DOCSLIB.ORG

Fora Certificate of Environmental Generating

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fora Certificate of Environmental Generating IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF 1 SOUTHWESTERN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY ) FORA CERTIFICATE OF ENVIRONMENTAL 1 COMPATXBILITYAND PUBLIC NEED FORTHE ) DOCKJZT NO. 06-154-U CONSTRUCTION, OWNERSHIP, OPERATION AND ) ORDERNO. 11 MAINTENANCE OF A COAL-FIRED BASELOAD ) GENERATING FACILITY IN HEMPSTEAD 1 COUNTY, ARKANSAS 1 ORDER Pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. 5 23-18-501 et seq., on December 8, 2006, Southwestern Electric Power Company1 (SWBPCO or the Company), a .rvholly-owned subsidiaiy of American Electric Power, Inc. (AEP} filed in the above-styled Docket its Application for a Ceriijicate of Envirunmentd Compatibility and Public Need for the Construction, Ownership, Operation and Maintenance of a Coal-Fired Baseload Generating Facility in Hempstead County, At.knnsas (Application). The proposed facilities to be constructed under this Application constitute a major utiIity facility as defined in Ark. Code. Ann. 5 23-18-503(5)(A). By its Application SWEPCO requests that this Commission issue an order granting it a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need (CECPN or Certificate) to construct, maintain, and operate a coal-fired baseIoad electric generation I In the States of Arkansas, Texas, and Louisiana, SWEPCO engages in the general electric utility busincss of gcnerating, transmitting, distributing and selling, at wholesale and retail, electric power and energy to customers in its service areas. SWEPCO is a pubIic utiIity within the meaning of Ark. Code Ann. 8 23-1-101,and is, therefore, subject to the jurisdiction of this Cornmission. SWEPCO is also subject to thc public utiIity regulatory jurisdiction of the Louisiana and Texas public utility commissions. Applications simiIar to that filed in this Docket are also pcnding before the Louisiana and Texas commissions. Docket NO.06-154-U OrderNo. 11 Page 2 of 76 facility in Hempstead County, Arkansas engineered to generate approximately 600 MW of net generating capacity (the Turk Plant or the plant). Pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. 5 23-18-513 and the Commission’s Rules ofPractfce and Procedure (the Rules), Rule 7.08, SWEPCO provided notice of its Application to all Iegally-designated state agencies and governmental bodies. On the same day that SWEPCO filed its Application, the General Staff of the Commission (the Staff), pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. 5 23-18-514, invited comments from all state agencies entitled to notice of the Application. These state agencies are the Attorney General of Arkansas, Arkansas Commissioner of State Lands, Arkansas WateMtays Cornmission, Arkansas Geological Commission, Axlmnsas Natural Resources Commission (ANRC), Arkansas Energy Office, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission (AGFC), Arkansas Forestry Commission, Arkansas Department of Environmental Qua1it-y (APEQ), Department of Arkansas Heritage [DAH), Arkansas Highway and Transportation Deparhnent, Arkansas Department of Health and Human Services, Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration, the Governor of the State of Arkansas, Arkansas Department of Economic Development and Arkansas Department of Aeronautics . Staffs notification to these legally-designated state agencies resuhed in the receipt by the Staff of responsive letters from four divisions of three state agencies stating concerns that the Application was deficient, was incomplete in its scope, or had failed to provide the information that the specific state agency needed to evaluate the Application. However, no governmental agencies intervened as a party in this Docket NO. 06-154-U OrdcrNo. 