DOCSLIB.ORG

Bordertown to California 120 Kv Transmission Line Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Sierra County, California, and Washoe County, Nevada

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bordertown to California 120 Kv Transmission Line Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Sierra County, California, and Washoe County, Nevada United States Department of Draft Environmental Agriculture Forest Service Impact Statement Bordertown to California December 2014 120 kV Transmission Line Project Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, Carson Ranger District Sierra County, California, and Washoe County, Nevada 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 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. Title: Bordertown to California 120 kV Transmission Line Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Sierra County, California, and Washoe County, Nevada Lead Agency: USDA, Forest Service Cooperating Agencies: Bureau of Land Management, Nevada Department of Wildlife, Truckee Meadows Planning Agency, Washoe County, Sierra County, and City of Reno Responsible Official: William A. Dunkelberger, Forest Supervisor Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest 1200 Franklin Way, Sparks NV 89431 For information: Marnie Bonesteel Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest 1200 Franklin Way, Sparks NV 89431 775-352-1240 Abstract: The U.S. Forest Service, Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest proposes to issue a special use permit for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a new 120 kilovolt overhead transmission line connecting the Bordertown and California substations, west of Reno, Nevada. The Bureau of Land Management, Eagle Lake Field Office would amend an existing right-of-way grant to expand the Bordertown substation to accommodate the new transmission line. Temporary improvements to existing roads and the construction of new temporary roads would allow for the installation and maintenance of the transmission line. The proposed transmission line is subject to the objection procedures of Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 218.24 Submitted comments should be useful in the Agency’s preparation of this Environmental Impact Statement and must be submitted prior to the close of the comment period. The comment period for this draft Environmental Impact Statement extends 45 days following publication of the notice of availability in the Federal Register. Comments received in response to this Environmental Impact Statement, including names and addresses of those who comment, will become part of the public record. Anonymous comments will be accepted; however, they will not provide standing to participate in subsequent objection procedures. Mail Comments to: Forest Supervisor 1200 Franklin Way Sparks, NV 89431 E-mail Comments to: [email protected] Comments are due by: 45 days after the publication of the notice of availability in the Federal Register. Executive Summary Introduction The United States Forest Service (USFS), Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest has prepared this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and its implementing regulations issued by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 Code of Federal Regulations 1500-1508). The USFS is the lead agency for this EIS, and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Eagle Lake Field Office, City of Reno, Washoe County, Sierra County, Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency, and Nevada Department of Wildlife are cooperating agencies. This EIS is intended to inform the public and disclose the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts that would result from the construction, operation and maintenance of a new electric transmission line proposed in Sierra County, California, and Washoe County, Nevada. Summary of the Proposed Project The proposal is to construct a new 120-kilovolt electric transmission line between the existing Bordertown and California substations. Depending on the alignment selected, the transmission line would be approximately 10.3 to 18.0 miles long. Expansion of the existing Bordertown Substation is proposed to accommodate the transmission line. The proposed transmission line would require a Special Use Permit from the USFS for a transmission line right-of-way (ROW) across National Forest System (NFS) land and an amended ROW Grant from the BLM for the substation expansion and section of transmission line across BLM-administered public land. Easements would be acquired on private land that would be crossed by the proposed transmission line. Private land would remain under ownership of the title holder, and private property owners would be compensated for the easement. NV Energy would own, operate and maintain the proposed transmission line. The ROW and easements would measure 90 feet in width, with the transmission line generally in the center. While the proposed transmission line would be constructed within the ROW/easements, temporary ground disturbance required for construction would occur within and outside of the ROW/easements. In general, ground disturbance outside of the ROW would consist of construction of access roads, widening existing roads, staging areas, and portions of transmission wire setup sites. The USFS would issue a temporary Special Use Permit for temporary roads and construction access located outside of the transmission line ROW. Restoration would be required at the completion of construction to re-contour and re-vegetate areas