Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Cross-Tie 500-kV Transmission Project in Beaver, Juab, and Millard Counties, Utah, and Lincoln, Nye, and White Pine Counties, Nevada, 77171-77174 [2024-21279]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
77171
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 183 / Friday, September 20, 2024 / Notices
PROCESSING AND FILING FEE TABLE—Continued
Document/action
FY 2025 fee
Site license application ...................................................................................................................................................................
Assignment or transfer of site license ............................................................................................................................................
Coal (parts 3400, 3470):
License to mine application ............................................................................................................................................................
Exploration license application .......................................................................................................................................................
Lease or lease interest transfer .....................................................................................................................................................
Leasing of Solid Minerals Other Than Coal and Oil Shale (parts 3500, 3580):
Applications other than those listed below .....................................................................................................................................
Prospecting permit application amendment ...................................................................................................................................
Extension of prospecting permit .....................................................................................................................................................
Lease modification or fringe acreage lease ...................................................................................................................................
Lease renewal ................................................................................................................................................................................
Assignment, sublease, or transfer of operating rights ...................................................................................................................
Transfer of overriding royalty .........................................................................................................................................................
Use permit ......................................................................................................................................................................................
Shasta and Trinity hardrock mineral lease ....................................................................................................................................
Renewal of existing sand and gravel lease in Nevada ..................................................................................................................
Public Law 359; Mining in Powersite Withdrawals: General (part 3730):
Notice of protest of placer mining operations ................................................................................................................................
Mining Law Administration (parts 3800, 3810, 3830, 3860, 3870):
Application to open lands to location .............................................................................................................................................
Notice of location ** ........................................................................................................................................................................
Amendment of location ...................................................................................................................................................................
Transfer of mining claim/site ..........................................................................................................................................................
Recording an annual FLPMA filing ................................................................................................................................................
Deferment of assessment work ......................................................................................................................................................
Recording a notice of intent to locate mining claims on Stockraising Homestead Act lands .......................................................
Mineral patent adjudication (more than 10 claims) ........................................................................................................................
(10 or fewer claims) ........................................................................................................................................................................
Adverse claim .................................................................................................................................................................................
Protest ............................................................................................................................................................................................
Oil Shale Management (parts 3900, 3910, 3930):
Exploration license application .......................................................................................................................................................
Application for assignment or sublease of record title or overriding royalty ..................................................................................
Onshore Oil and Gas Operations and Production (parts 3160, 3170):
Application for Permit to Drill ..........................................................................................................................................................
80
80
15
425
85
45
85
140
40
670
40
40
40
40
40
15
15
25
15
15
15
140
40
3,915
1,955
140
85
410
85
12,515
* These fees are new for FY 2025. The BLM adopted them in the final rule titled ‘‘Fluid Mineral Leases and Leasing Process,’’ published on
April 23, 2024 (89 FR 30916).
** To record a mining claim or site location, this processing fee along with the initial maintenance fee and the one-time location fee required by
statute and at 43 CFR part 3833 must be paid.
David Rosenkrance,
Assistant Director, Office of Energy, Minerals,
and Realty Management.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and
the United States Department of
Agriculture—Forest Service (USDA
Forest Service) announce the
availability of the Cross-Tie 500-kilovolt
(kV) Transmission Project (Cross-Tie
Project or Project) Final Environmental
Impact Statement (FEIS).
The availability period and objection
filing period will run concurrently.
Following the conclusion of that
availability period and objection
process, RODs signed by the BLM and
USDA Forest Service will document
both agency’s final decisions and
identify any conditions of approval.
Bureau of Land Management
DATES:
The BLM will not issue a
decision on the proposal for a minimum
of 30 days after the date the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
publishes its Notice of Availability
(NOA) of the FEIS in the Federal
Register. The EPA usually publishes its
NOAs on Fridays. The USDA Forest
Service may issue a Record of Decision
(ROD) after the pre-decisional
administrative review process, also
known as the objection process, has
ended and the Reviewing Officer has
responded in writing to all objections,
and all concerns and instructions
identified by the Reviewing Officer in
the objection response have been
addressed by the Responsible Official.
ADDRESSES:
[FR Doc. 2024–21605 Filed 9–19–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331–29–P
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Notice of Availability of the Final
Environmental Impact Statement for
the Cross-Tie 500-kV Transmission
Project in Beaver, Juab, and Millard
Counties, Utah, and Lincoln, Nye, and
White Pine Counties, Nevada
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
In compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended (NEPA), and the
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Sep 19, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Copies of the Final EIS and
documents pertinent to this proposal are
electronically available for review on
the BLM ePlanning project website at
https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/
project/2018636/510 and copies of the
Final EIS may be examined at the
following locations:
• BLM Bristlecone Field Office and
Ely District Office, 702 North Industrial
Way, Ely, Nevada 89301;
• BLM Caliente Field Office, 1400
Front Street, Caliente, Nevada, 89008;
• BLM Cedar City Field Office and
Color Country District Office, 176 East
D.L. Sargent Drive, Cedar City, Utah
84721;
E:\FR\FM\20SEN1.SGM
20SEN1
77172
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 183 / Friday, September 20, 2024 / Notices
• BLM Fillmore Field Office, 95 East
500 North, Fillmore, Utah 84631;
• BLM West Desert District Office,
491 North John Glenn Road, Salt Lake
City, Utah 84116
• Forest Service Humboldt-Toiyabe
National Forest Ely Ranger District, 825
Avenue E, Ely, Nevada, 89301; and
• Forest Service Humboldt-Toiyabe
National Forest Supervisor’s Office,
1200 Franklin Way, Sparks, Nevada,
89431.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amber Koski, BLM Project Manager,
telephone 435–743–3125, address 95
East 500 North, Fillmore, Utah 84631, or
blm_ut_fm_cross-tie_project@blm.gov.
Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, deaf blind, hard of hearing, or have
a speech disability, please dial 711
(TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunication relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
applicant, TransCanyon LLC
(TransCanyon), submitted an
Application for Transportation and
Utility Systems and Facilities on
Federal Lands (Standard Form 299) and
a draft Plan of Development to the BLM
and USDA Forest Service for a
permanent facility BLM right-of-way
(ROW) and a Forest Service special use
permit (SUP) for the construction,
operation and maintenance (O&M), and
decommissioning of the Cross-Tie 500kV Transmission Project.
The BLM Fillmore Field Office, in
coordination with cooperating agencies,
prepared an EIS to analyze potential
impacts from the Project and
alternatives. New permanent and
temporary land authorizations would be
required to construct, operate, and
maintain Project components. In Utah,
TransCanyon’s Proposed Action would
cross 110 miles of BLM land, 14 miles
of State land, and 18 miles of private
land, totaling 141 miles. In Nevada,
TransCanyon’s Proposed Action would
cross 63 miles of BLM land, eight miles
of National Forest System land, four
miles of private land, and one mile of
State land, totaling 76 miles.
TransCanyon would obtain these land
rights through ROW grants from the
BLM, a SUP from the Forest Service,
and easements or fee purchases for nonFederal lands.
Purpose and Need for the Proposed
Action
The purpose of this BLM Federal
action is to respond to the ROW
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Sep 19, 2024
Jkt 262001
application submitted by TransCanyon
for the construction, O&M, and
decommissioning of the proposed
transmission line between central Utah
and east-central Nevada. The need for
Federal action is established by the
BLM’s responsibilities under title V of
FLPMA (43 U.S.C. 1761), the BLM’s
ROW regulations at 43 CFR part 2800,
and other applicable Federal laws and
policies to grant ROWs over public land.
The purpose and need of the Forest
Service Federal action is to respond to
an application for a SUP submitted by
TransCanyon for the construction, O&M,
and decommissioning of the proposed
500-kV transmission line on National
Forest System land in east-central
Nevada in compliance with FLPMA and
the National Forest Management Act (16
U.S.C. 1601–1614), as well as the
Humboldt National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan, as
amended, which provides forest-wide
standards and guidelines for
management of National Forest System
land crossed by the Project. The SUP
will govern use and occupancy of
National Forest System land that is in
the public interest while avoiding and
minimizing adverse effects and ensuring
consistency with land and resource
management plans.
FLPMA provides both the BLM and
the Forest Service with discretion to
authorize use of land they administer
via ROWs or SUPs, taking into
consideration impacts on natural and
cultural resources. In doing so, the BLM
and the Forest Service both must
endeavor ‘‘to minimize damage to
scenic and esthetic values and fish and
wildlife habitat and otherwise protect
the environment.’’ (43 U.S.C. 1765). The
BLM and the Forest Service are
reviewing the Proposed Action and
other alternatives and will decide
whether to approve, approve with
modifications, or deny TransCanyon’s
application, and may include terms,
conditions, and stipulations authorized
by law and regulation.
Proposed Action and Alternatives
TransCanyon’s Proposed Action
includes an approximately 214-mile,
1,500-megawatt, 500-kV high-voltage
alternating current (HVAC) overhead
transmission line which would be
constructed between the Clover
Substation in central Utah and the
Robinson Summit Substation in eastcentral Nevada. The Project would be
situated within a 250-foot-wide ROW,
125 feet from centerline, which would
maintain separation from other existing
extra-high-voltage transmission lines as
required by the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation. The Project
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
facilities would include a 500-kV HVAC
overhead transmission line, new
substation equipment at the Clover
Substation in central Utah (within the
existing substation footprint) and at the
Robinson Summit Substation in eastcentral Nevada (within a 46-acre
proposed expansion), regeneration
stations near the line for the fiber optic
ground wire, series compensation
station(s), temporary and permanent
access roads, and temporary work areas
associated with construction activities.
In addition to the Proposed Action
and No Action Alternative (i.e., not
granting the ROW/SUP), alternatives
include modifications to the proposed
route. Three alternative routes to reduce
impacts on resources of concern were
developed before the public scoping
period during workshops with agency
interdisciplinary teams and cooperating
agencies. A fourth alternative was
developed after the public scoping
period in response to Tribal concerns.
Alternative A (Agency Preferred
Alternative)
Alternative A would replace a portion
of the Proposed Action in southeastern
Juab County and northeastern Millard
County, Utah, which would minimize
potential effects to private landowners
and their viewsheds in the area near
Leamington, Utah, and would minimize
potential effects to the Sevier River and
agricultural property.
