Reauthorization of Permits, Maintenance, and Vegetation Management on Western Area Power Administration Transmission Lines on National Forest System Lands, Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah (DOE/EIS-0442), 83074-83077 [2020-28016]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
83074
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices
(3) You can file a paper copy of your
comments by mailing them to the
Commission. Be sure to reference the
project docket number (CP20–503–000)
on your letter. Submissions sent via the
U.S. Postal Service must be addressed
to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington,
DC 20426. Submissions sent via any
other carrier must be addressed to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland
20852.
Filing environmental comments will
not give you intervenor status, but you
do not need intervenor status to have
your comments considered. Only
intervenors have the right to seek
rehearing or judicial review of the
Commission’s decision. At this point in
this proceeding, the timeframe for filing
timely intervention requests has
expired. Any person seeking to become
a party to the proceeding must file a
motion to intervene out-of-time
pursuant to Rule 214(b)(3) and (d) of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedures (18 CFR 385.214(b)(3) and
(d)) and show good cause why the time
limitation should be waived. Motions to
intervene are more fully described at
https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/ferconline/how-guides.
Additional information about the
project is available from the
Commission’s Office of External Affairs,
at (866) 208–FERC, or on the FERC
website (www.ferc.gov) using the
eLibrary link. The eLibrary link also
provides access to the texts of all formal
documents issued by the Commission,
such as orders, notices, and
rulemakings.
In addition, the Commission offers a
free service called eSubscription which
allows you to keep track of all formal
issuances and submittals in specific
dockets. This can reduce the amount of
time you spend researching proceedings
by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document
summaries, and direct links to the
documents. Go to https://www.ferc.gov/
ferc-online/overview to register for
eSubscription.
Dated: December 15, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020–28095 Filed 12–18–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:33 Dec 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Western Area Power Administration
Reauthorization of Permits,
Maintenance, and Vegetation
Management on Western Area Power
Administration Transmission Lines on
National Forest System Lands,
Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah (DOE/
EIS–0442)
Western Area Power
Administration, DOE.
ACTION: Record of decision.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
WAPA is
a Federal power marketing
administration within DOE that markets
and delivers Federal wholesale electric
power (principally hydroelectric power)
to municipalities, rural electric
cooperatives, public utilities, irrigation
districts, Federal and State agencies,
Native American tribes, and other
wholesale customers in 15 western and
central States. WAPA’s Rocky Mountain
Customer Service Region (RM) operates
in Arizona, Colorado, most of Wyoming,
and portions of Kansas, Nebraska, New
Mexico, and Utah.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Western Area Power
Administration (WAPA) has determined
that it will implement the proposed
action, or Project, as described in the
Reauthorization of Maintenance and
Vegetation Management on Western
Area Power Administration
Transmission Lines on Forest Service
Lands, Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah
final environmental impact statement
(Final EIS) (DOE/EIS–0442). The
proposed action includes changing
WAPA’s vegetation management and
facility maintenance practices in some
rights-of-way (ROWs) along
approximately 273 miles of electrical
transmission lines on National Forest
System (NFS) lands in Colorado,
Nebraska, and Utah. The U.S. Forest
Service (USFS) was a joint lead agency
on the EIS and proposes to authorize the
changes through new Special Use
Permits (SUPs) and Operations and
Maintenance (O&M) Plans. This Record
of Decision (ROD) was prepared in
accordance with the requirements of the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations for
implementing NEPA, and U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) NEPA
regulations.
DATES: The ROD was effective when it
was signed by WAPA’s Administrator
on December 8, 2020. All known
interested parties, agencies, tribes, and
the public will be notified of this ROD
directly via the Project mailing list and
via paid advertising, news releases, or
other appropriate means.
ADDRESSES: The Final EIS, this ROD,
and other Project documents are
available on the Project website at
https://www.wapa.gov/transmission/
EnvironmentalReviewNEPA/Pages/
vegetation-management.aspx.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
additional information on the Project,
the EIS process or this ROD, please
contact Ms. E. Lynn Burkett at
Headquarters A9400, Western Area
Power Administration, P.O. Box 281213,
Lakewood, CO 80228–8213, email
SUMMARY:
burkett@wapa.gov, telephone (720) 962–
7000. For general information on the
DOE NEPA review process, please
contact Brian Costner, Office of NEPA
Policy and Compliance, GC–54, U.S.
Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20585–0119, email AskNEPA@
hq.doe.gov, telephone (202) 586–4600 or
(800) 472–2756, facsimile (202) 586–
7031.
