DOCSLIB.ORG

May 1, 2013 Boulder Solar Power, LLC Project Transmission Line

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
May 1, 2013 Boulder Solar Power, LLC Project Transmission Line U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2013-0053-EA May 1, 2013 Boulder Solar Power, LLC Project Transmission Line, Access Road, and Waterline 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 Boulder Solar Power, LLC Project DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2013-0053-EA N-91253 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 Bouldevard, Suite 100 Las Vegas, NV 89117 May 2013 Boulder Solar Power Project Environmental Assessment Contents Contents Contents ......................................................................................................................................................... i Tables ............................................................................................................................................................ ii Figures ......................................................................................................................................................... iii Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... iv 1 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Need for the Action ..................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Scope of Analysis and Decisions to be Made .................................................................................. 1 1.4 Relationship to Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Other Plans ........................................................ 4 1.5 Supplemental Authorities ................................................................................................................ 4 1.7 Identifying Information ................................................................................................................... 6 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives .......................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Proposed Action .............................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 Non-federal Connected Action ........................................................................................................ 7 2.3 Overview of 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......................................................................................................... 25 3.4 Water Resources ............................................................................................................................ 27 3.5 Vegetation ...................................................................................................................................... 30 3.6 Special Status Vegetation .............................................................................................................. 33 3.7 Wildlife .......................................................................................................................................... 36 3.8 Special Status Wildlife Species ..................................................................................................... 38 3.9 Cultural Resources ......................................................................................................................... 49 3.10 Land Use ...................................................................................................................................... 51 3.11 Visual Resources ......................................................................................................................... 52 3.12 Recreation .................................................................................................................................... 54 3.13 Noise ............................................................................................................................................ 56 3.14 Socioeconomics ........................................................................................................................... 58 i Boulder Solar Power Project Environmental Assessment Contents 3.15 Waste Management and Hazardous Materials............................................................................. 60 4 Cumulative Impacts .............................................................................................................................. 62 4.1 Past and Present Actions ................................................................................................................ 62 4.2 Reasonably Foreseeable Projects ................................................................................................... 62 4.3 Air Quality and Climate ................................................................................................................ 63 4.4 Geology, Minerals, and Soils......................................................................................................... 63 4.5 Water Resources ............................................................................................................................ 63 4.6 Vegetation ...................................................................................................................................... 64 4.7 Special Status Plant Species .......................................................................................................... 64 4.8 Invasive Species / Noxious Weeds ................................................................................................ 64 4.9 Wildlife .......................................................................................................................................... 64 4.10 Special Status Species ................................................................................................................. 64 4.11 Migratory Birds ........................................................................................................................... 65 4.12 Cultural Resources ....................................................................................................................... 65 4.13 Land Use ...................................................................................................................................... 65 4.14 Visual Resources ......................................................................................................................... 66 4.15 Socioeconomics ........................................................................................................................... 66 5 Tribes, Individuals, or Agencies Consulted .......................................................................................... 67 6 List of Prepares ..................................................................................................................................... 68 7 References ............................................................................................................................................ 69 Appendix A: Master Title Plats and Descriptions....................................................................................... A Appendix B: Best Management Practices ................................................................................................... B Appendix C: Append to the Programmatic Biological Opinion ................................................................. C Appendix D: SHPO Concurrance Letter ..................................................................................................... D Tables Table 1.5-1. Supplemental Authorities ......................................................................................................... 5 Table 2.3-1. Comparison of Alternatives ...................................................................................................... 9 Table 2.4-1. Typical Design Characteristics for a 230kV and 500 kV Transmission Line ....................... 11 Table 2.4-2. Typical Design Characteristics of a Gravel or Paved Access Road (north access road) ....... 13 Table 2.5-1. Transmission Line Construction
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Concentrated Photovoltaic
    Concentrated Photovoltaic (CPV) - Global Installation Size, Cost Analysis, Efficiencies and Competitive Analysis to 2020 Reference Code: GDAE1043MAR Publication Date: April 2011 The US, Germany and Japan are Key Countries for the CPV–The Emerging Solar Technology Industry CPV is an upcoming renewable market which promises to In 2010 Spain dominated the global CPV market with around provide cost-effective power generation at high levels of XX MW of cumulative installed capacity. Spain accounts for efficiency. Presently, the global CPV cumulative installed XX% of the global CPV installed base. Most parts of the country capacity is XX MW. The technology is still developing and so experience high DNI which attracts CPV installers for most CPV projects are in the pilot or prototype stage. Guascor investments in Spain. The US follows Spain with a cumulative Foton’s Navarre power plant and Murcia power plant are the installed capacity of around XX MW; thereby accounting for largest CPV plants with installed capacities of XX MW and XX XX% of the global CPV installed capacity. Greece and Australia MW respectively. Globally, Spain has the largest market for have also attracted CPV system installers due to a high DNI CPV installations. In the US, the major emerging companies are concentration. These countries account for approximately XX% SolFocus, Amonix, EMCORE and Skyline Solar. European and XX% of the global CPV cumulative installed capacity companies such as Concentrix, Abengoa Solar and ArimaEco respectively. have also started making progress in the CPV market. Global Cumulative Installations to Reach XX GW by 2020 Concentrated PV Market, Global, Cumulative Installed Capacity by Country, %, 2010 The CPV market is expected to grow dramatically over the next three years.
