Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project Habitat Conservation Plan in Lewis and Thurston Counties, Washington, 19569-19572 [2018-09405]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 86 (Thursday, May 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19569-19572]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09405]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R1-ES-2018-N038; FXES11140100000-189-FF01E00000]


Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement for the Proposed Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project Habitat 
Conservation Plan in Lewis and Thurston Counties, Washington

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of intent for scoping; notice of public scoping meeting; 
request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), provide this 
notice to open a public scoping period and announce a public open house 
meeting in accordance with requirements of National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA) regulations. We intend to prepare an environmental 
impact statement (EIS) to evaluate the impacts on the human environment 
associated with operations of a proposed wind energy project, for which 
the Service anticipates receipt of an application for an incidental 
take permit (ITP) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended 
(ESA). Incidental to its operations, the wind project is likely to take 
the marbled murrelet, listed as threatened under the ESA, as well as 
the bald eagle and golden eagle, both of which are protected under the 
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The project proponent is 
Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project, LLC, an affiliate of Renewable Energy 
Services. The wind project would be located near Yelm, Washington, in 
Lewis and Thurston Counties, and would consist of up to 38 commercial 
wind turbines and associated infrastructure.

DATES: You may submit information, questions, and comments until June 
4, 2018.
    Public meetings: During the scoping period, the Service will hold 
two public scoping open house meetings: One in Lacey, Washington, and 
one in Centralia, Washington. The Lacey scoping meeting will be held on 
May 8, 2018, from 6 to 8 p.m., and the Centralia scoping meeting will 
be held on May 10, 2018, from 6 to 8 p.m.
    The public scoping meetings will provide Skookumchuck Wind Energy 
Project, LLC, and the Service an opportunity to present information 
pertinent to the wind project and for the public to ask questions and 
provide written comments and information on the scope of issues and 
alternatives we should consider when preparing the EIS. No oral 
comments will be accepted during the scoping meetings.

ADDRESSES: To request further information or submit written comments, 
please use one of the following methods:
     U.S. mail: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, c/o Mark 
Ostwald, 510 Desmond Dr. SE, Suite 102, Lacey, WA 98503.
     Email: [email protected]. Include ``Skookumchuck Wind'' 
in the subject line of the message.
     Internet: You may obtain copies of this notice on the 
internet at https://www.fws.gov/wafwo/ (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section).
    You may also submit written comments during the public scoping 
meeting. See the Public Availability of Comments section for more 
information.
    Public meetings: The addresses of the scoping meetings are as 
follows:
    Lacey, Washington: South Puget Sound Community College, 4220 6th 
Avenue SE, Lacey, WA 98503.
    Centralia, Washington: Centralia College, Walton Science Center, 
Room 100, 600 Centralia College Blvd., Centralia, WA 98531.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Ostwald, by telephone at 360-753-
9564, or by email at Mark[email protected]. Hearing or speech impaired 
individuals may call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339 for TTY 
assistance.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with Section 10(a)(2)(A) of 
the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1539(a)(2)(A)), 
the Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project, LLC, intends to submit a habitat 
conservation plan (HCP) in support of an incidental take permit (ITP) 
application for the ESA-listed marbled murrelet (Brachyamphus 
marmoratus), and the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden 
eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), both of which are not listed

[[Page 19570]]

species under the ESA but are protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle 
Protection Act (BGEPA) (16 U.S.C. 668-668d). Hereafter, the marbled 
murrelet, bald eagle and golden eagle collectively will be referred to 
as the ``covered species.'' To meet our requirements under the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), we intend to 
prepare a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS), and later, a 
final environmental impact statement (FEIS), to evaluate the effects on 
the human environment of authorizing take under the ESA and BGEPA by 
the proposed wind project.
    The project proponent is seeking ITP coverage for the operation and 
maintenance of 38 commercial wind turbines. This includes, without 
limitation, ITP coverage for protected species colliding with both 
stationary and operating project structures. In contrast, the project 
proponent does not intend to seek ITP coverage for the construction 
phase of the wind project, which may include, without limitation, 
constructing roads, turbine pads, and erecting turbines. Initial 
project construction is anticipated to begin in 2018. The project 
proponent intends to commence operations in 2019.
    The Service's purpose and need for its proposed action will be to 
process the project proponent's request for an ITP for the project in 
accordance with the requirements of Section 10(a) of the ESA and 
associated regulations, and to either grant, grant with conditions, or 
deny the ITP in compliance with the requirements of applicable law 
including, without limitation, the ESA and BGEPA.
    This scoping notice was prepared pursuant to the requirements of 
the NEPA and its implementing regulations in the Code of Federal 
Regulations at 40 CFR 1506.6. The primary purpose of the scoping 
process is for the public and other parties to assist in developing the 
DEIS by identifying important issues and alternatives that should be 
considered. We will prepare an FEIS prior to issuing an ITP decision.