Background
On August 10, 1996, during a period
of high temperatures and high
electricity demand, a transmission line
sagged into filbert trees near Portland,
Oregon, leading to a cascade of power
outages as far away as southern
California. Executive Order 13212,
Actions To Expedite Energy-Related
Projects (May 18, 2001), declared the
increased production and transmission
of energy in a safe and environmentally
sound manner to be essential to the
well-being of the American people and
called for the improvement and
streamlining of cooperation among
Federal agencies to expedite projects
that would increase the production,
transmission, or conservation of energy.
In August 2003, the cascading results of
another equipment failure led to an
enormous power outage in the Northeast
and Midwest, affecting approximately
45 million people in the United States
and 10 million people in Ontario,
Canada. The U.S.-Canada Power System
Outage Task Force found that, again,
transmission line sag into overgrown
trees in rural Ohio sparked the outage.
In response to these outages, Congress
added, as part of the Energy Policy Act
of 2005 (Pub. L. 109–58), a new section
215 to the Federal Power Act. Among
other things, the new section 215
authorized the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) to
certify an ‘‘Electric Reliability
Organization’’ to create mandatory and
enforceable reliability standards, subject
to FERC review and approval. FERC
certified the North American Electric
E:\FR\FM\21DEN1.SGM
21DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices
Reliability Corporation (NERC) as the
Electric Reliability Organization. The
Energy Policy Act of 2005 also requires
Federal agencies to expedite approvals
to allow owners or operators of
transmission facilities access to the
facilities to comply with applicable
standards, including vegetation
management standards.
FERC approved NERC’s original
Reliability Standard, FAC–003–1,
‘‘Transmission Vegetation Management
Program’’ (NERC Standard) on March
16, 2007,1 and the standard became
mandatory and enforceable on June 18,
2007. The most recent version of the
NERC Standard is FAC–003–4,
‘‘Transmission Vegetation
Management.’’ The revised standard
was approved on April 26, 2016,2 and
became mandatory and enforceable on
October 1, 2016.
To enhance WAPA’s compliance with
NERC’s Transmission Vegetation
Management Reliability Standard,
industry standards, and WAPA’s policy
and guidance, WAPA proposes to
improve the way it manages vegetation
along its ROWs on NFS lands in
Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah. WAPA
owns, operates, and maintains
approximately 273 miles of
transmission line ROWs on NFS lands
in Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah.
Specifically, the Project includes WAPA
RM transmission facilities and access
routes located on NFS lands managed
by seven National Forests in the Rocky
Mountain Region (Region 2) and one
National Forest in the Intermountain
Region (Region 4). These National
Forests and Grasslands include the
Arapahoe—Roosevelt; Ashley; Grand
Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison;
Medicine Bow—Routt; Pike—San Isabel;
Samuel R. McKelvie; San Juan; and
White River.
1 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the BulkPower System, Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218,
order on reh’g, Order No. 693–A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053
(2007).
2 Letter Order Approving Reliability Standard
FAC–003–4, FERC Docket No. RD16–4–000 (Apr.
26, 2016).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:33 Dec 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
Purpose and Need for Agency Action
WAPA needs to improve the way it
manages vegetation along its 273 miles
of transmission line ROWs on NFS
lands with the following purposes and
objectives:
1. To ensure that WAPA can safely
and reliably operate and maintain its
existing electrical transmission facilities
to deliver electrical power.
2. To further WAPA’s compliance
with NERC’s Transmission Vegetation
Management Reliability Standards,
industry standards, and WAPA’s policy
and guidance.
3. To ensure that WAPA’s
transmission facilities remain
operational for the useful life of the
facilities.
4. To protect public and worker
safety.
5. To reduce the risk of wildfires
caused by transmission lines and the
risk to the facilities from fire.
6. To control the spread of noxious
weeds.
7. To maintain sound relationships
with landowners and land managers.
8. To ensure that WAPA has access to
its transmission facilities for
maintenance and emergency response.
9. To ensure that the costs associated
with maintaining the transmission
system can be controlled following
sound business principles, including
achieving technical and economic
efficiencies to minimize impacts on
transmission line tariff costs and
electrical power rates.
10. To allow flexibility to
accommodate changes in transmission
system operation and maintenance
requirements.
11. To minimize impacts to
environmental resources.
WAPA’s Proposed Action—Proposed
Project
WAPA proposes to change the way it
manages vegetation in the ROWs for the
transmission lines it owns, operates, or
maintains. The proposed action would
require the USFS to re-authorize and
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
83075
issue SUPs for each transmission line
and authorize WAPA to manage
vegetation along WAPA ROWs on NFS
lands using an integrated vegetation
management (IVM) approach, for which
WAPA would develop new O&M Plans.