11 Page 3 of 76 proceeding.' After Staff notification to SWEPCO, by letter dated February 23, 2007, SWEPCO addressed the stated deficiencies and responded directIy to the designated state agencies. On October 5, 2007, after the conclusion of 17 days of evidentiary hearings and before closing arguments, the Commission requested the DAH, ADEQ, AGFC, ANRC, the Department of the Army, and the Vicksburg District Corps of Engineers to provide updates of the status of each agency's review of SWEPCO's Application. On October 17, 2007 the ANRC responded to the request. Responses were received by ADEQ and AGFC on October 18,2007. The DAH,on behalf of the Vicksburg District Corps of Engineers, also responded on October 18,2007.3 The Parties, Witnesses and Pre-Filed Testimonies In addition to SWEPCO,the other parties to this proceeding are the Staff, the Consumer Utilities Rate Advocacy Division of the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Arkansas4 (AG) and certain Intervenors who OM^ property adjacent to or in the general proximity of SWEPCO's proposed Hempstead County plant site. On December 28, 2006, the SchuTtz Family Limited Partnership, and its Genera1 Partner, Schultz Family Management Company, and F. Patrick Schultz, individually and as Vice-president of Schuh Family Management Company (Schultz), petitioned to intervene as a pam in this docket pursuant to Rule 3.04@)(1) of the Commission's ~ ~ 2 Federal, state, and/or local agencies have intervened in previous APSC dockets wherein eIectric utiIities sought CECPNs for generating plants, including Dockc t Nos. 73-048-U,74-015-U, and 77-003-U. 3 All correspondence between the Staff, SWEPCO and these governrnentd agencies was filed in the official record of this Docket. 4 On December 15, 2006, pursuant to Ark, Code Ann. 5 23-4-301et seq, On December 15,2006,the AG notified the Commission of its intention to participate as a party in tiis procceding. Docket No. 06-154-U OrderNo. 11 Page 4 of 76 Rules. Schultz stated that it owned property adjacent to the proposed generating faciliv that is used for hunting, fishing and other recreational purposes. Schultz alleged that its propem would be adversely impacted by the construction and operation of the proposed faciliv as a direct result of environmental impacts. On January 4,2007,Emon Mahony, Jr., individualIy, and as a shareholder of the Yellow Creek, Po-Boy, Cypress Bayou and Bee Bayou Hunting Clubs (Mahony) filed a Petition to Intervene in this docket. Likewise, on January 4, 2007, the Hempstead County Hunting CIub, Inc., Po-Boy Land Company, Inc., Cypress Bayou Corporation and Yellow Creek Corporation (Hempstead) filed a separate Petition to Intervene in this docket. In his Petition to Intervene, Mahony stated that the hunting dubs in which he is a member “would be adversely impacted by the environmental impact of mercury discharged into the atmosphere in the vicinity of these lands“ and that “the withdrawal of 6000 gallons of water per minute from the Litde River will adversely impact the availability of water for hunting purposes ....” (Mahony Petition at 4) In its Petition to Intervene Hempstead alleged that “[tJhe potential impact of the water to be withdrawn by the proposed facility is of grave concern ....” Hempstead also alleged that “[t]he release of the toxic metal mercury, which is a by-product of the burning of coal, has the potential of contaminating the watersheds of Yellow Creek and Little River,” Finally, Hempstead expressed concern about “the impact of coal train arrival and departures”. (Hempstead Petition at 2-3) On January 24,2007,the Commission issued Order No. 2 granting the Petitions to Xnteelwene of Schultz, Hempstead and Mahony (collectively, the Inteervenors) on the Docket NO.06-154-U OrderNo. 