Alternative A would largely follow
the approved but currently unbuilt
TransWest Express Transmission Project
(TransWest Express) ROW, deviate from
the Proposed Action in the east, and
cross BLM-administered land and pass
through a Greater Sage-grouse (GRSG)
General Habitat Management Area,
where the line is not co-located with the
approved TransWest Express ROW. It
would then follow the route of the
approved TransWest Express ROW until
it rejoins the Proposed Action at the line
between Juab and Millard Counties. A
23-mile-long segment of the Proposed
Action would be replaced with the 27mile-long segment of Alternative A,
which would increase the total length of
the route from 214 miles to 218 miles.
Alternative B
Alternative B would replace a portion
of the Proposed Action alignment in
central and western Millard County,
Utah, which would minimize crossings
of the Sevier A and Sevier B Military
Operating Area (low-level flight training
areas) that are part of the Department of
Defense’s Utah Test and Training Range
(UTTR).
Alternative B would cross into Beaver
County, Utah, following identified
E:\FR\FM\20SEN1.SGM
20SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 183 / Friday, September 20, 2024 / Notices
utility corridors to the Milford, Utah,
area, then turn west and north following
an identified utility corridor (with no
current aboveground utilities) back to
the Proposed Action alignment near the
Utah-Nevada State line. A 69-mile-long
segment of the Proposed Action would
be replaced with the 158-mile-long
segment of Alternative B, which would
increase the total length of the route
from 214 miles to 304 miles.
Alternative C
Alternative C would replace a portion
of the Proposed Action alignment in
eastern White Pine County, Nevada, and
was developed in consideration of
concerns regarding the culturally
sensitive Swamp Cedars Area of Critical
Concern and Bahsahwahbee Traditional
Cultural Property.
This alternative would diverge from
the Proposed Action alignment and
follow U.S. Highway 6/50 southwest,
then follow State Route 893 northwest
back to the Proposed Action alignment.
A 7-mile-long segment of the Proposed
Action would be replaced with the 13mile-long segment of Alternative C,
which would increase the total length of
the route from 214 miles to 221 miles.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Alternative D
Alternative D was developed to avoid
sensitive resource areas in Spring
Valley, Nevada. Alternative D would
replace a portion of the Proposed Action
alignment in Millard County, Utah, and
eastern White Pine County, Nevada.
Alternative D would follow Alternative
B through Beaver County, Utah, then
depart from Alternative B shortly after
reentering Millard County, Utah. It
would then head west, north of the
county line, rerouted in the southwest
corner of Millard County, Utah, to avoid
the Lands with Wilderness
Characteristic (LWC) Inventory Unit
Jackson Wash (UT–C010–121), and
cross into Lincoln County, Nevada.
From there, the route would head west,
then southwest to an Ely District
resource management plan (RMP)
corridor near Atlanta, Nevada. The route
would then follow the RMP corridor
west and south until it intersects the
Section 368 Energy Corridor that
contains the existing One Nevada
Transmission Line. It would then follow
the One Nevada Transmission Line
north to the Robinson Summit
Substation. A 145-mile-long segment of
the Proposed Action route would be
replaced with the 297-mile-long
segment of Alternative D, which would
increase the total length of the route
from 214 miles to 366 miles.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Sep 19, 2024
Jkt 262001
Key Mitigation Measures
The Project is anticipated to cause
direct and indirect impacts during
construction, O&M, and
decommissioning. During construction,
impacts would occur from land
disturbance; operation of construction
equipment; installation of towers, access
roads, and other facilities; and presence
of work forces. During O&M, impacts
would occur from continued presence of
Project facilities and from maintenance
activities. Impacts from
decommissioning would be similar to
those expected from the construction
phase. Cumulative impacts from
relevant reasonably foreseeable future
actions are disclosed in the FEIS.
Applicant-Committed Environmental
Protection Measures (ACEPMs) are
included as part of the Agency Preferred
Alternative and have been identified to
reduce impacts on environmental
resources. These measures would apply
to all action alternatives. TransCanyon
and its contractors would adhere to the
ACEPMs identified during the
engineering/design phase and to the
measures addressing construction and
O&M activities. A full list of the
ACEPMs can be found in Appendix A:
Plan of Development. Additionally,
direct and indirect impacts to GRSG
habitat have been analyzed and used to
determine compensatory mitigation
requirements.
