DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2013-0052-EA DOE/EA-1960

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2013-0052-EA DOE/EA-1960 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2013-0052-EA DOE/EA-1960 June 10, 2013 Townsite Solar Project Transmission Line PREPARING OFFICE U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Southern Nevada District Office Las Vegas Field Office 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 702-515-5000 Office 702-515-5010 Fax Environmental Assessment for the Townsite Solar Project DOE/EA-1960 DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2013-0052 EA N-91290 Prepared For U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Southern Nevada District Office Las Vegas Field Office 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive Las Vegas, NV Prepared by: 8250 West Charleston Boulevard, Suite 100 Las Vegas, NV 89117 June 10, 2013 Townsite Solar Project Environmental Assessment Contents Contents 1 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Relationship to Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Other Plans...................................................... 4 1.3 Supplemental Authorities .............................................................................................................. 4 1.4 Identifying Information ................................................................................................................. 6 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives ......................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Proposed Action ............................................................................................................................ 7 2.2 Non-federal Connected Action ..................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Alternatives ................................................................................................................................... 7 2.4 Proposed Project Facilities .......................................................................................................... 11 2.5 Project Construction Schedule .................................................................................................... 16 3 Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures ............................. 18 3.1 Proposed Project General Setting ............................................................................................... 18 3.2 Air Quality and Climate .............................................................................................................. 19 3.3 Geology, Minerals, and Soils ...................................................................................................... 26 3.4 Water Resources ......................................................................................................................... 28 3.5 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................... 31 3.6 Special Status Vegetation............................................................................................................ 35 3.7 Wildlife ....................................................................................................................................... 37 3.8 Special Status Wildlife Species................................................................................................... 39 3.9 Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................................... 49 3.10 Visual Resources ......................................................................................................................... 51 3.11 Recreation ................................................................................................................................... 53 3.12 Noise ........................................................................................................................................... 55 3.13 Socioeconomics .......................................................................................................................... 58 3.14 Human Health and Safety ........................................................................................................... 60 3.15 Intentional Destructive Acts........................................................................................................ 64 4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 66 4.1 Past and Present Actions ............................................................................................................. 66 4.2 Reasonably Foreseeable Projects ................................................................................................ 66 4.3 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts and Irreversible and Irretrievable ............................................... 70 5 Tribes, Individuals, or Agencies Consulted ........................................................................................ 73 Townsite Solar Project Environmental Assessment Contents 6 List of Preparers .................................................................................................................................. 74 7 References ........................................................................................................................................... 