11 Page 5 of 76 condition that “these entities intervene and participate in this proceeding as a single and united interest represented by common legal counsel.” The Initial Direct Testimony and Exhibits of SWEPCO witnesses Venita McCellon-Allen, Renee V. Hawkins, John C. Hendricks, Timothy A. Hostetler, James A. Kobyra, Mark W. Marano, and Donald R. Moncrief were filed on December 8,2006,in support of SWEPCO’s Application. Supplemental Testimony and Exhibits were filed on March 22, 2007, by SWEPCO witnesses Venita McCellon-Allen, Bruce H. Braine, and Scott C. Weaver. The Direct Testimony and Exhibits of SWEPCO witness Rob R. Reid were filed on April 18, 2007. Additional Supplemental Testimony and Exhibits were filed on April 19, 2007, by SWEPCO witness John C. Hendricks and on June 18-19, 2007,by SWEPCO witnesses Venita McCeTlon-Allen, Scott C. Weaver, James A. Kobyra, and Judah L. Rose. Pursuant to Ark, Code Ann. 523-18-511,SWEPCO’s Application, and supporting witnesses’ testimonies and exhibits, included (I) A general description of the proposed Iocation and type of the major utility facility proposed to be built; (Test. Tr. 191, 19&7,327-8) (2) A general description of any reasonable alternate location or locations considered for the proposed facility; (Test.Tr. 199-202) (3) A statement of the need and reasons for construction of the faciliv; (Test. Tr. 73-4) (4) A statement of the estimated costs of the facility and the proposed method of financing the construction of the facility; (Test. Tr, 223-30,305- 9) (5)(A) A general description of any reasonable alternate methods of financing the cons~ctionof the facility and a description of the comparative merits and detriments of each alternate financing method considered; (Test. Tr. 309-13) Docket NO. 06-154-U OrdcrNo. 11 Page 6 of 76 (6) An analysis of the projected economic or financial impact on the applicant and the local community where the faciIiv is to be located as a result of the const-ruction and the operation of the proposed faciliw; (Test. Tr. 313-21,485-6) (7) An analysis of the estimated effects on energy costs to the consumer as a result of the construction and operation of the proposed facility; (Hr. Tr. 1910-1; Test. Tr. 484-5) (8)(A) An exhibit containing an environmental impact statement (EIS), developing the following four factors listed in subdivision (S)(B>: (Test. Tr. 328-34;EX. Tr* 1723-4246) i. The environmental impact of the proposed action; (Test. Tr. 332-33 ii. Any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided; (Test. Tr, 333) iii. A description of the comparative merits and detriments of each alternative energy production process considered, and a statement of the reasons why the proposed location and production process were selected for the facility; and (Test.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Book Order Form
    Page 1 of 4 Please mail this order form and full payment to: Ozark Society Books, P.O. Box 2914, Little Rock, AR 72203 • For further information about Ozark Society Publications, contact: Emily Roberts – 501.213.5226 or email address: [email protected] Ozark Society Books, Guides, Maps, CDs, and Video Item Price Quantity Total Price Buffalo National River Canoeing Guide (New Edition) 15.00 Complete revision of The Buffalo National River Canoeing Guide, this is the 4th revised edition of this classic guide, done by members of the Ozark Society, dedicated to Harold and Margaret Hedges. This guide includes all aspects of the Buffalo River experience, including safety tips, equestrian trails, the GPS Coordinates for points along the river, and topographic maps and narrative river logs. Paperbound, 9 x 6. ISBN: 0912456248, EANS: 9780912456249. Forest Forensics by Frederick Paillet and Steven Stephenson 24.95 Ozark Forest Forensics interprets our natural surroundings in a way that enhances a simple walk in the scenic deciduous woodlands of the Ozark Mountain region. Explanations go beyond trees and their habitat to include other diverse subjects: the leaf litter beneath a hiker’s feet, strategies used by wildflowers for pollination and seed dispersal, diseases that can ravage our forests, and forces active in the landscape that impact conservation efforts. Simplified line drawings demonstrate specific points of interest in a way that visually cluttered photographs cannot do. Includes: 163 line drawings, a list of species used in the text, a glossary, and a reading list. Paperback; 342 pages; ISBN: 978-0-912456-28-7 The Buffalo Flows (Video) 19.95 The Buffalo Flows is a one-hour documentary film written and produced by two-time Emmy award winning filmmaker Larry Foley, Professor of Journalism at the University of Arkansas.