Lead and Cooperating Agencies
The BLM, as the lead Federal agency
for preparing the EIS, invited Federal,
Tribal, State, and local agencies to serve
as cooperating agencies. In total, 56
agencies were invited. The following
entities accepted the invitation and are
participating as cooperating agencies:
Federal Agencies
• Forest Service (Humboldt-Toiyabe
National Forest, Ely Ranger District)
• U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
• Department of Defense, Military
Aviation and Installation Assurance
Siting Clearinghouse
• Department of Defense, UTTR
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
State Agencies
• Utah Public Lands Policy
Coordinating Office, with multiple
State of Utah entities participating
through this office:
Æ University of Utah Telescope Array
Project
Æ Utah Department of Agriculture
and Food
Æ Utah Department of Transportation
Æ Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
Æ Utah Trust Lands Administration
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
•
•
•
•
•
77173
Nevada Department of Wildlife
Nevada Division of Minerals
Nevada Sagebrush Ecosystem Program
Nevada Division of State Lands
Nevada N–4 State Grazing Board
Local Agencies
• Beaver County, Utah
• Juab County, Utah
• Millard County, Utah
• Lincoln County, Nevada
• Nye County, Nevada
• White Pine County, Nevada
• City of Ely, Nevada
• Lincoln County Conservation District
Tribal Governments
• Duckwater Shoshone Tribe
• Te-Moak Tribe of Western ShoshoneElko Band
The BLM and Forest Service have also
engaged in government-to-government
consultation with affected Tribes and
will continue Tribal engagement during
all phases of the planning process in
accordance with applicable Federal
statutes, regulations, and other
authorities, including the National
Historic Preservation Act, the American
Indian Religious Freedom Act,
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments), and Executive Order
13007 (Indian Sacred Sites).
Public Involvement
The BLM published a Notice of Intent
(NOI) to prepare the EIS in the Federal
Register on May 2, 2022 (87 FR 25656).
The scoping process began with the
publication of the NOI in the Federal
Register, and ran from May 2, 2022, to
June 1, 2022. During the scoping period,
the BLM sought public comments to
identify issues to be addressed in the
EIS.
Two virtual public scoping meetings
were held on May 17 and May 18, 2022.
In total, 59 letter submissions were
received from the public during the
scoping period either via the U.S. Postal
Service, email, recorded telephone line,
or via telephone to the BLM Project
Manager.
The BLM published a Draft EIS Notice
of Availability (NOA) in the Federal
Register on November 9, 2023 (88 FR
77358). Although the NOA defined the
end date of the public comment period
as January 2, 2024, the BLM extended
the comment period through January 9,
2024. The BLM held four in-person
meetings and one virtual meeting in
November and December 2023.
Meetings were held in Nephi, Milford,
and Delta, Utah, and Ely, Nevada. The
BLM also met with the Leamington,
Utah town council in December 2023.
The BLM received a total of 583
submissions during the public comment
E:\FR\FM\20SEN1.SGM
20SEN1
77174
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 183 / Friday, September 20, 2024 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
period. Of the submissions, 420 were
identical copy letters, 89 were form
letters with additional text, 73 were
unique letters, and one was a duplicate
submission. Principle comment issues
included:
• Wildlife impact concerns, including
birds, bats, big game, amphibians,
pollinators and insects, general wildlife,
special-status species, and GRSG;
• Lands with Wilderness
Characteristics impact concerns;
• Visual resource impact concerns;
and
• Cultural resource impact concerns.
Public and stakeholder comments also
provided specific edits and corrections
to EIS sections and general support or
opposition to the proposed Project.
Final EIS Revisions
Comments on the Draft EIS received
from the public and internal BLM
review were considered and
incorporated as appropriate into the
Final EIS. Public comments resulted in
the addition of clarifications and
analysis, but comments did not identify
significant new circumstances or
information relevant to environmental
concerns that have bearing upon the
proposed action.
In response to public comments on
the Draft EIS, revisions were made to
the Final EIS. The agency made
micrositing changes within the 0.5-mile
wide siting corridor at Marjum Pass in
Millard County, Utah, which is
analyzed as part of the Agency Preferred
Alternative within the Final EIS. The
LWC, Transportation, Visual Resources,
and Wilderness Study Areas sections of
the Final EIS include updated analysis
for the Agency Preferred Alternative
micrositing at Marjum Pass. Impacts
from the Agency Preferred Alternative
would be the same as described under
the Proposed Action for the following:
air quality; climate change/greenhouse
gases; cultural and heritage resources;
fire and fuels management; geology,
minerals, and renewable energy
production; inventoried roadless areas;
land use; livestock grazing; noxious and
invasive weeds; paleontology;
recreation; socioeconomics and
environmental justice; soils; vegetation;
water resources; wildlife; and
woodlands.
In addition to micrositing in Marjum
Pass, the agency widened the 0.5-milewide siting corridor in two specific
areas (Utah-Nevada border west of
Garrison, Utah; and Steptoe Valley,
Nevada) where public comments noted
administrative constraints that would
preclude or interfere with existing
infrastructure, private lands, and
specially managed areas. Widening the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Sep 19, 2024
Jkt 262001
siting corridor in these locations allows
for the flexibility of the centerline to
shift. The 0.5-mile-wide siting corridor
was also reduced after publication of the
Draft EIS in multiple locations across
Nevada to remove locations outside
designated utility corridors. These are
locations where siting of the
transmission line would not be in
conformance with the Nevada and
Northeastern California Greater SageGrouse Approved Resource
Management Plan Amendment (NevadaCalifornia ARMPA) (BLM 2015b), as
described below. The 0.5-mile-wide
siting corridor and centerline were also
shifted in the southwest corner of
Millard County, Utah, to avoid the LWC
Inventory Unit Jackson Wash (UT–
C010–121).
In early 2024, the United States
Geological Survey issued a draft annual
update report related to GRSG that
disclosed an adaptive management
trigger identified in the NevadaCalifornia ARMPA that was tripped for
the third year in a row for a lek cluster
within the area near the western
terminus of the Project at Robinson
Summit Substation (Prochazka et al.
