analyses conducted on these
project elements. Further, DOE has also considered the Congressional
direction specified in Section 2003 of H.R. 4899, the 2010 Supplemental
Appropriations Act, Public Law 111-212, effective on July 29, 2010 (the
2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act) in its decision to issue this
ROD. The 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act allows DOE to provide or
facilitate Federal financing for SWIP under the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-5; 123 Stat. 115), or the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15801 et seq.), based on the
comprehensive reviews and consultations performed by BLM under the
Secretary of the Interior.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 18, 2010.
Jonathan M. Silver,
Executive Director, Loan Programs Office.
[FR Doc. 2010-27046 Filed 10-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P