    [Show full text]
  • Ridgeway Baptist Church Delight United (SBC) Corner of Peachtree & Hearn Methodist Church Y
    THE NASHVILLE H News-LEADER H H Preserving Southwest Arkansas’s Heritage While Leading Through the 21st Century H Wednesday, Sept. 28, 2016 u Vol. 14, Issue 13 u 24 pages, 2 sections u 75¢ Leader New physician opens ofice; Board family practice to be focus www.swarkansasnews.com By Terrica Hendrix owned a bakery and a French intellectually and would be a News-Leader staff restaurant, was from Michigan.” career where I could ofer as- OPINION 4A Howard Memorial Hospital’s Wilkins’ maternal grand- sistance to others. Growing up newest physician, Dr. Ngozi A. parents are originally from in Nigeria, health disparities Disappointment Wilkins, is “Every Woman.” Arkansas. She was reared with were often apparent. Out of She is a wife, mother and a two younger sisters and one pocket costs for health care were for Razorback physician. brother. “I grew up knowing cost prohibitive for some, and fan after loss Dr. Wilkins recently opened that education was not an op- to receive care, payment was to Aggies. her family medicine clinic on tion; it was a necessity. My par- needed. Those who could not HMH’s medical campus. ents always exposed us to the aford medical services were not She was raised in Nigeria, languages, arts and music; and able to get treated and would West Africa, on the campus of we often visited various univer- have to raise funds to pay for Band seeks “I igured medicine would the University of Ibadan, “one of sities across the United States.” care. I also experienced the loss instruments be a good ield as it would the oldest and most prestigious Wilkins said that her love of a cousin to typhoid fever keep me challenged intellec- Nigerian universities, where my for the sciences - especially bi- and another to malaria [both regardless tually and would be a career father was a Professor of Psy- ology - at an early age is what preventable diseases] and my chology,” she said.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Impact Statement for the Proposed Habitat Conservation Plan for the Endangered American Burying Beetle
    Final Environmental Impact Statement For the Proposed Habitat Conservation Plan for the Endangered American Burying Beetle for American Electric Power in Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Texas Volume II: Appendices September 2018 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southwest Region Albuquerque, NM Costs to Develop and Produce this EIS: Lead Agency $29,254 Applicant (Contractor) $341,531 Total Costs $370,785 Appendix A Acronyms and Glossary Appendix A Acronyms and Glossary ACRONYMS °F Fahrenheit ABB American burying beetle AEP American Electric Power Company AMM avoidance and minimization measures APE Area of Potential Effects APLIC Avian Power Line Interaction Committee APP Avian Protection Plan Applicant American Electric Power Company ATV all-terrain vehicles BGEPA Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act BMP best management practices CE Common Era CFR Code of Federal Regulations Corps Army Corps of Engineers CPA Conservation Priority Areas CWA Clean Water Act DNL day-night average sound level EIS Environmental Impact Statement EMF electric magnetic fields EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FR Federal Register GHG greenhouse gases HCP American Electric Power Habitat Conservation Plan for American Burying Beetle in Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Texas ITP Incidental Take Permit MDL multi-district litigation NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHD National Hydrography Dataset NOI Notice of Intent NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NWI National Wetlands Inventory NWR National Wildlife Refuge OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration ROD Record of Decision ROW right-of-way American Electric Power Habitat Conservation Plan September 2018 A-1 Environmental Impact Statement U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • RV Sites in the United States Location Map 110-Mile Park Map 35 Mile