disturbed areas in the project area. Trees beneath the transmission line and within 21 feet of any direction of the transmission line conductors would be removed and trees within the ROW would continue to be removed through the operational life of the transmission line for safety reasons. Project construction would commence as soon as all necessary agency approvals and permits are obtained and all ROW authorizations and easements are secured. Construction of the project would take 8 to 12 months. NV Energy would inspect the transmission line annually to Bordertown to California 120 kV Transmission Line Project ES-i Draft Environmental Impact Statement determine if maintenance is needed. An inspection that involves climbing pole structures is anticipated once every 10 years. Restoration would be implemented following any maintenance activities that result or require ground disturbance. Project Alternatives The transmission line alternative originally proposed, referred to as the “Stateline Alternative”, was eliminated from detailed analysis in this EIS and is not considered a viable alternative for implementation (see Section 2.10.1). Four alternatives (i.e., action alternatives) were developed and are evaluated in this EIS: the Mitchell Alternative, the Peavine Alternative, the Poeville Alternative, and the Peavine/Poeville Alternative (Figure 2.1-1). The Mitchell and Peavine Alternatives, as well as the Stateline Alternative were initially developed from a Constraint Study prepared by JBR Environmental Consultants, Inc. (JBR) (2009a). The Mitchell Alternative was revised after dismissal of the Stateline Alternative to avoid routing on the portion of the Stateline Alternative that was no longer feasible. The Poeville Alternative was developed by the USFS interdisciplinary team in order to maximize compliance with management goals and directives of the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Toiyabe National Forest (1986). The Peavine/Poeville Alternative was developed in response to public scoping comments. The NEPA requires that an EIS include analysis of the “No Action Alternative,” against which the effects of the “action” alternatives can be evaluated and compared. Accordingly, the No Action Alternative is evaluated as an alternative in this EIS. Under the No Action Alternative there would be no new transmission line, no substation expansion or temporary access roads constructed between the Bordertown and California substations. A number of other alternatives were considered and eliminated from further analysis in this EIS. These alternatives and the reasons for their elimination from further analysis are summarized in Chapter 2. Preferred Alternative The Poeville Alternative has been identified as the Agency Preferred Alternative. This alternative is consistent with the Humboldt-Toiyabe Forest Plan (as amended), “to manage all utility, road and transmission corridors and when utility right of way applications are received, the first priority will be to utilize existing corridors.” The Poeville Alternative would utilize existing utility corridors more than any of the other action alternatives. This alternative would maximize the use of federally designated portions of Section 368 Energy Corridor (P.L. 109-58) and regionally designated utility corridors. Issues Summary Using the comments from the public and other agencies, the interdisciplinary team developed a list of issues to address. The following three key issues were identified during scoping for this project: Visual Resource Issue: Transmission line power poles and conductor
Load more

Recommended publications
  • National Wetlands Inventory Map Report for Quinault Indian Nation
    National Wetlands Inventory Map Report for Quinault Indian Nation Project ID(s): R01Y19P01: Quinault Indian Nation, fiscal year 2019 Project area The project area (Figure 1) is restricted to the Quinault Indian Nation, bounded by Grays Harbor Co. Jefferson Co. and the Olympic National Park. Appendix A: USGS 7.5-minute Quadrangles: Queets, Salmon River West, Salmon River East, Matheny Ridge, Tunnel Island, O’Took Prairie, Thimble Mountain, Lake Quinault West, Lake Quinault East, Taholah, Shale Slough, Macafee Hill, Stevens Creek, Moclips, Carlisle. • < 0. Figure 1. QIN NWI+ 2019 project area (red outline). Source Imagery: Citation: For all quads listed above: See Appendix A Citation Information: Originator: USDA-FSA-APFO Aerial Photography Field Office Publication Date: 2017 Publication place: Salt Lake City, Utah Title: Digital Orthoimagery Series of Washington Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: raster digital data Other_Citation_Details: 1-meter and 1-foot, Natural Color and NIR-False Color Collateral Data: . USGS 1:24,000 topographic quadrangles . USGS – NHD – National Hydrography Dataset . USGS Topographic maps, 2013 . QIN LiDAR DEM (3 meter) and synthetic stream layer, 2015 . Previous National Wetlands Inventories for the project area . Soil Surveys, All Hydric Soils: Weyerhaeuser soil survey 1976, NRCS soil survey 2013 . QIN WET tables, field photos, and site descriptions, 2016 to 2019, Janice Martin, and Greg Eide Inventory Method: Wetland identification and interpretation was done “heads-up” using ArcMap versions 10.6.1. US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping contractors in Portland, Oregon completed the original aerial photo interpretation and wetland mapping. Primary authors: Nicholas Jones of SWCA Environmental Consulting. 100% Quality Control (QC) during the NWI mapping was provided by Michael Holscher of SWCA Environmental Consulting.