75 Appendix A: Master Title Plats .................................................................................................................. A Appendix B: Best Management Practices ................................................................................................... B Appendix C: Desert Tortoise Mitigation Measures as Presented in the Programmatic Biological Opinion ..................................................................................................................................................................... C Tables Table 1.3-1. Supplemental Authorities ........................................................................................................ 4 Table 2.3-1. Comparison of Alternatives .................................................................................................... 9 Table 2.4-1. Typical Design Characteristics for a 220, 230 and 500-kV Transmission Line .................... 11 Table 2.5-1. Transmission Line Construction Estimated Personnel and Equipment Required ................. 17 Table 3.2-1. National Ambient Air Quality Standards .............................................................................. 20 Table 3.2-2. Criteria Air Pollution Emissions (Tons/Year) Over the Construction Duration of the Transmission Line ....................................................................................................................................... 22 Table 3.2-3. Criteria Air Pollution Emissions (Tons/Year) Over the 18 Month Proposed Project Construction Duration ................................................................................................................................. 23 Table 3.2-4. Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions (Tons/Year) During the Proposed Project O&M Duration of 12 Months ................................................................................................................................................... 24 Table 3.7-1. Species recorded by NDOW in the project area. ................................................................... 37 Table 3.8-1. BLM Sensitive Species. ......................................................................................................... 39 Table 3.12-1. Noise Levels at Various Distances from Typical Construction Equipment ........................ 56 Table 3.13-1. Selected Socioeconomic Indicators for the Region of Influence and State of Nevada ........ 58 Table 3.14-1. AADT at NDOT Traffic Count Stations near the Proposed Project Area ........................... 60 Figures Figure 1.1-1. Project Vicinity ...................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2.3-1. Transmission Line Alternatives ............................................................................................. 8 Figure 2.4-1. Typical 220/230-kV Transmission Structure ....................................................................... 12 Figure 2.4-2. Typical 500-kV Transmission Structure .............................................................................. 13 Figure 2.4-3. Typical 220/230-kV Tangent Transmission Structure ......................................................... 14 Figure 3.10-1. Representative View in the Project Area ........................................................................... 51 Townsite Solar Project Environmental Assessment Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronyms and Abbreviations BA Biological Assessment BO Biological Opinion BCCE Boulder City Conservation Easement BLM Bureau of Land Management BMP Best Management Practices CAA Clean Air Act CFR Code of Federal Register CO Carbon monoxide DAQ Department of Air Quality EA Environmental Assessment ESA Endangered Species Act EZ Energy Zone designated by the City of Boulder City FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management
Load more

Recommended publications
  • U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Final Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV0S010-2009-1014-EA May 2016 Eastern Nevada Transmission Project APPLICANT Silver State Energy Association GENERAL LOCATION Clark County, Nevada BLM CASE FILE SERIAL NUMBER N-086357 PREPARING OFFICE U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Las Vegas Field Office 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive Las Vegas, NV 89130 Phone: (702) 515-5172 Fax: (702) 515-5010 This page intentionally left blank. Table of Contents Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need ...................................................................................................1 1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Background ........................................................................................................1 1.3 Purpose and Need for Action .........................................................................................2 1.4 Decisions to be Made .....................................................................................................7 1.5 BLM Policies, Plans, Authorizing Actions, and Permit Requirements .........................7 Chapter 2 - Proposed Action and Alternatives ........................................................................9 2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................9 2.1.1 Regulatory Framework for Alternatives
    [Show full text]
  • Transmission Plan