    [Show full text]
  • Permitted/Approved Renewable Energy Facilities NORTHERN NEVADA SOUTHERN NEVADA 1150 E
    Permitted/Approved Renewable Energy Facilities NORTHERN NEVADA SOUTHERN NEVADA 1150 E. William Street 9075 W. Diablo Dr., Ste. 250 Carson City, NV 89701 Las Vegas, NV 89148 Phone: (775) 684-6101 Phone: (702) 486-7210 Fax: (775) 684-6110 Fax: (702) 486-7206 Consumer Complaints: (775) 684-6100 Consumer Complaints: (702) 486-2600 Pursuant to Nevada Revised Statute 704.865, the PUCN approves Utility Environmental Protection Act (UEPA) permits for all privately- owned conventional (natural gas, oil, coal, nuclear) utility facilities constructed in Nevada. The PUCN also approves the construction of renewable energy projects with an output greater than 70 megawatts, and transmission for renewable energy greater than 200 kilovolts. Additionally, the PUCN approves purchase power agreements (PPAs) between NV Energy and conventional utility and renewable energy facilities. See the table below for a comprehensive list of renewable energy projects in Nevada with a PUCN- approved UEPA permit and/or PPA. Projects Within Nevada that Received PUCN PUCN Approval Project Details Approval MW Exporting/Internal Project UEPA¹ PPA² COD³ Notes⁶ Nameplate⁴ Generation⁵ Biogas 1 Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility X 2005 0.80 Internal 2004 Geothermal 2 Beowawe X 2006 17.70 Internal 05-5010 3 Buffalo/Jersey Valley X N/A 24.00 N/A 06-10021 4 Brady X 1992 24.00 Internal 1990 5 Carson Lake X N/A 31.50 N/A 06-10021 6 Carson Lake Basin Project X N/A 62.00 N/A 07-07013 7 Clayton Valley 1 X N/A 53.50 N/A 10-03022 8 Coyote Canyon X N/A 70.00 Exporting 11-06014 9
    [Show full text]
  • Boulder Solar Power JUN 3 2016 MBR App.Pdf
    20160603-5296 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 6/3/2016 12:51:20 PM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Boulder Solar Power, LLC ) Docket No. ER16-_____-000 APPLICATION FOR MARKET-BASED RATE AUTHORIZATION, REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF CATEGORY 1 SELLER STATUS, REQUEST FOR WAIVERS AND BLANKET AUTHORIZATIONS, AND REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF PRIOR NOTICE REQUIREMENT Pursuant to Section 205 of the Federal Power Act (“FPA”),1 Section 35.12 of the regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC” or the “Commission”),2 Rules 204 and 205 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure,3 and FERC Order Nos. 697, et al.4 and Order No. 816,5 Boulder Solar Power, LLC (“Applicant”) hereby requests that the Commission: (1) accept Applicant’s proposed baseline market-based rate tariff (“MBR Tariff”) for filing; (2) authorize Applicant to sell electric energy, capacity, and certain ancillary services at market-based rates; (3) designate Applicant as a Category 1 Seller in all regions; and (4) grant Applicant such waivers and blanket authorizations as the Commission has granted to other sellers with market-based rate authorization. Applicant requests that the Commission waive its 60-day prior notice requirement6 to allow Applicant’s MBR Tariff to become effective as of July 1, 2016. In support of this Application, Applicant states as follows: 1 16 U.S.C. § 824d (2012). 2 18 C.F.R. § 35.12 (2016). 3 Id. §§ 385.204 and 385.205. 4 Mkt.-Based Rates for Wholesale Sales of Elec. Energy, Capacity & Ancillary Servs. by Pub. Utils., Order No.
