Notice2024-21279
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
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 20, 2024
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentLand Management Bureau
Abstract
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).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 183 (Friday, September 20, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 183 (Friday, September 20, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77171-77174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[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 <a href="https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2018636/510">https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2018636/510</a> and copies of the Final EIS may be examined at the
following locations:
<bullet> BLM Bristlecone Field Office and Ely District Office, 702
North Industrial Way, Ely, Nevada 89301;
<bullet> BLM Caliente Field Office, 1400 Front Street, Caliente,
Nevada, 89008;
<bullet> BLM Cedar City Field Office and Color Country District
Office, 176 East D.L. Sargent Drive, Cedar City, Utah 84721;
[[Page 77172]]
<bullet> BLM Fillmore Field Office, 95 East 500 North, Fillmore,
Utah 84631;
<bullet> BLM West Desert District Office, 491 North John Glenn
Road, Salt Lake City, Utah 84116
<bullet> Forest Service Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Ely Ranger
District, 825 Avenue E, Ely, Nevada, 89301; and
<bullet> 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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b9dbd5d4e6cccde6dfd4e6dacbd6caca94cdd0dce6c9cbd6d3dcdacdf9dbd5d497ded6cf"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="82e0eeefddf7f6dde4efdde1f0edf1f1aff6ebe7ddf2f0ede8e7e1f6c2e0eeeface5edf4">[email protected]</span></a>. 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
<bullet> Forest Service (Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, Ely Ranger
District)
<bullet> U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
<bullet> Department of Defense, Military Aviation and Installation
Assurance Siting Clearinghouse
<bullet> Department of Defense, UTTR
<bullet> U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
State Agencies
<bullet> 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
<bullet> Nevada Department of Wildlife
<bullet> Nevada Division of Minerals
<bullet> Nevada Sagebrush Ecosystem Program
<bullet> Nevada Division of State Lands
<bullet> Nevada N-4 State Grazing Board
Local Agencies
<bullet> Beaver County, Utah
<bullet> Juab County, Utah
<bullet> Millard County, Utah
<bullet> Lincoln County, Nevada
<bullet> Nye County, Nevada
<bullet> White Pine County, Nevada
<bullet> City of Ely, Nevada
<bullet> Lincoln County Conservation District
Tribal Governments
<bullet> Duckwater Shoshone Tribe
<bullet> 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:
<bullet> Wildlife impact concerns, including birds, bats, big game,
amphibians, pollinators and insects, general wildlife, special-status
species, and GRSG;
<bullet> Lands with Wilderness Characteristics impact concerns;
<bullet> Visual resource impact concerns; and
<bullet> 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
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 20, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.