This approach is based on the American
National Standard Institute Tree, Shrub
and Other Woody Plant Maintenance—
Standard Practices (Integrated
Vegetation Management, a. Electric
Utility ROW (ANSI A300 (Part 7)–2006
IVM)). WAPA would control vegetation
growth and fuel conditions that threaten
transmission lines. The proposed action
would balance the purpose of and need
for agency action with the need to
comply with environmental regulations
and USFS requirements, address
potential impacts to environmental
resources, and incorporate public and
agency comments. It incorporates the
design features developed to protect
environmental resources. It is important
to note that vegetation management and
maintenance of WAPA’s transmission
facilities has been ongoing for many
years, so the proposed action merely
makes these routine activities more
proactive under the IVM approach.
The vegetation management proposal
includes an initial treatment plan for
areas that have been identified for
treatment. The initial treatment would
affect approximately 1,610 acres of the
approximately 4,055 acres of
transmission line ROWs on NFS lands.
In the EIS, WAPA identified six broad
categories of existing conditions in the
ROWs. The condition of the vegetation
in the ROW determines whether the
ROW would need to be treated soon,
needs treatment over the longer term, or
is unlikely to need treatment for some
time. WAPA routinely monitors ROWs
to determine vegetation conditions. The
proposed action includes vegetation
management options based on the
conditions in the ROWs. Table ES–1
summarizes the six categories of ROW
conditions and vegetation management.
E:\FR\FM\21DEN1.SGM
21DEN1
83076
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices
TABLE ES–1—CATEGORIES OF RIGHT-OF-WAY CONDITIONS AND VEGETATION TREATMENT METHODS
Category
Vegetation
1 ...................
Compatible with the transmission line.
2 ...................
Fast-growing incompatible
species that are presently
not acceptable, and over
the long term, the vegetation is likely to include incompatible vegetation types
that would require monitoring and treatment.
Fast-growing incompatible
species of trees that are in
an acceptable condition, but
over the long term, incompatible vegetation treatments would be needed.
Slow-growing incompatible
species of mature vegetation that is not acceptable,
and over the long term,
treatments for incompatible
vegetation would be needed
to control re-growth.
3 ...................
4 ...................
Examples
Frequency of treatment
The lines span canyons and
there will likely always be
adequate clearance between vegetation and the
transmission line conductors—even with larger mature trees; a vegetation
community that is already a
stable, low-growth one
(e.g., grasses, forbs,
bushes, and shrubs) so that
vegetation at mature height
is not a threat to the transmission line.
Mature lodgepole pine, mature aspen, and other species on high-quality growth
sites.
None expected for the duration of the authorization, but
ROW monitoring will be
needed to ensure conditions have not changed.
None expected.
• Initial treatment expected
within 1 to 5 years.
• Maintenance treatments are
expected to be relatively
frequent (expected 2- to 6year return intervals).
• Accessible sites would favor
use of mechanized equipment and removal of salvageable material.
• Inaccessible sites would
favor use of hand felling.
Immature lodgepole pine and
aspen. Other species on
high-quality growth sites.
• Maintenance treatments are
expected to be relatively
frequent (expected 2- to 6year return intervals, but
this will vary depending on
site conditions).
• Initial treatment is expected
within 2 to 5 years, depending on site conditions and
vegetation growth.
• Maintenance treatments are
expected to be relatively infrequent on sites with incompatible species with
slow growth rates, perhaps
5 or more years, depending
on site conditions.
• Maintenance treatments are
expected to be relatively infrequent, perhaps 5 years
or longer, depending on site
conditions.
• Accessible sites would favor
mechanized equipment,
with removal of salvageable
material.
• Inaccessible sites would
favor use of hand felling.
• On sites with good access,
mechanized equipment
would be favored, and salvageable material would be
removed.
• On sites with poor access,
hand felling and other manual methods would typically
be used.
Mature spruce and fir. Other
species on harsh sites.
5 ...................
These sites have slow-growing incompatible species,
and the ROW is in an acceptable condition; but over
the long term, the incompatible species would need to
be monitored and treated.
Immature spruce and fir.
Other incompatible species
on harsh sites.
6 ...................
Treatments in these areas of
ROW are driven largely by
the conditions of the fuel
load. Typically, they include
areas with low-growing
vegetation types characterized by having high fuel
loads. Sites are characterized by dense, woody vegetation capable of high-intensity fire, with transmission
lines having relatively low
conductor-to-ground clearances.