    [Show full text]
  • RECREATION SPECIALIST REPORT SEPTEMBER 2014 BORDERTOWN to CALIFORNIA 120 KV TRANSMISSION LINE I LIST of TABLES
    SPECIALIST REPORT: RECREATION BORDERTOWN TO CALIFORNIA 120 KV TRANSMISSION LINE PROJECT SIERRA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND WASHOE COUNTY, NEVADA Prepared by: Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Carson Ranger District 1536 South Carson Street Carson City, Nevada, 89701 Contact: Daniel Morris, Natural Resource Specialist September 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS page 1.0 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1 1.1 PURPOSE OF SPECIALIST REPORT ..............................................................................1 1.2 PROPOSED PROJECT ..................................................................................................1 1.2.1 Project Construction.....................................................................................2 1.2.2 Restoration of Project-Related Ground Disturbance ...................................7 1.2.3 Operation and Maintenance .........................................................................7 1.2.4 Design Features Common to All Alternatives .............................................7 1.3 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ...................................................................8 1.3.1 No Action Alternative ..................................................................................9 1.3.2 Action Alternatives ......................................................................................9 1.4 RECREATION RESOURCES ISSUE STATEMENT .........................................................14 2.0 AFFECTED
    [Show full text]
  • Current Tracking List
    Nevada Division of Natural Heritage Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 901 S. Stewart Street, Suite 5002, Carson City, Nevada 89701-5245 voice: (775) 684-2900 | fax: (775) 684-2909 | web: heritage.nv.gov At-Risk Plant and Animal Tracking List July 2021 The Nevada Division of Natural Heritage (NDNH) A separate list, the Plant and Animal Watch List, systematically curates information on Nevada's contains taxa that could become at-risk in the future. endangered, threatened, sensitive, rare, and at-risk plants and animals providing the most comprehensive Taxa on the At-Risk Plant and Animal Tracking List are source of information on Nevada’s imperiled organized by taxonomic group, and presented biodiversity. alphabetically by scientific name within each group. Currently, there are 639 Tracking List taxa: 285 plants, Nevada's health and economic well-being depend 209 invertebrates, 65 fishes, 9 amphibians, 7 reptiles, upon its biodiversity and wise land stewardship. This 27 birds, and 37 mammals. challenge increases as population and land-use pressures continue to grow. Nevada is among the top Documentation of population status, locations, or 10 states for both the diversity and the vulnerability of other updates or corrections for any of the taxa on its living heritage. With early planning and responsible this list are always welcome. Literature citations with development, economic growth and our biological taxonomic revisions and descriptions of new taxa are resources can coexist. NDNH is a central source for also appreciated. The Nevada Native Species Site information critical to achieving this balance. Survey Report form is available on our website under Management priorities for the state’s imperiled the Submit Data tab and is the preferred format for biodiversity are continually assessed, providing submitting information to NDNH.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.4 Biological Resources
    4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES INTRODUCTION This section describes the existing biological resources that occur or have the potential to occur within the Project Area and vicinity. In addition, a description of applicable regulations is provided. The analysis evaluates the potential impacts to biological resources that could occur in association with the development of property in the commercial districts and the implementation of the Mobility Element. The Land Use Element/Zoning Code Amendments would modify the development regulations and no specific projects are proposed at this time. Likewise, the roadway and trail alignments are conceptual in nature. Therefore, the analysis is evaluated at a program‐level. With a programmatic study, such as this EIR, subsequent projects carried out under the proposed Land Use Element/ Zoning Code Amendments and Mobility Element Update may warrant site specific biological assessments and surveys once plans have been prepared. 1. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING a. Regulatory Framework As part of the proposed Project’s review and approval there are a number of performance criteria and standard conditions that must be met. These include compliance with all of the terms, provisions, and requirements of applicable laws that relate to Federal, State, and local regulating agencies for impacts to biological resources. The following provides an overview of the applicable regulations with regard to the biological resources that may be present within the Project Area. (1) Federal (a) Migratory Bird Treaty Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) protects individuals as well as any part, nest, or eggs of any bird listed as migratory. In practice, Federal permits issued for activities that potentially impact migratory birds typically have conditions that require pre‐disturbance surveys for nesting birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Programmatic EIS for Fuels Reduction and Rangeland
    NATIONAL SYSTEM OF PUBLIC LANDS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. Department of the Interior March 2020 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Draft Programmatic EIS for Fuels Reduction and Rangeland Restoration in the Great Basin Volume 3: Appendices B through N Estimated Lead Agency Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing this EIS $2,000,000 The Bureau of Land Management’s multiple-use mission is to sustain the health and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Bureau accomplishes this by managing such activities as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, mineral development, and energy production, and by conserving natural, historical, cultural, and other resources on public lands. Appendix B. Acronyms, Literature Cited, Glossary B.1 ACRONYMS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Full Phrase ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation AML appropriate management level ARMPA Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment BCR bird conservation region BLM Bureau of Land Management BSU biologically significant unit CEQ Council on Environmental Quality EIS environmental impact statement EPA US Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ESR emergency stabilization and rehabilitation FIAT Fire and Invasives Assessment Tool FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act FY fiscal year GHMA general habitat management area HMA herd management area IBA important bird area IHMA important habitat management area MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MOU memorandum of understanding MtCO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NIFC National Interagency Fire Center NRCS National Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NWCG National Wildfire Coordination Group OHMA other habitat management area OHV off-highway vehicle Programmatic EIS for Fuels Reduction and Rangeland Restoration in the Great Basin B-1 B.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E Threatened and Endangered Species
    Appendix E Threatened and Endangered Species Table E–1 Special Status Species in Plumas County Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status State Status CDFW CA Rare Status Plant Rank Animals – Amphibians Ambystoma macrodactylum southern long-toed salamander None None SSC – sigillatum Rana boylii foothill yellow-legged frog None Candidate SSC – Threatened Rana cascadae Cascades frog None Candidate SSC – Endangered Rana draytonii California red-legged frog Threatened None SSC – Rana muscosa southern mountain yellow- Endangered Endangered WL – legged frog Rana sierrae Sierra Nevada yellow-legged Endangered Threatened WL – frog Animals – Birds Accipiter gentilis northern goshawk None None SSC – Accipiter striatus sharp-shinned hawk None None WL – Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle None None FP ; WL – Buteo swainsoni Swainson's hawk None Threatened – – Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Delisted Endangered FP – Ardea alba great egret None None – – Ardea herodias great blue heron None None – – Charadrius montanus mountain plover None None SSC – Falco mexicanus prairie falcon None None WL – Antigone canadensis tabida greater sandhill crane None Threatened FP – Riparia riparia bank swallow None Threatened – – Lanius ludovicianus loggerhead shrike None None SSC – Larus californicus California gull None None WL – Pandion haliaetus osprey None None WL – Setophaga petechia yellow warbler None None SSC – Spizella breweri Brewer's sparrow None None – – Phalacrocorax auritus double-crested cormorant None None WL – Melanerpes lewis Lewis' woodpecker None
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Evaluation for Pacific Southwest Region (R5) Sensitive Botanical Species For
    BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION FOR PACIFIC SOUTHWEST REGION (R5) SENSITIVE BOTANICAL SPECIES FOR JOSEPH CREEK FOREST HEALTH PROJECT MODOC NATIONAL FOREST WARNER MOUNTAIN RANGER DISTRICT September 14, 2017 Prepared by: Heidi Guenther 9.14.2017 Heidi Guenther, Forest Botanist Date Modoc National Forest BOTANY BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION JOSEPH CREEK FOREST HEALTH PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 1 2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 2 3 Proposed Project and Description ....................................................................................... 2 3.1 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Proposed Action.............................................................................................................. 2 3.3 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 2 4 Species Considered and Species Evaluated ........................................................................ 4 5 Analysis Process and Affected Environment ...................................................................... 4 5.1 Analysis Process.............................................................................................................. 4 6 Consultation..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of NEVADA-RENO Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology Un~Vrrsiryof Nevada-8.Eno Reno, Nevada 89557-0088 (702) 784-6691 FAX: (7G2j 784-1709
    UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA-RENO Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology Un~vrrsiryof Nevada-8.eno Reno, Nevada 89557-0088 (702) 784-6691 FAX: (7G2j 784-1709 NBMG OPEN-FILE REPORT 90-1 MINERAL RESOURCE INVENTORY BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, CARSON CITY DISTRICT, NEVADA Joseph V. Tingley This information should be considered preliminary. It has not been edited or checked for completeness or accuracy. Mineral Resource Inventory Bureau of Land Management, Carson City District, Nevada Prepared by: Joseph V. Tingley Prepared for: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF E INTERIOR '\\ !\ BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Carson City Office Carson City, Nevada Under Cooperative Agreement 14-08-0001-A-0586 with the U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY NEVADA BUREAU OF MINES AND GEOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, RENO January 1990 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................ 3 LOCATION .......................... 4 MINERAL RESOURCES ...................... 4 MINING DISTRICTS AND AREAS .................. 6 ALLEN HOT SPRINGS AREA ................. 6 ALPINE DISTRICT .................... 7 AURORA DISTRICT .................... 10 BELL DISTRICT ..................... 13 BELLMOUNTAIN DISTRICT ................. 16 BENWAY DISTRICT .................... 19 BERNICE DISTRICT .................... 21 BOVARDDISTRICT .............23 BROKENHILLS DISTRICT ................. 27 BRUNERDISTRICT .................. 30 BUCKLEYDISTRICT ................. 32 BUCKSKINDISTRICT ............... 35 CALICO HILLS AREA ................... 39 CANDELARIA DISTRICT ................. 41 CARSON CITY DISTRICT .................. 44
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Mineral Resources of the Reno 1 O by 2° Quadrangle, Nevada and California
    Geology and Mineral Resources of the Reno 1 o by 2° Quadrangle, Nevada and California U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 2019 Geology and Mineral Resources of the Reno 1 o by 2° Quadrangle, Nevada and California By DAVID A. JOHN, JOHN H. STEWART, JAMES E. KILBURN, NORMAN J. SILBERLING, and LARRY C. ROWAN U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 2019 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1993 For sale by Book and Open-File Report Sales U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25286 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Geology and mineral resources of the Reno 1 o by 2° quadrangle, Nevada and California I by David A. John ... [et al.]. p. cm.-(U.S. Geological Survey bulletin; 2019) Includes bibliographical references. Supt. of Docs. no.: I 19.3:2019 1. Mines and mineral resources-Nevada-Reno Region. 2. Mines and mineral resources-California. 3. Geology-Nevada-Reno Region. 4. Geology-California. I. John, David A. II. Series. QE75.89 [TN24.NJ 557.3 s-dc20 [553'.09793'55] 92-32554 CIP CONTENTS Abstract 1 Introduction 2 Acknowledgments 2 Background studies 2 Geologic mapping 2 Gravity data 4 Aeromagnetic data 4 Isotopic-dating studies 4 Paleomagnetic data 4 Geochemical data 5 Mines and prospects data 6 Remote-sensing data 7 Area description 7 Geology 8 Pre-Tertiary
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Mineral Deposits in Rocks of the Triassic to Jurassic Magmatic Arc of Western Nevada and Eastern California