    RV sites in the United States This GPS POI file is available here: https://poidirectory.com/poifiles/united_states/accommodation/RV_MH-US.html Location Map 110-Mile Park Map 35 Mile Camp Map 370 Lakeside Park Map 5 Star RV Map 566 Piney Creek Horse Camp Map 7 Oaks RV Park Map 8th and Bridge RV Map A AAA RV Map A and A Mesa Verde RV Map A H Hogue Map A H Stephens Historic Park Map A J Jolly County Park Map A Mountain Top RV Map A-Bar-A RV/CG Map A. W. Jack Morgan County Par Map A.W. Marion State Park Map Abbeville RV Park Map Abbott Map Abbott Creek (Abbott Butte) Map Abilene State Park Map Abita Springs RV Resort (Oce Map Abram Rutt City Park Map Acadia National Parks Map Acadiana Park Map Ace RV Park Map Ackerman Map Ackley Creek Co Park Map Ackley Lake State Park Map Acorn East Map Acorn Valley Map Acorn West Map Ada Lake Map Adam County Fairgrounds Map Adams City CG Map Adams County Regional Park Map Adams Fork Map Page 1 Location Map Adams Grove Map Adelaide Map Adirondack Gateway Campgroun Map Admiralty RV and Resort Map Adolph Thomae Jr. County Par Map Adrian City CG Map Aerie Crag Map Aeroplane Mesa Map Afton Canyon Map Afton Landing Map Agate Beach Map Agnew Meadows Map Agricenter RV Park Map Agua Caliente County Park Map Agua Piedra Map Aguirre Spring Map Ahart Map Ahtanum State Forest Map Aiken State Park Map Aikens Creek West Map Ainsworth State Park Map Airplane Flat Map Airport Flat Map Airport Lake Park Map Airport Park Map Aitkin Co Campground Map Ajax Country Livin' I-49 RV Map Ajo Arena Map Ajo Community Golf Course Map
    [Show full text]
  • STATE PARKS, RECREATION, and TRAVEL COMMISSION Degray Lake Resort State Park, 2027 State Park Entrance Road, Bismarck, AR 71929 August 16 -17, 2018
    STATE PARKS, RECREATION, AND TRAVEL COMMISSION DeGray Lake Resort State Park, 2027 State Park Entrance Road, Bismarck, AR 71929 August 16 -17, 2018 Commissioners present Jim Shamburger, chair – Aug 16, 17 Ron Gossage – Aug 16, 17 Kalene Griffith, vice chair – Aug 16 Shash Goyal – Aug 16 Austin Albers – Aug 16, 17 Eric Jackson – Aug 16, 17 Bill Barnes – Aug 16, 17 Bob Knight – Aug 16, 17 Jeff Baskin – Aug 16, 17 Montine McNulty – Aug 16, 17 Danny Ford – Aug 16, 17 Mike Wilson – Aug 16, 17 John Gill – Aug 16 Commissioners absent Weston Lewey Ness Sechrest Cindy Smith Randy Wolfinbarger Department Staff present Kane Webb, Executive Director Mike Farringer, Region 4 Supervisor Cynthia Dunlap, Administration Director Marcel Hanzlik, Region 3 Supervisor Jim Dailey, Tourism Director Kayla Hardage, Welcome Center Administrator Grady Spann, State Parks Director Joe Jacobs, Marketing and Revenue Manager Angela Allen, Administrative Analyst Kirk Jordan, Tourism Photographer Becky Bariola, Region 5 Supervisor Shea Lewis, State Parks Deputy Director Joy Barlogie, Tourism Development Manager Harrison Maddox, Digital Content Specialist Susan Brewczynski, Tourism Director Assistant Kristine Puckett, Tourism Deputy Director LaJeana Carroll, State Parks Executive Assistant Kris Richardson, ADPT Executive Assistant Casey Crocker, Multimedia Specialist Randy Roberson, Planning & Development Manager Leah DiPietro, Communications Manager Pete Salmon, Exhibits Coordinator Kelly Farrell, Program Services Manager Tom Stolarz, Region 1 Supervisor Mike Wilson,
    [Show full text]
  • PUBLIC LAW 102-275—APR. 22,1992 106 STAT. 123 Public Law 102-275 102D Congress an Act
    PUBLIC LAW 102-275—APR. 22,1992 106 STAT. 123 Public Law 102-275 102d Congress An Act To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act by designating certain rivers in the » go 1992 State of Arkansas as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, rq ^<^AVt and for other purposes. [°- ^'43j Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assemoled, Arkansas Wild and Scenic SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. Rivers Act This Act may be cited as the ''Arkansas Wild and Scenic Rivers Conservationof 1992 . Act of 1992". Ig ugQ J271 SEC. 2. WILD, SCENIC, AND RECREATIONAL RIVER DESIGNATIONS. "'^^- Section 3(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1274(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs: "( ) BIG PINEY CREEK, ARKANSAS.—The 45.2-mile segment from its origin in section 27, township 13 north, range 23 west, to the Ozark National Forest boundary, to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture as a scenic river. "( ) BUFFALO RIVER, ARKANSAS.—The 15.8-mile segment from its origin in section 22, township 14 north, range 24 west, to the Ozark National Forest boundary, to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture in the following classes: "(A) The 6.4-mile segment from its origin in section 22, town­ ship 14 north, range 24 west, to the western boundary of the Upper Buffalo Wilderness, as a scenic river. "(B) The 9.4-mile segment from the western boundary of the Upper Buffalo Wilderness to the Ozark National Forest boundary, as a wild river.