    [Show full text]
  • HUNTER INFORMATION SHEET DESERT BIGHORN Unit 266
    HUNTER INFORMATION SHEET DESERT BIGHORN Unit 266 LOCATION: Unit 266 is situated in southern Clark County and comprises the northern portion of the Eldorado Mountains. ELEVATION: Elevations range from 656' at lake level (Lake Mohave) to 3,773' above Oak Creek Canyon. TERRAIN: Topographic features vary from rolling hills on the western margin of bighorn sheep habitat to the sheer, vertical cliffs characteristic of Black Canyon. VEGETATION: Vegetation is typical of the Mojave Desert=s creosote bush scrub community. Prominent vegetative types within this community include creosote and white bursage. LAND STATUS: The majority of the area that offers opportunities to hunt bighorn sheep lies within the Lake Mead National Recreation Area, and is administered by the National Park Service. A minor portion of bighorn sheep habitat is within the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, Las Vegas District. HUNTER ACCESS: Hunter access is considered good given the network of National Park Service approved roads. Some hunters opt to use boats to learn their area, and to access points which would otherwise be more difficult to reach on foot. Note: Please be aware that sections of this unit are in a wilderness area. Motorized equipment, mechanized transport, including wheeled game carriers and chainsaws, are prohibited in wilderness areas. Contact the Federal Management Agency responsible for this area for more information. MAP REFERENCE: Maps are available for purchase from BLM, or through private vendors such as Mercury Blueprint & Supply Co. (Las Vegas), Desert Outfitters (Las Vegas) or Oakman=s (Reno). At a minimum, hunters should possess the United States Geologic Survey, Boulder City 1:100,000-scale topographic map (30 x 60 minute quadrangle).
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory Report
    Eldorado Mountain/ Doudy Draw Trail Study Area (TSA) Inventory Report February 24, 2006 Table of Contents Eldorado Mountain/ Doudy Draw Trail Study Area (TSA) Inventory Report Page # Introduction 04 Summary of Major Findings 04 Issues and Opportunities 05 Area Description 06 Management Area Designations 06 Recreation Resources 07 Trailheads 08 Designated Accesses 09 Undesignated Accesses 10 Designated Trails 10 Undesignated Trails 11 Destinations and Connections 12 Recreational Issues 13 Property Rights Issues 14 Cultural and Agricultural Resources 14 Cultural Resources 15 Agricultural Resources 15 Natural Resources 16 Geological and Paleontological Resources 17 Vegetation Communities 18 Xeric Tallgrass Plant Communities 18 Foothills Deciduous Shrublands 19 Wetlands and Riparian Communities 19 Mature Ponderosa Pine Forests 20 Mountain Mahogany Shrublands 21 Needle and Thread Grassland Community 22 Rare and Sensitive Plant Species 22 Exotic and Invasive Species 26 Wildlife Guilds 26 Grassland Nesting Birds 27 Forest Nesting Birds 27 Cliff Nesting Raptors 28 Wildlife Species 29 Mountain Lion 29 Bobcat 30 ELDORADO MOUNTAIN/ DOUDY DRAW TRAIL STUDY AREA- INVENTORY REPORT 2 Black Bears 30 Elk 31 Prairie Dogs 31 Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse 32 Wild Turkey 33 Plains Sharp-tailed Grouse 33 Blue Grouse 34 Northern Leopard Frog 34 Butterflies 35 References 37 Appendices Appendix 1. Vegetation Alliances 41 Appendix 2. Exotic and Invasive Species 42 Figures (not in text) Figure 1. Eldorado Mountain/ Doudy Draw Trail Study Area (TSA) Map Figure 2. Designated and Undesignated Trails Map Figure 3. Cultural and Agricultural Resources Map Figure 4. Landscape Context Map Figure 5. Wildlife and Vegetation Natural Resources Map ELDORADO MOUNTAIN/ DOUDY DRAW TRAIL STUDY AREA- INVENTORY REPORT 3 Introduction This inventory report represents a compilation and analysis of the known resources within the Eldorado Mountain/ Doudy Draw Trail Study Area (TSA).
    [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-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]
  • The Genetics, Ecology, and Conservation Management of the Rare Orchid Spiranthes Diluvialis
    Aqui egza• Newsletter of the Colorado Native Plant Society " ... dedicated to the appreciation and conservation of the Colorado native flora" IVOlumet8Number2 The Genetics, Ecology, and Conservation Management of the Rare Orchid Spiranthes diluvialis Anna'Maria Arft ~ through the winter months. exist in wetland habitats such as sub irrigated University of Colorado at Boulder "ff1VT II Reproduction appears to be meadows, alluvial terraces, and abandoned strictly sexual with bumble bees stream channels where the soil is saturated at (Bombus species) as the primary pollinators least temporarily during the spring and Spiranthes diluvialis is one of twelve species (Sheviak, 1984; Sipes et aI., 1993). Upon summer growing season. Potential threats to federally listed as Threatened or Endangered germination, many species of Spiranthes the species' habitat include stream \n Colorado. During the past three years, are infected by a mycorrhizal fungus and channelization, water diversions, urban '-'"'I've been engaged in research on this species may persist underground for many years development, and agricultural use. since little was known of the genetic, before leaves emerge above ground. These ecological, and demographic processes individuals may not flower in consecutive PhylogenetiC Origin affecting its life history and long-term year~ or under unfavorable conditions, and Although S. diluvialis is currently recognized survival. My research addresses three areas may survive. due to specific symbiotic as a distinct species, in the past some concerning the evolution and long-term controversy has surrounded its status. The survival of S. diluvialis: phylogenetic or relationships with mycorrhizal W fungi (Wells, 1981). distinctness ofS. diluvialis as a species forms . genealogical history, genetic variation within i the basis for its protection under the .