Background

Endangered Species Act

    Section 9 of the ESA prohibits ``take'' of fish and wildlife 
species listed as endangered under section 4 (16 U.S.C. 1538 and 16 
U.S.C. 1533, respectively). The ESA implementing regulations extend, 
under certain circumstances, the prohibition of take to threatened 
species (50 CFR 17.31). Under section 3 of the ESA, the term ``take'' 
means to ``harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, 
capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct'' (16 
U.S.C. 1532(19)). The term ``harm'' is defined by regulation as ``. . . 
an act which actually kills or injures wildlife.'' Such act may include 
significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills 
or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral 
patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering'' (50 CFR 17.3). 
The term ``harass'' is defined in the regulations as ``an intentional 
or negligent act or omission which creates the likelihood of injury to 
wildlife by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt 
normal behavioral patterns which include, but are not limited to, 
breeding, feeding, or sheltering'' (50 CFR 17.3).
    Under section 10(a) of the ESA, the Service may issue permits to 
authorize incidental take of listed fish and wildlife species. 
``Incidental take'' is defined by the ESA as take that is incidental 
to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity. 
Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA contains provisions for issuing ITPs to 
non-Federal entities for the take of endangered and threatened species, 
provided the following criteria are met:
    1. The taking will be incidental;
    2. The applicant will, to the maximum extent practicable, minimize 
and mitigate the impact of such taking;
    3. The applicant will ensure that adequate funding for the plan 
will be provided;
    4. The taking will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the 
survival and recovery of the species in the wild; and
    5. The applicant will carry out any other measures that the Service 
may require as being necessary or appropriate for the purposes of the 
HCP.

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act

    Although the project proponent is requesting incidental take for 
bald and golden eagles under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA, 
consistency with the requirements of BGEPA (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) is also 
necessary. The BGEPA prohibits take of eagles where ``take'' is defined 
as ``pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, 
collect, destroy, molest, or disturb'' and where ``disturb'' is further 
defined as ``to agitate or bother'' a bald or golden eagle to a degree 
that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific 
information available: (1) Injury to an eagle; (2) a decrease in its 
productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, 
feeding, or sheltering behavior; or (3) nest abandonment, by 
substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering 
behavior (50 CFR 22.3).
    Under 50 CFR 22.26, the Service has the authority to authorize take 
of bald and golden eagles (generally, disturbance, injury, or killing) 
that occurs incidental to an otherwise lawful activity. For the Service 
to issue such a permit, the following required determinations must be 
met (see 50 CFR 22.26(f)):
    1. The taking will be compatible with the preservation of the bald 
or golden eagle (further defined by the Service to mean ``consistent 
with the goals of maintaining stable or increasing breeding populations 
in all eagle management units and the persistence of local populations 
throughout the geographic range of each species'');
    2. The taking will protect an interest in a particular locality;
    3. The taking will be associated with, but not the purpose of, the 
activity;
    4. The taking will be avoided and minimized by the applicant to the 
extent practicable;
    5. The applicant will have applied all appropriate and practical 
compensatory mitigation measures, when required pursuant to 50 CFR 
22.26(c);
    6. Issuance of the permit will not preclude issuance of another 
permit necessary to protect an interest of higher priority as set forth 
in 50 CFR 22.26(e)(7); and
    7. Issuance of the permit will not interfere with ongoing civil or 
criminal action concerning unpermitted past eagle take at the project.
    The Service can provide eagle take authorization through an ITP for 
an HCP, which confers take authorization under the BGEPA without the 
need for a separate permit, as long as the permit issuance criteria 
under both ESA and BGEPA will be met by the conservation measures 
included in the HCP. See 50 CFR 22.11(a).

Skookumchuck Wind Project Habitat Conservation Plan

Project Description

    Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project, LLC, intends to start project 
construction in 2018, and commence wind turbine operations in 2019. The 
goal of Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project, LLC, is to receive an ITP 
prior to commencing commercial operations of the wind turbines in 2019.
    The majority of the wind project, including all of the 38 turbines, 
is located in Lewis County, Washington, with some supporting 
infrastructure located in Thurston County, Washington. The wind 
turbines are proposed to be constructed on a

[[Page 19571]]

prominent ridgeline on the Weyerhaeuser Vail Tree Farm, approximately 
18 miles east of Centralia, Washington.
    The project consists of the following components: A maximum of 38 
wind turbines, with an expected output of 137 megawatts (MW); a maximum 
wind turbine height of 492 feet (from ground to vertical blade tip); a 
maximum rotor diameter of 446 feet; approximately 36.5 miles of 
existing roads that will be upgraded; approximately 3.9 miles of new 
road that will be constructed; 17 miles of buried medium voltage 
collection cable that will transport power to a substation along the 
ridgeline; and 15 miles of transmission line that will transport power 
to the Tono Substation.