    [Show full text]
  • Little Sandy National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Little Sandy National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment January 2017 Vision Statement Vision Statement Little Sandy National Wildlife Refuge (NWR or Refuge) will preserve, restore, and enhance the ecological integrity of the Oak Woods and Prairies and Piney Woods bottomland forests, oxbow lakes, and shrub swamps within the Upper West Gulf Coastal Plain ecoregion of east Texas. The Refuge will also serve as a resilient source of evolving habitats and ecosystem processes, even as structure and composition are altered due to climate change. The Refuge will continue to provide quality habitats for a variety of native plants and wildlife; with emphasis on migratory birds and threatened and endangered species, for the benefit of present and future generations. American Alligator by David Weaver Little Sandy NWR Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment v-1 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... i Vision Statement ...................................................................................................................................... v-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Purpose and Need for the CCP ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Outline for Ozark St
    FISCAL YEAR 2013 MONITORING AND EVALUATION REPORT FOR THE LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN OZARK- ST. FRANCIS NATIONAL FORESTS Baxter, Benton, Conway, Crawford, Franklin, Johnson, Logan, Madison, Marion, Newton, Pope, Searcy, Stone, Van Buren, Washington, Yell, (Ozark National Forest) Lee, and Phillips (St. Francis National Forest) Counties in Arkansas UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE AUGUST 2014 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1 II. AREA OF ANALYSIS .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Causes of Haze in Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area (UPBU1)
    Preliminary Conceptual Model - Causes of Haze in Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area (UPBU1) Sulfate transported from the eastern United States in the summer is the major cause of haze in the Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area in Arkansas. Sulfate in average contributes ~ 60% to regional haze during the 20% worst haze days observed at the site UPBU1 based on 6 years of IMPROVE data available from 1997 – 2002. The Upper Buffalo Wilderness contains 10,819 acres around the headwaters of the Buffalo National River in northern Arkansas. Terrain is rugged steep valleys, with many caves, hollows, and bluffs. The UPBU1 IMPROVE site is located on hilltop at an elevation of 723 m (2,372 ft), 500 m east of the small town of Dee, 16.5 km east of Upper Buffalo Wilderness boundary and 4 km north of Hurricane Creek Wilderness boundary. As shown in Figure 2, the average PM2.5 mass concentration measured at UPBU1 during 3 1997 to 2002 is 9.5 µg/m . The average total light extinction coefficient (Bext) is 75.5 Mm-1 (Visual Range ~ 52 Km; Deciview ~ 20.2). The average contributions of the major aerosol components to Upper Buffalo haze are particulate sulfate 50.6%, nitrate 13.1%, organic matter (OMC) 12.7%, elemental carbon (light absorbing carbon, LAC) 4.2%, fine soil 1.1% and coarse mass (CM) 5.1%. Figure 1. 20 Km terrain map 1 Figure 2. Average contributions of major aerosol chemical components to light extinction. As Figure 3 and Figure 4 indicate, most of the 20% worst days happened in the summer season from July to September, and sulfate is the dominant aerosol component that contributes to the light extinction.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix G - Roadless Area/Wilderness Evaluations and Wild and Scenic Rivers
    Appendix G - Roadless Area/Wilderness Evaluations and Wild and Scenic Rivers In accordance with 36 CFR 219.17, a new inventory of roadless areas was completed for this plan revision, and areas of the Ouachita National Forest that met the criteria for inclusion in the roadless area inventory (Chapter 7 of Forest Service Handbook 1909.12) were further evaluated for recommendation as potential wilderness areas. The reinventory of roadless areas included previously recognized roadless areas considered during development of the 1986 Forest Plan and the 1990 Amended Forest Plan. These areas were: Beech Creek, Rich Mountain, Blue Mountain, Brush Heap, Bear Mountain, and Little Blakely. Also, two areas near Broken Bow Lake in Southeastern Oklahoma, Bee Mountain and Ashford Peak, were identified in the January 2002 FEIS for Acquired Lands in Southeastern Oklahoma. Possible additions to existing wilderness areas were also considered. The roadless inventory for the Ouachita National Forest was updated for