2024). The individual annual triggers
are defined as soft triggers in the
Nevada-California ARMPA, and the
plan provided that tripping three soft
triggers in consecutive years (2021,
2022, and 2023) equates to a hard
trigger. In response to tripping a hard
trigger, the ARMPA identifies any land
outside designated utility corridors and
within GRSG habitat management areas
as exclusion areas for new high-voltage
transmission. There is an approximately
1-mile-long segment of the proposed
Project and action alternatives that
would be located outside the designated
utility corridor across GRSG habitat
management areas and whose
authorization would not conform to the
approved Nevada-California ARMPA
based on this new information. Through
a separate process, the BLM is currently
reconsidering its 2015 GRSG planning
decisions, including its management of
the lands being considered for this
proposed Project segment. The BLM
published a NOA for the draft GRSG
RMP amendments on March 15, 2024.
The BLM will ensure that its decision
responding to the application for the
Project will conform to the land use
plans approved at the time of the record
of decision, consistent with 43 CFR
1610.5–3.
Additional updates were made to
address public concerns within the
following resource sections: renewable
energy resources, visual resources,
Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and cumulative impacts, GRSG, and
LWC.
Agency Decisions
Based on the environmental analysis
in this Final EIS, the BLM Utah State
Director will decide whether to
authorize the ROW grant, authorize with
modifications, or deny the application
based on the proposed Project,
alternatives, or any combination thereof
on Public Lands. The Forest Service will
issue a separate ROD specific to its
decision whether to authorize a SUP on
National Forest System land.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10)
Christina Judd,
Acting State Director, Utah.
[FR Doc. 2024–21279 Filed 9–19–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331–25–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[BLM_NV_FRN_4500181325]
Notice of Availability of the Final
Environmental Impact Statement for
Ioneer Rhyolite Ridge LLC’s Rhyolite
Ridge Lithium-Boron Mine Project,
Esmeralda County, Nevada
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended (NEPA), and the
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
announces the availability of the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the Rhyolite Ridge Lithium-Boron
Mine Project (Project) proposed by
Ioneer Rhyolite Ridge LLC (Ioneer) in
Esmeralda County, Nevada.
DATES: The BLM will not issue a
decision on the proposal for a minimum
of 30 days after the date that the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
publishes its Notice of Availability
(NOA) in the Federal Register. The EPA
usually publishes its NOAs on Fridays.
ADDRESSES: The Final EIS and
documents pertinent to this proposal are
available for review on the BLM’s
National NEPA Register (ePlanning) at
https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/
project/2012309/510.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Scott Distel, Project Manager, telephone:
(775) 635–4093; email: sdistel@blm.gov;
address: 50 Bastian Road, Battle
Mountain, NV 89820. Individuals in the
United States who are deaf, deafblind,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20SEN1.SGM
20SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 183 (Friday, September 20, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77171-77174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-21279]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact
Statement for the Cross-Tie 500-kV Transmission Project in Beaver,
Juab, and Millard Counties, Utah, and Lincoln, Nye, and White Pine
Counties, Nevada
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended (NEPA), and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act
of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and
the United States Department of Agriculture--Forest Service (USDA
Forest Service) announce the availability of the Cross-Tie 500-kilovolt
(kV) Transmission Project (Cross-Tie Project or Project) Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).
DATES: The BLM will not issue a decision on the proposal for a minimum
of 30 days after the date the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
publishes its Notice of Availability (NOA) of the FEIS in the Federal
Register. The EPA usually publishes its NOAs on Fridays. The USDA
Forest Service may issue a Record of Decision (ROD) after the pre-
decisional administrative review process, also known as the objection
process, has ended and the Reviewing Officer has responded in writing
to all objections, and all concerns and instructions identified by the
Reviewing Officer in the objection response have been addressed by the
Responsible Official. The availability period and objection filing
period will run concurrently. Following the conclusion of that
availability period and objection process, RODs signed by the BLM and
USDA Forest Service will document both agency's final decisions and
identify any conditions of approval.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final EIS and documents pertinent to this
proposal are electronically available for review on the BLM ePlanning
project website at https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2018636/510 and copies of the Final EIS may be examined at the
following locations:
BLM Bristlecone Field Office and Ely District Office, 702
North Industrial Way, Ely, Nevada 89301;
BLM Caliente Field Office, 1400 Front Street, Caliente,
Nevada, 89008;
BLM Cedar City Field Office and Color Country District
Office, 176 East D.L. Sargent Drive, Cedar City, Utah 84721;
[[Page 77172]]
BLM Fillmore Field Office, 95 East 500 North, Fillmore,
Utah 84631;
BLM West Desert District Office, 491 North John Glenn
Road, Salt Lake City, Utah 84116
Forest Service Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Ely Ranger
District, 825 Avenue E, Ely, Nevada, 89301; and
Forest Service Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest
Supervisor's Office, 1200 Franklin Way, Sparks, Nevada, 89431.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amber Koski, BLM Project Manager,
telephone 435-743-3125, address 95 East 500 North, Fillmore, Utah
84631, or [email protected]. Individuals in the
United States who are deaf, deaf blind, hard of hearing, or have a
speech disability, please dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunication relay services. Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered within their country to make
international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The applicant, TransCanyon LLC
(TransCanyon), submitted an Application for Transportation and Utility
Systems and Facilities on Federal Lands (Standard Form 299) and a draft
Plan of Development to the BLM and USDA Forest Service for a permanent
facility BLM right-of-way (ROW) and a Forest Service special use permit
(SUP) for the construction, operation and maintenance (O&M), and
decommissioning of the Cross-Tie 500-kV Transmission Project.