Sagebrush, Gambel oak,
dense lodgepole regeneration, and pinyon and juniper
pine.
These areas are proposed for
mechanical treatment to remove
incompatible tall-growth species, while
addressing a buildup of fuels from
several decades of previous vegetation
management activities. Treatments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:33 Dec 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
• Initial treatments are expected. This could include
mechanical removal of
vegetation near structures
and from areas of the
ROW.
• Maintenance treatments as
needed. Need is determined from ROW monitoring.
could include logging, chipping, and
grinding of trees and existing debris
using mechanized equipment and other
activities developed in coordination
with the USFS. Following completion of
the initial treatment in an area, the ROW
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Treatment methods
• On sites with good access,
mechanized equipment
would be favored, and salvageable material would be
removed.
• On sites with poor access,
hand felling and other manual methods would typically
be used.
• In areas with good access,
mechanized treatment such
as mowing would be favored.
• In areas with poor access,
manual treatments would
typically be used.
• Gambel oak could be treated with herbicides.
would be maintained in a desired
condition that is generally defined by a
lack of incompatible vegetation species.
The desired condition depends on the
ROW conditions and incorporates
design features that protect sensitive
E:\FR\FM\21DEN1.SGM
21DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices
resources. As a joint-lead agency, and in
support of WAPA’s proposed action, the
USFS would re-authorize and issue
SUPs for each transmission line and
authorize WAPA to manage vegetation
and conduct maintenance activities
along WAPA ROWs on NFS lands. The
USFS would permit these activities
through new SUPs and O&M Plans.
Each specific WAPA vegetation
management or maintenance activity
would be assessed by the USFS prior to
initiation using a process defined in
O&M Plans developed in conjunction
with the SUPs.
Alternatives
WAPA and the USFS evaluated a no
action alternative that would leave the
existing WAPA vegetation management
and maintenance activities in place
under the existing USFS permits and
O&M Plans. This alternative would not
meet WAPA’s purpose and need or the
objectives given above. The
environmentally-preferred and agencypreferred alternative is the proposed
action. While initial treatment activities
would cause higher impacts than no
action, over the long term, after the
desired conditions are achieved, the
wildfire hazard would be much reduced
and vegetation management activities
would be less intensive and less
frequent. Overall, resource impacts
would be substantially lower compared
with no action. All practicable means of
avoiding or minimizing environmental
impacts have been incorporated into the
proposed action and its related standard
maintenance practices, and specific
additional resource protections may be
included in the new SUPs, WAPA’s
O&M Plans, and individual action
reviews.
WAPA and the USFS considered an
option to remove all tall-growing trees
from the ROWs to maximize
transmission line reliability and
minimize wildfire hazard. However,
vegetation conditions and terrain vary,
and not all areas require the same
treatment efforts. Where conductor
clearances allow, such as spanning a
drainage, taller vegetation can be
allowed to remain in the ROW. This
approach is included in the proposed
action, and reduces resource impacts,
visual effects, wildlife habitat impacts,
and vegetation management costs.
Similarly, an option to prohibit the use
of herbicides was considered. This
option would reduce WAPA’s ability to
control incompatible vegetation and
noxious weeds efficiently and
effectively. Herbicide use can be done in
an environmentally responsible way
with minimal impact. Selective proper
use of herbicides would reduce the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:33 Dec 18, 2020
Jkt 253001
number of vegetation management
cycles and associated environmental
impacts and allow the ROWs to reach
the desired conditions more quickly.
Public Involvement
The Notice of Intent (NOI) was
published in the Federal Register on
April 8, 2010, launching the scoping
process that extended through May 26,
2010. The NOI invited public
participation in the EIS scoping process
and solicited public comments on the
scope and content of the EIS. WAPA
and the USFS solicited comments from
Federal, State, and local agencies; tribal
governments; other organizations; and
the public, and announced
opportunities to comment in various
local news media. Chapter Four of the
Final EIS lists agencies, organizations,
and people who received copies.
In April 2010, WAPA and the USFS
hosted three public scoping meetings in
Denver and Grand Junction, Colorado,
and Vernal, Utah, which provided the
public an opportunity to comment and
ask questions about the Project and EIS
development. Before each public
meeting, WAPA and the USFS held
interagency scoping meetings.
The Notice of Availability (NOA) for
the Draft EIS was published in the
Federal Register on September 27, 2013.
One public meeting was held in Denver,
Colorado, on October 23, 2013; there
were no attendees. WAPA and the
Forest Service received four comment
letters; two of the letters expressed
support for the Project. The U.S.