    2017-2018 TRANSMISSION PLAN March 14, 2018 REVISED DRAFT Foreword to Revised Draft 2017-2018 Transmission Plan This revised draft transmission plan reflects a number of changes from the draft plan released on February 1, 2018. To assist our stakeholders following the transmission plan cycle, we have summarized a number of those changes, with particular emphasis on a number of projects where the recommendations have progressed since the release on February 1 and the subsequent stakeholder meeting on February 8: • The model estimating the impact of the transmission plan on the ISO’s High Voltage TAC has been updated and the results added to the model. • The Oakland Clean Energy Initiative project is recommended for approval • The Phasor Measurement Unit project has been added and is recommended for approval • The Bridgerville-Garberville #2 115 kV line project is recommended to remain on hold. • The Kearney-Caruthers 70 kV Line Reonductor project is recommended to proceed with the original scope. • The recommended revised scope for the Kern 115 kV Area Reinfoement has been updated as presented at the February 8 stakeholder meeting. • Section 2.10 addressing the need for phasor measurement units to be installed on all ISO balancing authority area interties has been added. • Several projects approved in the 2016-2017 transmission planning cycle have been added to Table 7.1-1: Status of Previously-approved Projects Costing Less than $50M, that had been omitted from the table in the Draft 2017-2018 Transmission Plan. • The in-service date for a number of previously approved projects have been updated. A number of clarifications and edits have also been added throughout the plan to address other stakeholder comments.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Final Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2010-0091-EA November 2014 Southern Nevada Intertie Project APPLICANT Great Basin Transmission, LLC GENERAL LOCATION Clark County, Nevada BLM CASE FILE SERIAL NUMBER N-086359 PREPARING OFFICE U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Las Vegas Field Office 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 89130 Phone: (702) 515-5172 Fax: (702) 515-5010 This page intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1. Identifying Information ...................................................................................... 1-2 1.1.1. Title, EA Number, and Type of Project .............................................. 1-2 1.1.2. Location of Proposed Action ............................................................... 1-2 1.1.3. Name and Location of Preparing Office ............................................. 1-2 1.1.4. Identify the Case File Number ............................................................ 1-2 1.1.5. Applicant Name ................................................................................... 1-2 1.2. Purpose and Need for Action ............................................................................. 1-2 1.2.1. Background ......................................................................................... 1-2 1.2.2. BLM Purpose and Need .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • EB-2011-0140 in the MATTER of Sections 70
    EB-2011-0140 IN THE MATTER OF sections 70 and 78 of the Ontario Energy Board Act 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 15 (Schedule B); AND IN THE MATTER OF a Board-initiated proceeding to designate an electricity transmitter to undertake development work for a new electricity transmission line between Northeast and Northwest Ontario: the East-West Tie line. INTERROGATORIES OF RES CANADA TRANSMISSION LP to EWT L.P. January 30, 2013 12115001_5|TORDOCS EB-2011-0140 Interrogatories of RES Canada Transmission LP to EWT L.P. Filed: January 30, 2013 Page 2 of 24 Interrogatory #1 Project Schedules Reference: a. AltaLink: Part B, Section 7 b. EWT: Part B, Exhibit 7 c. CNPI: Part B, Section 7 d. Iccon/TPT: Volume 1, Section 7 e. UCT: Section B, Section 7 f. RES: Exhibit N Preamble: Each applicant has prepared development and construction cost estimates that are dependent, inter alia, upon underpinning project schedule assumptions. Some applicants have assumed aggressive project schedules. For example, both UCT and EWT assume that the leave to construct process – from application to decision – can be completed in less than one year. The generalized phase-by-phase project schedule of each applicant is shown in the table below. The questions below are intended to test the reasonableness of the scheduling assumption and the sensitivity of development and construction cost estimates to changes in the project schedule that underpins each such estimate. Table 1: Project Schedules Questions: a. What evidence can EWT offer that a nine month leave-to-construct phase – from application to decision – is reasonable and achievable? 12115001_5|TORDOCS EB-2011-0140 Interrogatories of RES Canada Transmission LP to EWT L.P.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Area Power Administration Desert Southwest Region's
    FINAL Western Area Power Administration Desert Southwest Region’s Facilities Historic Context Statement Edited by Lisa M. Meyer September 2014 FINAL Western Area Power Administration Desert Southwest Region’s Facilities Historic Context Edited by Lisa M. Meyer September 2014 DSW Region’s Facilities Historic Context Statement CONTENTS Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... ES-1 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1-1 Purpose and Need .................................................................................................................. 1-1 Data Sources Consulted ......................................................................................................... 1-5 Current Document ................................................................................................................. 1-8 2. Statement of Context Part 1: DSW Region’s Transmission Power Systems………………………………………… ...................................................................................... 2-1 Temporal Context .................................................................................................................. 2-1 Geographic Context ............................................................................................................... 2-1 Historic Context ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mohave County Wind Farm Project