The BLM Fillmore Field Office, in coordination with cooperating
agencies, prepared an EIS to analyze potential impacts from the Project
and alternatives. New permanent and temporary land authorizations would
be required to construct, operate, and maintain Project components. In
Utah, TransCanyon's Proposed Action would cross 110 miles of BLM land,
14 miles of State land, and 18 miles of private land, totaling 141
miles. In Nevada, TransCanyon's Proposed Action would cross 63 miles of
BLM land, eight miles of National Forest System land, four miles of
private land, and one mile of State land, totaling 76 miles.
TransCanyon would obtain these land rights through ROW grants from the
BLM, a SUP from the Forest Service, and easements or fee purchases for
non-Federal lands.
Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action
The purpose of this BLM Federal action is to respond to the ROW
application submitted by TransCanyon for the construction, O&M, and
decommissioning of the proposed transmission line between central Utah
and east-central Nevada. The need for Federal action is established by
the BLM's responsibilities under title V of FLPMA (43 U.S.C. 1761), the
BLM's ROW regulations at 43 CFR part 2800, and other applicable Federal
laws and policies to grant ROWs over public land.
The purpose and need of the Forest Service Federal action is to
respond to an application for a SUP submitted by TransCanyon for the
construction, O&M, and decommissioning of the proposed 500-kV
transmission line on National Forest System land in east-central Nevada
in compliance with FLPMA and the National Forest Management Act (16
U.S.C. 1601-1614), as well as the Humboldt National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan, as amended, which provides forest-wide
standards and guidelines for management of National Forest System land
crossed by the Project. The SUP will govern use and occupancy of
National Forest System land that is in the public interest while
avoiding and minimizing adverse effects and ensuring consistency with
land and resource management plans.
FLPMA provides both the BLM and the Forest Service with discretion
to authorize use of land they administer via ROWs or SUPs, taking into
consideration impacts on natural and cultural resources. In doing so,
the BLM and the Forest Service both must endeavor ``to minimize damage
to scenic and esthetic values and fish and wildlife habitat and
otherwise protect the environment.'' (43 U.S.C. 1765). The BLM and the
Forest Service are reviewing the Proposed Action and other alternatives
and will decide whether to approve, approve with modifications, or deny
TransCanyon's application, and may include terms, conditions, and
stipulations authorized by law and regulation.
Proposed Action and Alternatives
TransCanyon's Proposed Action includes an approximately 214-mile,
1,500-megawatt, 500-kV high-voltage alternating current (HVAC) overhead
transmission line which would be constructed between the Clover
Substation in central Utah and the Robinson Summit Substation in east-
central Nevada. The Project would be situated within a 250-foot-wide
ROW, 125 feet from centerline, which would maintain separation from
other existing extra-high-voltage transmission lines as required by the
North American Electric Reliability Corporation. The Project facilities
would include a 500-kV HVAC overhead transmission line, new substation
equipment at the Clover Substation in central Utah (within the existing
substation footprint) and at the Robinson Summit Substation in east-
central Nevada (within a 46-acre proposed expansion), regeneration
stations near the line for the fiber optic ground wire, series
compensation station(s), temporary and permanent access roads, and
temporary work areas associated with construction activities.
In addition to the Proposed Action and No Action Alternative (i.e.,
not granting the ROW/SUP), alternatives include modifications to the
proposed route. Three alternative routes to reduce impacts on resources
of concern were developed before the public scoping period during
workshops with agency interdisciplinary teams and cooperating agencies.
A fourth alternative was developed after the public scoping period in
response to Tribal concerns.
Alternative A (Agency Preferred Alternative)
Alternative A would replace a portion of the Proposed Action in
southeastern Juab County and northeastern Millard County, Utah, which
would minimize potential effects to private landowners and their
viewsheds in the area near Leamington, Utah, and would minimize
potential effects to the Sevier River and agricultural property.
Alternative A would largely follow the approved but currently
unbuilt TransWest Express Transmission Project (TransWest Express) ROW,
deviate from the Proposed Action in the east, and cross BLM-
administered land and pass through a Greater Sage-grouse (GRSG) General
Habitat Management Area, where the line is not co-located with the
approved TransWest Express ROW. It would then follow the route of the
approved TransWest Express ROW until it rejoins the Proposed Action at
the line between Juab and Millard Counties. A 23-mile-long segment of
the Proposed Action would be replaced with the 27-mile-long segment of
Alternative A, which would increase the total length of the route from
214 miles to 218 miles.
Alternative B
Alternative B would replace a portion of the Proposed Action
alignment in central and western Millard County, Utah, which would
minimize crossings of the Sevier A and Sevier B Military Operating Area
(low-level flight training areas) that are part of the Department of
Defense's Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR).