Department of the Interior letter
indicated no comments on the Project,
and the Environmental Protection
Agency letter indicated a rating of Lack
of Objections (LO) for the Project. No
comments were received from the
general public or tribes.
The USFS has a pre-decisional
objection process that follows the
release of certain environmental
documents, in this case the Final EIS.
The objection filing period was 45 days,
and no objections were filed during that
time.
Decision
Informed by the analyses and
environmental impacts documented in
the Final EIS and related consultations,
WAPA has selected the proposed action
identified in the Final EIS as its
decision for the Project. The proposed
action will be the basis for the
preparation of revised SUPs and
associated O&M Plans.
This ROD was prepared in accordance
with the requirements of the CEQ
regulations for implementing NEPA (40
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
83077
CFR parts 1500–1508) and the DOE
NEPA regulations (10 CFR part 1021).
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on December 8, 2020,
by Mark A. Gabriel, Administrator,
Western Area Power Administration,
pursuant to delegated authority from the
Secretary of Energy. That document
with the original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative
purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal
Register, the undersigned DOE Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been
authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of
the Department of Energy. This
administrative process in no way alters
the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on December
15, 2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2020–28016 Filed 12–18–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[Region 4 Library; FRL–10017–91–Region 4]
Notice of Library Changes
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Informational notice.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is issuing this notice to
advise the public of upcoming changes
to the Region 4 Library. Region 4 will
be reducing the size of its library space,
decreasing the amount of print materials
maintained in its collection, and ceasing
all on-site library support services. The
library will retain a small, targeted
collection of reference material on-site
which will be accessible by
appointment only to EPA staff and the
public (For appointments, see contact
information below). In addition, EPA
staff and the public will continue to
have remote access to the full suite of
library services available at EPA through
the Andrew W. Breidenbach
Environmental Research Center
(AWBERC) Library, located in
Cincinnati, Ohio. The AWBERC Library
can be reached by email (CI_AWBERC_
Library@epa.gov) or by phone (513–
569–7703). For more information about
the EPA National Library Network and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21DEN1.SGM
21DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 245 (Monday, December 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83074-83077]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28016]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Western Area Power Administration
Reauthorization of Permits, Maintenance, and Vegetation
Management on Western Area Power Administration Transmission Lines on
National Forest System Lands, Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah (DOE/EIS-
0442)
AGENCY: Western Area Power Administration, DOE.
ACTION: Record of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) has determined
that it will implement the proposed action, or Project, as described in
the Reauthorization of Maintenance and Vegetation Management on Western
Area Power Administration Transmission Lines on Forest Service Lands,
Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah final environmental impact statement
(Final EIS) (DOE/EIS-0442). The proposed action includes changing
WAPA's vegetation management and facility maintenance practices in some
rights-of-way (ROWs) along approximately 273 miles of electrical
transmission lines on National Forest System (NFS) lands in Colorado,
Nebraska, and Utah. The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) was a joint lead
agency on the EIS and proposes to authorize the changes through new
Special Use Permits (SUPs) and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plans.
This Record of Decision (ROD) was prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Council
on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing NEPA, and
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) NEPA regulations.
DATES: The ROD was effective when it was signed by WAPA's Administrator
on December 8, 2020. All known interested parties, agencies, tribes,
and the public will be notified of this ROD directly via the Project
mailing list and via paid advertising, news releases, or other
appropriate means.
ADDRESSES: The Final EIS, this ROD, and other Project documents are
available on the Project website at https://www.wapa.gov/transmission/EnvironmentalReviewNEPA/Pages/vegetation-management.aspx.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on the
Project, the EIS process or this ROD, please contact Ms. E. Lynn
Burkett at Headquarters A9400, Western Area Power Administration, P.O.
Box 281213, Lakewood, CO 80228-8213, email [email protected], telephone
(720) 962-7000. For general information on the DOE NEPA review process,
please contact Brian Costner, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, GC-
54, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20585-0119, email [email protected], telephone (202) 586-4600 or
(800) 472-2756, facsimile (202) 586-7031.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: WAPA is a Federal power marketing
administration within DOE that markets and delivers Federal wholesale
electric power (principally hydroelectric power) to municipalities,
rural electric cooperatives, public utilities, irrigation districts,
Federal and State agencies, Native American tribes, and other wholesale
customers in 15 western and central States. WAPA's Rocky Mountain
Customer Service Region (RM) operates in Arizona, Colorado, most of
Wyoming, and portions of Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Utah.