    BP Wind Energy North America Inc. Mohave County Wind Farm Project Plan of Development Submitted to BLM Kingman Field Office April 2013 Revision Mohave County Wind Farm Project Plan of Development Signature Page I certify that to the best of my knowledge, this document is accurate and fulfills the requirements for the Right of Way Grant process. This Plan of Development (POD) for the Mohave County Wind Farm Project site accompanies the Final EIS. Name Date ii Mohave County Wind Farm Project Plan of Development TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1 Proposed Schedule ............................................................................................ 1-4 1.2 Proponent’s Purpose and Need for the Project ................................................................ 1-5 1.3 General Facility Description, Design, and Operation ...................................................... 1-5 1.3.1 Project Location, Land Ownership, and Jurisdiction ........................................ 1-5 1.3.2 Legal Land Description of Facility ................................................................... 1-5 1.3.3 Total Acreage .................................................................................................... 1-5 1.3.4 Number and Size of Wind Turbines .................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Resource Plan
    2019 Integrated Resource Plan Adopted by Burbank City Council at its December 11, 2018 Meeting Table of Contents Chapter 1 6 1.1 Introduction 7 1.2 Assumptions and Implications 7 1.3 Major Changes Since 2015 IRP 9 1.4 Proposed Policy Guidelines 9 1.5 Action Items 10 Chapter 2 11 2.1 Introduction 12 2.1.1 About the IRP 12 2.1.2 Key Policy Drivers 13 2.1.3 Major Challenges 13 2.1.4 IRP Overview 14 2.2 Starting with Customers 15 2.2.1 Public Input 15 2.2.2 Demand and Energy Forecast 16 2.3 Customer-Side Resources 17 2.3.1 Energy Efficiency 17 2.3.2 Demand Response 18 2.3.3 Electric Vehicles 20 2.3.4 Customer-Owned Generation 21 2.3.5 Results of Customer-Side Impacts 21 2.4 Supply-Side Resources: The SB350 Future 22 2.4.1 Retirement of IPP coal in 2025 23 2.4.2 IPP Coal Replacement Options 23 2.4.3 Results: Replacing IPP Coal 25 2.5 Supply-Side Resources: The SB100 Future 27 2.5.1 Retirement of IPP Coal in 2025 27 2.5.2 Same IPP Coal Replacement Options as in SB350 27 2.5.3 Results: Replacing IPP Coal 28 2.6 Over-Generation at High RPS Levels 30 2.7 STS Transmission Utilization 31 2.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 32 Burbank Water and Power - 2019 Integrated Resource Plan Page | 2 2.9 Transmission 33 2.10 Distribution 33 2.11 Customer Rate Impacts 33 2.12 EIM Participation 34 2.13 Proposed Policy Guidelines 34 2.14 Action Items 35 2.12 Conclusion 35 Chapter 3 36 3.1 About BWP 37 3.2 Load 38 3.2.1 BWP is a Fully-Resourced Utility 40 3.2.2 Load Patterns 41 3.2.3 Annual Energy Requirements 41 3.2.4 The Duck Curve 43 3.2.5 Over-Generation 47 3.3 Generation
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
    LOCAL KNOWLEDGE | GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE 877 GRS CRE1 +1 213 908 2173 www.grs-global.com Los Angeles New York Due Diligence Chicago PHASE I San Francisco Project Management San Diego Financial Advisory ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Atlanta Strategic Asset Solutions PROPERTY REFERENCE: Dallas 6690 GRAND MONTECITO PARKWAY, LAS VEGAS, NV Frankfurt London Tokyo PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Prepared for: FDIC as Receiver for Southwest USA Bank FIN 10267 40 Pacifica, Fifth Floor Irvine, CA Property Identification Asset# 10267F012 (Southwest USA Bank FIN 10267) 6690 Grand Montecito Parkway Las Vegas, NV Prepared by: Global Realty Services Group 325 Center Street, Laguna Beach, California 92651 877 GRS CRE1 | +1 213 908 2173 | www.grs-global.com Report Date: December 29, 2010 GRS Project #: 10-08517.3 RESTRICTED USE AND RELIANCE THE USE OF AND RELIANCE UPON THIS REPORT ARE STRICTLY LIMITED AS SET FORTH HEREIN TABLE OF CONTENTS Overview.............................................................................................................................................. 1 Data Gaps................................................................................................................................................................2 Limiting Conditions................................................................................................................................................. 2 Findings and Opinions.............................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • 6. Cumulative Impacts