this iteration of plan revision using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology. Evaluation of the Forest for areas meeting the criterion of one-half mile of improved [National Forest System] road or less per 1,000 acres yielded a significant number of candidate polygons and all polygons over 1,000 acres in size were considered to determine if there were any possibility of expanding the area to a suitable size to warrant consideration as possible wilderness. Polygons meeting the initial criteria were further analyzed using criteria found in FSH 1909.12 (Chapter 7.11) to produce the inventoried roadless areas described in this appendix. The planning team determined that, of the former RARE II areas, the only ones that meet the criteria for inclusion in the roadless area inventory are portions of Blue Mountain and Brush Heap.
    [Show full text]
  • Ozark Society, Representing 1,000 Members Would Like to Make the Following Comments About the Roberts Gap Project
    Mr. Timothy E. Jones Big Piney Ranger District 12000 SR27 Hector, AR72843 Re: Roberts Gap Project, #53597 August 24, 2020 Dear Mr. Jones, The Ozark Society, representing 1,000 members would like to make the following comments about the Roberts Gap Project. Please include them in the record. Thank you for the opportunity to make these recommendations. As a way of making recommendations we will separate our comments according to several issues. 1. Potential Wilderness Additions to the Upper Buffalo Wilderness There are approximately 3000 acres (all Forest Service land) in several tracts, that have been identified as having the potential to be considered for wilderness designation as additions to the existing Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area at some point in the future. As potential wilderness, it is important that these lands be protected now so they will better retain their natural characteristics over time so they can later be considered for wilderness. The map below shows these potential additions marked in green. Our recommendation is that the Forest Service not plan any new road building, timber, or forest and wildlife management activities in the lands. Alternative 3 does show management activities planned for portions of the green area marked on the map for protection. The following is a list of compartments and activities proposed in Alternative 3 that we recommend that the Forest Service not include in the Roberts Gap Project. Comp. 56, Hardwood Thinning; Comp. 57, Pine Thinning; Comp. 58, Hardwood Shelterwood; Comp. 166, Hardwood Thinning; Comp. 161, Hardwood Thinning; Comp. 159, Hardwood Shelterwood (the portion north and east of Road 414); Comp.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1464 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1132
    § 1132 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1464 Department and agency having jurisdiction of, and reports submitted to Congress regard- thereover immediately before its inclusion in ing pending additions, eliminations, or modi- the National Wilderness Preservation System fications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regula- unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. tions pertaining to wilderness areas within No appropriation shall be available for the pay- their respective jurisdictions also shall be ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- available to the public in the offices of re- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation gional foresters, national forest supervisors, System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- priations be available for additional personnel and forest rangers. stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classi- they are included within the National Wilder- fications as primitive areas; Presidential rec- ness Preservation System. ommendations to Congress; approval of Con- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined gress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Ea- A wilderness, in contrast with those areas gles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado where man and his own works dominate the The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where years after September 3, 1964, review, as to its the earth and its community of life are un- suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- wilderness, each area in the national forests tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness classified on September 3, 1964 by the Secretary is further defined to mean in this chapter an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service primeval character and influence, without per- as ‘‘primitive’’ and report his findings to the manent improvements or human habitation, President.
    [Show full text]