Background
On August 10, 1996, during a period of high temperatures and high
electricity demand, a transmission line sagged into filbert trees near
Portland, Oregon, leading to a cascade of power outages as far away as
southern California. Executive Order 13212, Actions To Expedite Energy-
Related Projects (May 18, 2001), declared the increased production and
transmission of energy in a safe and environmentally sound manner to be
essential to the well-being of the American people and called for the
improvement and streamlining of cooperation among Federal agencies to
expedite projects that would increase the production, transmission, or
conservation of energy. In August 2003, the cascading results of
another equipment failure led to an enormous power outage in the
Northeast and Midwest, affecting approximately 45 million people in the
United States and 10 million people in Ontario, Canada. The U.S.-Canada
Power System Outage Task Force found that, again, transmission line sag
into overgrown trees in rural Ohio sparked the outage.
In response to these outages, Congress added, as part of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-58), a new section 215 to the Federal
Power Act. Among other things, the new section 215 authorized the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to certify an ``Electric
Reliability Organization'' to create mandatory and enforceable
reliability standards, subject to FERC review and approval. FERC
certified the North American Electric
[[Page 83075]]
Reliability Corporation (NERC) as the Electric Reliability
Organization. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 also requires Federal
agencies to expedite approvals to allow owners or operators of
transmission facilities access to the facilities to comply with
applicable standards, including vegetation management standards.
FERC approved NERC's original Reliability Standard, FAC-003-1,
``Transmission Vegetation Management Program'' (NERC Standard) on March
16, 2007,\1\ and the standard became mandatory and enforceable on June
18, 2007. The most recent version of the NERC Standard is FAC-003-4,
``Transmission Vegetation Management.'' The revised standard was
approved on April 26, 2016,\2\ and became mandatory and enforceable on
October 1, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System,
Order No. 693, 118 FERC ] 61,218, order on reh'g, Order No. 693-A,
120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007).
\2\ Letter Order Approving Reliability Standard FAC-003-4, FERC
Docket No. RD16-4-000 (Apr. 26, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To enhance WAPA's compliance with NERC's Transmission Vegetation
Management Reliability Standard, industry standards, and WAPA's policy
and guidance, WAPA proposes to improve the way it manages vegetation
along its ROWs on NFS lands in Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah. WAPA owns,
operates, and maintains approximately 273 miles of transmission line
ROWs on NFS lands in Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah. Specifically, the
Project includes WAPA RM transmission facilities and access routes
located on NFS lands managed by seven National Forests in the Rocky
Mountain Region (Region 2) and one National Forest in the Intermountain
Region (Region 4). These National Forests and Grasslands include the
Arapahoe--Roosevelt; Ashley; Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison;
Medicine Bow--Routt; Pike--San Isabel; Samuel R. McKelvie; San Juan;
and White River.
Purpose and Need for Agency Action
WAPA needs to improve the way it manages vegetation along its 273
miles of transmission line ROWs on NFS lands with the following
purposes and objectives:
1. To ensure that WAPA can safely and reliably operate and maintain
its existing electrical transmission facilities to deliver electrical
power.
2. To further WAPA's compliance with NERC's Transmission Vegetation
Management Reliability Standards, industry standards, and WAPA's policy
and guidance.
3. To ensure that WAPA's transmission facilities remain operational
for the useful life of the facilities.
4. To protect public and worker safety.
5. To reduce the risk of wildfires caused by transmission lines and
the risk to the facilities from fire.
6. To control the spread of noxious weeds.
7. To maintain sound relationships with landowners and land
managers.
8. To ensure that WAPA has access to its transmission facilities
for maintenance and emergency response.
9. To ensure that the costs associated with maintaining the
transmission system can be controlled following sound business
principles, including achieving technical and economic efficiencies to
minimize impacts on transmission line tariff costs and electrical power
rates.
10. To allow flexibility to accommodate changes in transmission
system operation and maintenance requirements.
11. To minimize impacts to environmental resources.
WAPA's Proposed Action--Proposed Project
WAPA proposes to change the way it manages vegetation in the ROWs
for the transmission lines it owns, operates, or maintains. The
proposed action would require the USFS to re-authorize and issue SUPs
for each transmission line and authorize WAPA to manage vegetation
along WAPA ROWs on NFS lands using an integrated vegetation management
(IVM) approach, for which WAPA would develop new O&M Plans. This
approach is based on the American National Standard Institute Tree,
Shrub and Other Woody Plant Maintenance--Standard Practices (Integrated
Vegetation Management, a. Electric Utility ROW (ANSI A300 (Part 7)-2006
IVM)). WAPA would control vegetation growth and fuel conditions that
threaten transmission lines. The proposed action would balance the
purpose of and need for agency action with the need to comply with
environmental regulations and USFS requirements, address potential
impacts to environmental resources, and incorporate public and agency
comments. It incorporates the design features developed to protect
environmental resources. It is important to note that vegetation
management and maintenance of WAPA's transmission facilities has been
ongoing for many years, so the proposed action merely makes these
routine activities more proactive under the IVM approach.