Covered Species

Marbled Murrelet
    The marbled murrelet is a seabird that forages on marine waters and 
nests in mature and old-growth forests, generally within 55 miles of 
marine waters. Because the marbled murrelet is flying between forest 
nest sites and marine foraging areas, the species is susceptible to 
collision with the wind project turbines and possibly other related 
infrastructure, and thus mortality is anticipated.
    The marbled murrelet was listed as threatened under the ESA in 1992 
in California, Oregon, and Washington. The marbled murrelet is a 
relatively long-lived species with low recruitment potential. Low 
breeding rates, coupled with poor nesting success, have resulted in a 
population decline estimated at approximately 4.4 percent per year in 
Washington.
    The radar surveys conducted for this project, along with recent 
observations of marbled murrelet occupancy behaviors on adjacent 
private forest lands in 2016, indicate that this geographic area 
continues to support nesting marbled murrelets. The wind project poses 
a risk of collision to marbled murrelets transiting to and from marine 
foraging areas and nesting sites located in the vicinity of the Mineral 
Block portion of the Gifford Pinchot National Forest and private lands. 
The closest proposed turbine locations are 0.4 miles from a known 
marbled murrelet nesting site.
    National Forest lands in the Mineral Block landscape are designated 
as critical habitat that is essential for the survival and recovery of 
the marbled murrelet. The area is also important because it represents 
the southernmost distribution of marbled murrelet nesting within the 
listed range of the species in the Washington Cascades. Past survey 
efforts have documented a minimum of seven murrelet nest sites in the 
Mineral Block area, indicating that the area supports a local colony of 
marbled murrelets with nesting fidelity to this landscape.
    There is uncertainty regarding the number of marbled murrelet 
mortalities that may occur due to wind project operations. The project 
proponent has indicated its intent to a request a 30-year permit term.
Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle
    Bald and golden eagles can also be found in the project footprint 
and the surrounding areas, and will also be subject to collision with 
the wind project turbines and possibly other related infrastructure. 
Bald eagle populations are considered to be stable and increasing 
throughout most of the United States. Conversely, the golden eagle has 
been identified as a State candidate for listing due to declines in the 
number of nesting pairs at historic nests. Golden eagle populations are 
thought to be in a slight decline in some parts of the United States.
    Although bald eagles are generally associated with aquatic habitat 
and are often found in higher numbers near water, they are wide ranging 
and can be found in almost any type of habitat, either migrating or 
moving between foraging and sheltering areas. Golden eagles are thought 
to be associated primarily with arid landscapes east of the Cascades; 
however, small numbers of golden eagles are known to nest and migrate 
west of the Cascade crest. Both eagle species were observed during 
preconstruction eagle surveys. During 418 hours of preconstruction 
eagle surveys at the proposed project site in 2016, over 200 minutes 
involved sightings of bald eagles, and over 35 minutes involved 
sightings of golden eagles.
    Both bald and golden eagles are known to collide with wind 
turbines, causing injury and often death to the affected eagle. Since 
eagles have been observed using the project footprint and surrounding 
area, a potential injury and mortality risk to these species exists as 
a result of wind project operations. The potential risk to each species 
from this project will be analyzed in detail in the DEIS, using 
available tools such as the Service's Collision Risk Model and 
considering all cumulative and indirect effects.

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

    NEPA requires that Federal agencies conduct an environmental 
analysis of their proposed actions to determine if the actions may 
significantly affect the human environment. Based on the criteria at 40 
CFR 1508.27, we have determined, and the project proponent has 
expressed agreement, that the proposed Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project 
may have significant effects on the human environment.
    To determine whether a proposed Federal action would require the 
preparation of an EIS, the Service must consider two distinct factors: 
Context and intensity (40 CFR 1508.27; Service and National Marine 
Fisheries Service HCP Handbook 2016). Context refers to the geographic 
scale (local, regional, or national) of significance of short- and/or 
long-term effects/impacts of a proposed action. Intensity refers to the 
severity of the effects/impacts relative to the affected settings, 
including the degree to which the proposed action affects an endangered 
or threatened species or designated critical habitat; public health or 
safety; scientific, historic, or cultural resources; or other aspects 
of the human environment.
    In determining whether the preparation of an EIS is warranted, we 
must also consider the 10 components of intensity, as set forth under 
40 CFR 1508.27(b):
    1. Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. A significant 
impact may exist even if the Federal agency believes that on balance 
the effect will be beneficial.
    2. The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or 
safety.
    3. Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity 
to historic or cultural resources, park lands, prime farmlands, 
wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas.
    4. The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human 
environment are likely to be highly controversial.
    5. The degree to which the potential impacts are highly uncertain 
or involve unique or unknown risks.
    6. The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for 
future actions with significant effects or represents a decision in 
principle about a future consideration.
    7. Whether the action is related to other actions with individually 
insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts.
    8. The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, 
sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or eligible for 
listing in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause loss 
or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical 
resources.