    1 6. Cumulative Impacts 6.1 Introduction This chapter addresses potential cumulative impacts to the environment that could be associated with implementation of the build alternatives for the Boulder City/U.S. 93 Corridor Study in concert with one or more other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions or projects. Specifically, this chapter is prepared in accordance with the requirements of NEPA and guidance from the federal CEQ, Considering Cumulative Effects under the National Environmental Policy Act. The CEQ regulations define a “cumulative impact” for purposes of NEPA as follows: Cumulative impact is the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or nonfederal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, actions taking place over a period of time (40 CFR §1508.7). This cumulative impacts chapter gives emphasis to the actions or projects that are likely to cause adverse cumulative impacts (i.e., projects that would occur relatively close to the project site). For other transportation projects in the region, this analysis focuses primarily on the potential impacts of reasonably foreseeable future actions. The impacts of past and present actions are also discussed but in less detail and in a more qualitative manner. 6.2 Cumulative Impacts Analysis 6.2.1 Other Actions/Projects Included in the
    [Show full text]
  • 14-0191 So CA Pub Power Authority OS.Xps
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maturity Schedules $151,880,000 Apex Power Project, Revenue Bonds, 2014 Series A (Tax-Exempt) Due Principal Interest July 1 Amount Rate Yield CUSIP 2030 $10,015,000 5.000% 3.510%(1) 84247PHF1 2031 14,855,000 5.000 3.630(1) 84247PHG9 2032 15,600,000 5.000 3.720(1) 84247PHH7 2033 16,380,000 5.000 3.790(1) 84247PHJ3 2034 17,200,000 5.000 3.850(1) 84247PHK0 2035 18,055,000 5.000 3.890(1) 84247PHL8 2036 18,960,000 5.000 3.920(1) 84247PHM6 2037 19,910,000 5.000 3.940(1) 84247PHN4 2038 20,905,000 5.000
    [Show full text]
  • DOE/EA-1470: Environmental Assessment Harry Allen-Mead 500
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Las Vegas Field Office Las Vegas, Nevada March 2004 Interstate Intertie Centennial Plan Environmental Assessment Harry Allen-Mead 500kV Transmission Line Project Harry Allen - Mead 500kV Transmission Line DOE/EA-1470 Chapter 1 Purpose and Need 1.1 Introduction The construction of new transmission and distribution facilities is required throughout the western United States to meet the increasing demand for power as more people move to many of the fastest growing communities. According to Executive Order 13212 dated May 18, 2001, “The increased production and transmission of energy in a safe and environmentally sound manner is essential to the well-being of the American people…agencies shall take appropriate actions, to the extent consistent with applicable law, to expedite projects that will increase the production, transmission, or conservation of energy.” Las Vegas is one of the fastest growing communities in the United States, and the demand for additional power transmission and use continues to increase as more and more people move into the Las Vegas Valley. The population is expected to increase to more than 2 million people in the next 10 years or less, which will put a demand on the existing power transmission system that cannot be met without system upgrades and improvements. Nevada Power Company (Nevada Power) is proposing to use Federally-administered lands and interconnection requests to the Federal power system. Therefore, the lead agency, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) along with cooperating agencies, Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and Western Area Power Administration (Western), have prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) as part of their decision-making process.
    [Show full text]
  • SECTION 2-TRANSMISSION PLAN SUMMARY Nevada Power Is The
    SECTION 2-TRANSMISSION PLAN SUMMARY Nevada Power is the electric utility for most of Southern Nevada. Its service area is approximately 4,500 square miles. Service is primarily to Las Vegas, Henderson, and several smaller towns in Clark County. Nevada Power is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sierra Pacific Resources. Nevada Power operates 1,665 miles of Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC") jurisdictional transmission lines ranging from 500 kV to 69 kV. Transmission services are offered under the Sierra Pacific Resources Operating Companies' Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT). Nevada Power's existing Rd-, transmission system is composed of am,-=- three sections as shown in Figure TP-1. The first part is the uncongested grid, where the vast majority of Nevada Powcr's customers reside. Geographically, the uncongested grid is located within thc Las Vegas Valley. Generally, the ability to deliver resources is not limited by the transmission facilities within this area. The second and third parts of the transmission system deal with congested portions of the transmission grid. These are shown on Figure TP-1 as heavy dashed lines. The second part is the Southern cut-plane, which allows s:"b, Nevada Power to bring in power % from market hubs - namely Mead, McCullough, and Eldorado Substations - located south of Las A Vegas in the Eldorado Valley. The Neda Power- Southern cut-plane consists of . fourteen 230 kV bulk transmission lines electrically situated in parallel with each other. These lines are connected to Mead, McCullough, Eldorado, and Hoover. They connect to several trading hubs south of Nevada Power's transmission system and proportionally bring in import or deliver out any export that is scheduled across this cut-plane.
    [Show full text]