The vegetation management proposal includes an initial treatment
plan for areas that have been identified for treatment. The initial
treatment would affect approximately 1,610 acres of the approximately
4,055 acres of transmission line ROWs on NFS lands.
In the EIS, WAPA identified six broad categories of existing
conditions in the ROWs. The condition of the vegetation in the ROW
determines whether the ROW would need to be treated soon, needs
treatment over the longer term, or is unlikely to need treatment for
some time. WAPA routinely monitors ROWs to determine vegetation
conditions. The proposed action includes vegetation management options
based on the conditions in the ROWs. Table ES-1 summarizes the six
categories of ROW conditions and vegetation management.
[[Page 83076]]
Table ES-1--Categories of Right-of-Way Conditions and Vegetation Treatment Methods
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frequency of
Category Vegetation Examples treatment Treatment methods
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1..................... Compatible with the The lines span None expected for the None expected.
transmission line. canyons and there duration of the
will likely always authorization, but
be adequate ROW monitoring will
clearance between be needed to ensure
vegetation and the conditions have not
transmission line changed.
conductors--even
with larger mature
trees; a vegetation
community that is
already a stable,
low-growth one
(e.g., grasses,
forbs, bushes, and
shrubs) so that
vegetation at
mature height is
not a threat to the
transmission line.
2..................... Fast-growing Mature lodgepole Initial Accessible
incompatible species pine, mature aspen, treatment expected sites would favor
that are presently and other species within 1 to 5 years. use of mechanized
not acceptable, and on high-quality Maintenance equipment and
over the long term, growth sites. treatments are removal of
the vegetation is expected to be salvageable
likely to include relatively frequent material.
incompatible (expected 2- to 6-
vegetation types year return Inaccessible sites
that would require intervals). would favor use of
monitoring and hand felling.
treatment.
3..................... Fast-growing Immature lodgepole Maintenance Accessible
incompatible species pine and aspen. treatments are sites would favor
of trees that are in Other species on expected to be mechanized
an acceptable high-quality growth relatively frequent equipment, with
condition, but over sites. (expected 2- to 6- removal of
the long term, year return salvageable
incompatible intervals, but this material.
vegetation will vary depending
treatments would be on site conditions). Inaccessible sites
needed. would favor use of
hand felling.
4..................... Slow-growing Mature spruce and Initial On sites
incompatible species fir. Other species treatment is with good access,
of mature vegetation on harsh sites. expected within 2 to mechanized
that is not 5 years, depending equipment would be
acceptable, and over on site conditions favored, and
the long term, and vegetation salvageable
treatments for growth. material would be
incompatible Maintenance removed.
vegetation would be treatments are On sites
needed to control re- expected to be with poor access,
growth. relatively hand felling and
infrequent on sites other manual
with incompatible methods would
species with slow typically be used.
growth rates,
perhaps 5 or more
years, depending on
site conditions.
5..................... These sites have slow- Immature spruce and Maintenance On sites
growing incompatible fir. Other treatments are with good access,
species, and the ROW incompatible expected to be mechanized
is in an acceptable species on harsh relatively equipment would be
condition; but over sites. infrequent, perhaps favored, and
the long term, the 5 years or longer, salvageable
incompatible species depending on site material would be
would need to be conditions. removed.
monitored and On sites
treated. with poor access,
hand felling and
other manual
methods would
typically be used.
6..................... Treatments in these Sagebrush, Gambel Initial In areas
areas of ROW are oak, dense treatments are with good access,
driven largely by lodgepole expected. This could mechanized
the conditions of regeneration, and include mechanical treatment such as
the fuel load. pinyon and juniper removal of mowing would be
Typically, they pine. vegetation near favored.
include areas with structures and from In areas
low-growing areas of the ROW. with poor access,
vegetation types Maintenance manual treatments
characterized by treatments as would typically be
having high fuel needed. Need is used.
loads. Sites are determined from ROW Gambel oak
characterized by monitoring. could be treated
dense, woody with herbicides.
vegetation capable
of high-intensity
fire, with
transmission lines
having relatively
low conductor-to-
ground clearances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These areas are proposed for mechanical treatment to remove
incompatible tall-growth species, while addressing a buildup of fuels
from several decades of previous vegetation management activities.