Alternative B would cross into Beaver County, Utah, following
identified
[[Page 77173]]
utility corridors to the Milford, Utah, area, then turn west and north
following an identified utility corridor (with no current aboveground
utilities) back to the Proposed Action alignment near the Utah-Nevada
State line. A 69-mile-long segment of the Proposed Action would be
replaced with the 158-mile-long segment of Alternative B, which would
increase the total length of the route from 214 miles to 304 miles.
Alternative C
Alternative C would replace a portion of the Proposed Action
alignment in eastern White Pine County, Nevada, and was developed in
consideration of concerns regarding the culturally sensitive Swamp
Cedars Area of Critical Concern and Bahsahwahbee Traditional Cultural
Property.
This alternative would diverge from the Proposed Action alignment
and follow U.S. Highway 6/50 southwest, then follow State Route 893
northwest back to the Proposed Action alignment. A 7-mile-long segment
of the Proposed Action would be replaced with the 13-mile-long segment
of Alternative C, which would increase the total length of the route
from 214 miles to 221 miles.
Alternative D
Alternative D was developed to avoid sensitive resource areas in
Spring Valley, Nevada. Alternative D would replace a portion of the
Proposed Action alignment in Millard County, Utah, and eastern White
Pine County, Nevada. Alternative D would follow Alternative B through
Beaver County, Utah, then depart from Alternative B shortly after
reentering Millard County, Utah. It would then head west, north of the
county line, rerouted in the southwest corner of Millard County, Utah,
to avoid the Lands with Wilderness Characteristic (LWC) Inventory Unit
Jackson Wash (UT-C010-121), and cross into Lincoln County, Nevada. From
there, the route would head west, then southwest to an Ely District
resource management plan (RMP) corridor near Atlanta, Nevada. The route
would then follow the RMP corridor west and south until it intersects
the Section 368 Energy Corridor that contains the existing One Nevada
Transmission Line. It would then follow the One Nevada Transmission
Line north to the Robinson Summit Substation. A 145-mile-long segment
of the Proposed Action route would be replaced with the 297-mile-long
segment of Alternative D, which would increase the total length of the
route from 214 miles to 366 miles.
Key Mitigation Measures
The Project is anticipated to cause direct and indirect impacts
during construction, O&M, and decommissioning. During construction,
impacts would occur from land disturbance; operation of construction
equipment; installation of towers, access roads, and other facilities;
and presence of work forces. During O&M, impacts would occur from
continued presence of Project facilities and from maintenance
activities. Impacts from decommissioning would be similar to those
expected from the construction phase. Cumulative impacts from relevant
reasonably foreseeable future actions are disclosed in the FEIS.
Applicant-Committed Environmental Protection Measures (ACEPMs) are
included as part of the Agency Preferred Alternative and have been
identified to reduce impacts on environmental resources. These measures
would apply to all action alternatives. TransCanyon and its contractors
would adhere to the ACEPMs identified during the engineering/design
phase and to the measures addressing construction and O&M activities. A
full list of the ACEPMs can be found in Appendix A: Plan of
Development. Additionally, direct and indirect impacts to GRSG habitat
have been analyzed and used to determine compensatory mitigation
requirements.
Lead and Cooperating Agencies
The BLM, as the lead Federal agency for preparing the EIS, invited
Federal, Tribal, State, and local agencies to serve as cooperating
agencies. In total, 56 agencies were invited. The following entities
accepted the invitation and are participating as cooperating agencies:
Federal Agencies
Forest Service (Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, Ely Ranger
District)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Defense, Military Aviation and Installation
Assurance Siting Clearinghouse
Department of Defense, UTTR
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
State Agencies
Utah Public Lands Policy Coordinating Office, with multiple
State of Utah entities participating through this office:
[cir] University of Utah Telescope Array Project
[cir] Utah Department of Agriculture and Food
[cir] Utah Department of Transportation
[cir] Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
[cir] Utah Trust Lands Administration
Nevada Department of Wildlife
Nevada Division of Minerals
Nevada Sagebrush Ecosystem Program
Nevada Division of State Lands
Nevada N-4 State Grazing Board
Local Agencies
Beaver County, Utah
Juab County, Utah
Millard County, Utah
Lincoln County, Nevada
Nye County, Nevada
White Pine County, Nevada
City of Ely, Nevada
Lincoln County Conservation District
Tribal Governments
Duckwater Shoshone Tribe
Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone-Elko Band
The BLM and Forest Service have also engaged in government-to-
government consultation with affected Tribes and will continue Tribal
engagement during all phases of the planning process in accordance with
applicable Federal statutes, regulations, and other authorities,
including the National Historic Preservation Act, the American Indian
Religious Freedom Act, Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments), and Executive Order 13007
(Indian Sacred Sites).
Public Involvement
The BLM published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare the EIS in
the Federal Register on May 2, 2022 (87 FR 25656). The scoping process
began with the publication of the NOI in the Federal Register, and ran
from May 2, 2022, to June 1, 2022. During the scoping period, the BLM
sought public comments to identify issues to be addressed in the EIS.