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARACTERIZATION OF MINERAL DEPOSITS IN ROCKS OF THE TRIASSIC TO JURASSIC MAGMATIC ARC OF WESTERN NEVADA AND EASTERN CALIFORNIA by Jeff L. Doebrich1, Larry J. Garside2, and Daniel R. Shawe3 Open-File Report 96-9 Prepared in cooperation with the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 1996 'U.S. Geological Survey, Reno Field Office, MS 176, Mackay School of Mines, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557-0047 'Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, MS 178, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557-0088 'U.S. Geological Survey, Retired, 8920 West 2nd Ave., Lakewood, Colorado 80226 CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 1 PURPOSE .......................................................................... 1 METHODS ......................................................................... 2 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS ........................................................ 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................. 3 GEOLOGY ................................................................................ 4 METALLOGENIC EPISODES
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of the Deep Geothermal Production at the Peppermill Resort
    Overview of the Deep Geothermal Production at the Peppermill Resort Terrence Spampanato, Pacific-Mountain Contractors, Inc., Dean Parker, Peppermill Casinos, Inc., Alan Bailey, Geothermal Resource Group, Inc., William Ehni, Ehni Enterprises, Inc., and Jerome Walker, Consulting Geologist ABSTRACT In 2009, Peppermill Resort Casino expanded its use of geothermal waters by drilling at depth into the Moana geothermal resource. The geothermal resource is of meteoric origin and is assumed to be heated by an intrusive body at depth. Past production of fluids from the resource was limited to shallow, Neogene clastic sediments. The first well drilled into the deeper Kat Peak formation was completed in 1988 and was completed as an injection well. In 2007, with the beginning of a large expansion to the facility, it was decided to make geothermal an integral part of the development plan. Two new deep wells were drilled in 2009 and 2010 to provide additional production and injection capacity. These wells demonstrated a significant improvement in temperature and flow over the earlier shallow wells. The use of acoustic and microresistivity logs, combined with other wireline logs and cuttings analysis, helped to develop a more detailed view of the resource. An intensely fractured zone occurs in the highly permeable andesite from approximately 2,500 ft to 3,400 ft. The majority of fractures in the Kate Peak trend northerly with a dip to the west. This data, with existing structural data, allows hypotheses regarding underlying controls of the Moana geothermal resource, as well as a foundation for further economic evaluation for commercial use. KEYWORDS: Moana KGRA, Truckee Meadows Basin, direct use, Peppermill geothermal, Kate Peak fm Introduction The Peppermill Resort Casino in Reno, Nevada, is expanding its use of low-temperature waters from the Moana geothermal resource to achieve its goal of making geothermal waters the primary heat source for its entire facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • ICBEMP Analysis of Vascular Plants
    APPENDIX 1 Range Maps for Species of Concern APPENDIX 2 List of Species Conservation Reports APPENDIX 3 Rare Species Habitat Group Analysis APPENDIX 4 Rare Plant Communities APPENDIX 5 Plants of Cultural Importance APPENDIX 6 Research, Development, and Applications Database APPENDIX 7 Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the Interior Columbia River Basin 122 APPENDIX 1 Range Maps for Species of Conservation Concern These range maps were compiled from data from State Heritage Programs in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, and Nevada. This information represents what was known at the end of the 1994 field season. These maps may not represent the most recent information on distribution and range for these taxa but it does illustrate geographic distribution across the assessment area. For many of these species, this is the first time information has been compiled on this scale. For the continued viability of many of these taxa, it is imperative that we begin to manage for them across their range and across administrative boundaries. Of the 173 taxa analyzed, there are maps for 153 taxa. For those taxa that were not tracked by heritage programs, we were not able to generate range maps. (Antmnnrin aromatica) ( ,a-’(,. .e-~pi~] i----j \ T--- d-,/‘-- L-J?.,: . ey SAP?E%. %!?:,KnC,$ESS -,,-a-c--- --y-- I -&zII~ County Boundaries w1. ~~~~ State Boundaries <ii&-----\ \m;qw,er Columbia River Basin .---__ ,$ 4 i- +--pa ‘,,, ;[- ;-J-k, Assessment Area 1 /./ .*#a , --% C-p ,, , Suecies Locations ‘V 7 ‘\ I, !. / :L __---_- r--j -.---.- Columbia River Basin s-5: ts I, ,e: I’ 7 j ;\ ‘-3 “.
    [Show full text]