[[Page 19572]]

    9. The degree to which the action may adversely affect an 
endangered or threatened species or its habitat that has been 
determined to be critical under the ESA.
    10. Whether the action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or 
local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the 
environment.
    The Service performed internal NEPA scoping for the wind project 
and identified the environmental issues requiring detailed analysis, as 
well as connected, similar, and cumulative actions. In this case, and 
after considering the above factors, the Service has determined that 
the proposed ITP action is of sufficient size and complexity to warrant 
the preparation of an EIS, is similar to previous permit actions taken 
by the Service's Pacific Region that likewise required the preparation 
of an EIS, and may have significant effects on the human environment. 
On that basis and in accordance with regulations at 40 CFR 1501.4, 
1507.3, and 1508.27, the Service believes preparation of an EIS is 
warranted to analyze the project-specific and cumulative environmental 
impacts associated with this proposed ITP action.
    Therefore, before deciding whether to issue an ITP, we will prepare 
a DEIS, and later, an FEIS, to analyze the environmental impacts 
associated with the Service's ITP decision on the human environment. We 
do not intend to prepare an environmental assessment for the proposed 
action.
    The DEIS will include a reasonable range of alternatives. Such 
alternatives may include, but are not limited to, variations in wind 
turbine curtailment by individual wind turbine and season, variations 
in covered species mitigation strategies, variations in implementation 
and effectiveness monitoring, or a combination of these factors. 
Additionally, a No Action Alternative will be included. Under the No 
Action Alternative, the Service would not issue an ITP, and 
Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project, LLC, would be obligated to avoid take 
of the covered species, or risk violation of Federal law.
    The DEIS will identify and describe direct, indirect, and 
cumulative impacts on elements of the human environment that could 
occur with the implementation of the proposed action and alternatives. 
The Service will also identify measures, consistent with NEPA and other 
relevant considerations of national policy, to avoid or minimize any 
significant effects of the proposed action on the quality of the human 
environment. The Service will publish a notice of availability in the 
Federal Register and a request for comment on the draft EIS and the 
Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project, LLC, draft HCP.

Request for Information

    We request data, comments, new information, or suggestions from the 
public, other concerned governmental agencies, the scientific 
community, industry, or any other interested party on this notice. We 
will consider these comments in developing the DEIS. We seek specific 
comments on:
    1. Biological information and relevant data concerning the covered 
species and other wildlife;
    2. Information on marbled murrelet collisions with stationary and 
moving objects in the terrestrial environment;
    3. Information on bald eagle, golden eagle, and marbled murrelet 
collisions with wind turbines, particularly in a forested environment;
    4. Potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts that 
implementation of the proposed wind project and mitigation/minimization 
measures could have on the covered species; and other endangered or 
threatened species, and their associated ecological communities or 
habitats; and other aspects of the human environment;
    5. Whether there are connected, similar, or reasonably foreseeable 
cumulative actions;
    6. Other possible reasonable alternatives to the proposed permit 
action that the Service should consider, including additional or 
alternative avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures;
    7. Other current or planned activities in the vicinity of the wind 
project area and their possible impacts on the marbled murrelet, bald 
eagle, and golden eagle; and
    8. Other information relevant to the proposed wind project and 
impacts to the human environment.

Public Availability of Comments

    You may submit your comments and materials by one of the methods 
listed in ADDRESSES. Before including your address, phone number, or 
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be 
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying 
information--might be made publicly available at any time. While you 
can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.
    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting 
documentation we use in preparing the DEIS, will be available for 
public inspection by appointment, during normal business hours, at the 
Washington Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT).

Scoping Meeting

    See DATES for the dates, times, and locations of the public scoping 
meetings. The primary purpose of the meetings and the public comment 
period is to provide the public with a general understanding of the 
background of the proposed action and to solicit written comments and 
information on the scope of issues and alternatives we should consider 
when preparing the DEIS. Written comments will be accepted at the 
meetings. No opportunity for oral comments will be provided. Comments 
may also be submitted by the methods listed in ADDRESSES.

Reasonable Accommodations

    Persons needing reasonable accommodations in order to attend and 
participate in the public scoping meetings should contact the Service's 
Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, using one of the methods listed in 
ADDRESSES as soon as possible. In order to allow sufficient time to 
process requests, please make contact no later than one week before the 
public meetings. Information regarding this proposed action is 
available in alternative formats upon request.

Authority

    We provide this notice in accordance with the requirements of 
section 10 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and NEPA regulations (40 
CFR 1501.7, 40 CFR 1506.5, 1506.6, and 1508.22).

Theresa Rabot,
Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-09405 Filed 5-2-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P