Two virtual public scoping meetings were held on May 17 and May 18,
2022. In total, 59 letter submissions were received from the public
during the scoping period either via the U.S. Postal Service, email,
recorded telephone line, or via telephone to the BLM Project Manager.
The BLM published a Draft EIS Notice of Availability (NOA) in the
Federal Register on November 9, 2023 (88 FR 77358). Although the NOA
defined the end date of the public comment period as January 2, 2024,
the BLM extended the comment period through January 9, 2024. The BLM
held four in-person meetings and one virtual meeting in November and
December 2023. Meetings were held in Nephi, Milford, and Delta, Utah,
and Ely, Nevada. The BLM also met with the Leamington, Utah town
council in December 2023.
The BLM received a total of 583 submissions during the public
comment
[[Page 77174]]
period. Of the submissions, 420 were identical copy letters, 89 were
form letters with additional text, 73 were unique letters, and one was
a duplicate submission. Principle comment issues included:
Wildlife impact concerns, including birds, bats, big game,
amphibians, pollinators and insects, general wildlife, special-status
species, and GRSG;
Lands with Wilderness Characteristics impact concerns;
Visual resource impact concerns; and
Cultural resource impact concerns.
Public and stakeholder comments also provided specific edits and
corrections to EIS sections and general support or opposition to the
proposed Project.
Final EIS Revisions
Comments on the Draft EIS received from the public and internal BLM
review were considered and incorporated as appropriate into the Final
EIS. Public comments resulted in the addition of clarifications and
analysis, but comments did not identify significant new circumstances
or information relevant to environmental concerns that have bearing
upon the proposed action.
In response to public comments on the Draft EIS, revisions were
made to the Final EIS. The agency made micrositing changes within the
0.5-mile wide siting corridor at Marjum Pass in Millard County, Utah,
which is analyzed as part of the Agency Preferred Alternative within
the Final EIS. The LWC, Transportation, Visual Resources, and
Wilderness Study Areas sections of the Final EIS include updated
analysis for the Agency Preferred Alternative micrositing at Marjum
Pass. Impacts from the Agency Preferred Alternative would be the same
as described under the Proposed Action for the following: air quality;
climate change/greenhouse gases; cultural and heritage resources; fire
and fuels management; geology, minerals, and renewable energy
production; inventoried roadless areas; land use; livestock grazing;
noxious and invasive weeds; paleontology; recreation; socioeconomics
and environmental justice; soils; vegetation; water resources;
wildlife; and woodlands.
In addition to micrositing in Marjum Pass, the agency widened the
0.5-mile-wide siting corridor in two specific areas (Utah-Nevada border
west of Garrison, Utah; and Steptoe Valley, Nevada) where public
comments noted administrative constraints that would preclude or
interfere with existing infrastructure, private lands, and specially
managed areas. Widening the siting corridor in these locations allows
for the flexibility of the centerline to shift. The 0.5-mile-wide
siting corridor was also reduced after publication of the Draft EIS in
multiple locations across Nevada to remove locations outside designated
utility corridors. These are locations where siting of the transmission
line would not be in conformance with the Nevada and Northeastern
California Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan
Amendment (Nevada-California ARMPA) (BLM 2015b), as described below.
The 0.5-mile-wide siting corridor and centerline were also shifted in
the southwest corner of Millard County, Utah, to avoid the LWC
Inventory Unit Jackson Wash (UT-C010-121).
In early 2024, the United States Geological Survey issued a draft
annual update report related to GRSG that disclosed an adaptive
management trigger identified in the Nevada-California ARMPA that was
tripped for the third year in a row for a lek cluster within the area
near the western terminus of the Project at Robinson Summit Substation
(Prochazka et al. 2024). The individual annual triggers are defined as
soft triggers in the Nevada-California ARMPA, and the plan provided
that tripping three soft triggers in consecutive years (2021, 2022, and
2023) equates to a hard trigger. In response to tripping a hard
trigger, the ARMPA identifies any land outside designated utility
corridors and within GRSG habitat management areas as exclusion areas
for new high-voltage transmission. There is an approximately 1-mile-
long segment of the proposed Project and action alternatives that would
be located outside the designated utility corridor across GRSG habitat
management areas and whose authorization would not conform to the
approved Nevada-California ARMPA based on this new information. Through
a separate process, the BLM is currently reconsidering its 2015 GRSG
planning decisions, including its management of the lands being
considered for this proposed Project segment. The BLM published a NOA
for the draft GRSG RMP amendments on March 15, 2024. The BLM will
ensure that its decision responding to the application for the Project
will conform to the land use plans approved at the time of the record
of decision, consistent with 43 CFR 1610.5-3.
Additional updates were made to address public concerns within the
following resource sections: renewable energy resources, visual
resources, Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions and cumulative
impacts, GRSG, and LWC.
Agency Decisions
Based on the environmental analysis in this Final EIS, the BLM Utah
State Director will decide whether to authorize the ROW grant,
authorize with modifications, or deny the application based on the
proposed Project, alternatives, or any combination thereof on Public
Lands. The Forest Service will issue a separate ROD specific to its
decision whether to authorize a SUP on National Forest System land.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10)
Christina Judd,
Acting State Director, Utah.
[FR Doc. 2024-21279 Filed 9-19-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331-25-P