Treatments could include logging, chipping, and grinding of trees and
existing debris using mechanized equipment and other activities
developed in coordination with the USFS. Following completion of the
initial treatment in an area, the ROW would be maintained in a desired
condition that is generally defined by a lack of incompatible
vegetation species. The desired condition depends on the ROW conditions
and incorporates design features that protect sensitive
[[Page 83077]]
resources. As a joint-lead agency, and in support of WAPA's proposed
action, the USFS would re-authorize and issue SUPs for each
transmission line and authorize WAPA to manage vegetation and conduct
maintenance activities along WAPA ROWs on NFS lands. The USFS would
permit these activities through new SUPs and O&M Plans. Each specific
WAPA vegetation management or maintenance activity would be assessed by
the USFS prior to initiation using a process defined in O&M Plans
developed in conjunction with the SUPs.
Alternatives
WAPA and the USFS evaluated a no action alternative that would
leave the existing WAPA vegetation management and maintenance
activities in place under the existing USFS permits and O&M Plans. This
alternative would not meet WAPA's purpose and need or the objectives
given above. The environmentally-preferred and agency-preferred
alternative is the proposed action. While initial treatment activities
would cause higher impacts than no action, over the long term, after
the desired conditions are achieved, the wildfire hazard would be much
reduced and vegetation management activities would be less intensive
and less frequent. Overall, resource impacts would be substantially
lower compared with no action. All practicable means of avoiding or
minimizing environmental impacts have been incorporated into the
proposed action and its related standard maintenance practices, and
specific additional resource protections may be included in the new
SUPs, WAPA's O&M Plans, and individual action reviews.
WAPA and the USFS considered an option to remove all tall-growing
trees from the ROWs to maximize transmission line reliability and
minimize wildfire hazard. However, vegetation conditions and terrain
vary, and not all areas require the same treatment efforts. Where
conductor clearances allow, such as spanning a drainage, taller
vegetation can be allowed to remain in the ROW. This approach is
included in the proposed action, and reduces resource impacts, visual
effects, wildlife habitat impacts, and vegetation management costs.
Similarly, an option to prohibit the use of herbicides was considered.
This option would reduce WAPA's ability to control incompatible
vegetation and noxious weeds efficiently and effectively. Herbicide use
can be done in an environmentally responsible way with minimal impact.
Selective proper use of herbicides would reduce the number of
vegetation management cycles and associated environmental impacts and
allow the ROWs to reach the desired conditions more quickly.
Public Involvement
The Notice of Intent (NOI) was published in the Federal Register on
April 8, 2010, launching the scoping process that extended through May
26, 2010. The NOI invited public participation in the EIS scoping
process and solicited public comments on the scope and content of the
EIS. WAPA and the USFS solicited comments from Federal, State, and
local agencies; tribal governments; other organizations; and the
public, and announced opportunities to comment in various local news
media. Chapter Four of the Final EIS lists agencies, organizations, and
people who received copies.
In April 2010, WAPA and the USFS hosted three public scoping
meetings in Denver and Grand Junction, Colorado, and Vernal, Utah,
which provided the public an opportunity to comment and ask questions
about the Project and EIS development. Before each public meeting, WAPA
and the USFS held interagency scoping meetings.
The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIS was published in
the Federal Register on September 27, 2013. One public meeting was held
in Denver, Colorado, on October 23, 2013; there were no attendees. WAPA
and the Forest Service received four comment letters; two of the
letters expressed support for the Project. The U.S. Department of the
Interior letter indicated no comments on the Project, and the
Environmental Protection Agency letter indicated a rating of Lack of
Objections (LO) for the Project. No comments were received from the
general public or tribes.
The USFS has a pre-decisional objection process that follows the
release of certain environmental documents, in this case the Final EIS.
The objection filing period was 45 days, and no objections were filed
during that time.
Decision
Informed by the analyses and environmental impacts documented in
the Final EIS and related consultations, WAPA has selected the proposed
action identified in the Final EIS as its decision for the Project. The
proposed action will be the basis for the preparation of revised SUPs
and associated O&M Plans.
This ROD was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the
CEQ regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508) and the
DOE NEPA regulations (10 CFR part 1021).
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on December 8,
2020, by Mark A. Gabriel, Administrator, Western Area Power
Administration, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of
Energy. That document with the original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance
with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on December 15, 2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2020-28016 Filed 12-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