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Infrastructure Update for December 2016
    Office of Energy Projects Energy Infrastructure Update For December 2016 Natural Gas Highlights • Natural received authorization to place into service its 2012 Storage Optimization Project which will provide 100 MMcf/d of capacity on its Gulf Coast Mainline from the Loudon Storage Field located near St. Emo in Fayette County, IL to a point of termination at Natural’s Compressor Station No. 113 near Joliet in Will County, IL. • Algonquin received authorization to place into service the Stony Point to Yorktown Take-up and Relay facilities as part of its Algonquin Incremental Market Project. These facilities will provide the remaining 97 MMcf/d of capacity out of the authorized 342 MMcf/d of capacity. • UGI Sunbury received authorization to place into service its Sunbury Pipeline Project which will provide 200 MMcf/d of capacity to serve markets in central PA, including a proposed electric generation facility in Snyder County, PA. • Tennessee received authorization to construct and operate its Southwest Louisiana Supply Project which will provide 295 MMcf/d of capacity on its existing 800 Line System in LA to serve the Cameron LNG export facility in Cameron Parish, LA. • Texas Eastern received authorization to construct and operate three projects, the Access South, the Adair Southwest, and the Lebanon Extension Projects, which will provide a total of 622 MMcf/d of capacity on its mainline from a receipt point in Uniontown, PA to Midwest and Southeastern markets. • Tennessee received authorization to construct and operate its Triad Expansion Project which will provide 180 MMcf/d of west-to-east capacity on its existing Line 300 system to serve a proposed electric generating plant in Lackawanna County, PA.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Solar Lease Revenues
    LIVE WORK PLAY RETIRE TURNING LAND INTO REVENUES: UNDERSTANDING SOLAR LEASE REVENUES Reprint Date: August 25, 2020 Mayor Kiernan McManus Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Mayor pro tem Claudia Bridges Tracy Folda Judith A. Hoskins James Howard Adams City Manager Finance Director Alfonso Noyola, ICMA-CM Diane Pelletier, CPA Boulder City Revenue Overview Table of Contents Unlike most other municipalities and counties in Nevada, the revenue stream for Boulder City does not include the lucrative Some History . gaming tax. Prior to the recession of 2007 - 2009, the City’s • 4 • revenue stream did not have a sizable amount of monies from land leases. With the recent focus by California and more Charter/Ordinance Requirements recently at the national level on renewable energy development, • 4 • the City was in a key position to take advantage of its unique Land Lease Process position for solar development by leasing city-owned land for • 6 • energy production. Because of those prudent actions, today the Energy Lease Revenue History solar lease revenues equate to roughly 28% to 34% of the City’s • 7 • overall revenue stream to support vital governmental functions. Energy Lease Revenue Projections • • But is Land Lease Revenue Stable? 9 A common question posed to our City Council surrounds the Energy Lease Revenue Potential stability of land lease revenues. Traditional commercial or • 9 • residential land leases have many risks, as the tenants are Overall Energy Lease Revenue subject to market conditions or changes in employment. And History and Projections with recessions, these types of leases are common casualties • 10 • of a downturn in the economy.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.0 Cumulative Impacts
    TransWest Express EIS Chapter 5.0 – Cumulative Impacts 5-1 5.0 Cumulative Impacts NEPA requires an assessment of potential cumulative impacts. Federal regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508) define cumulative impacts as: “…the impact on the environment which 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 non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.” The same resources evaluated for Project effects (Chapter 3.0) are evaluated for cumulative effects. The cumulative impact discussion assumes that all environmental mitigation measures discussed in Chapter 3.0 would be applied to the Project and that similar measures would be applied to other reasonably foreseeable transmission lines proposed on federal lands in the same alternative corridors. It also is assumed that these and any other projects on federal lands would comply with the applicable BLM Land Use Plans and Forest Service Forest Plans, as well as applicable federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements. The structure and content of the cumulative impacts analysis in this EIS follows the guidance contained in the BLM NEPA handbook (BLM 2008) and the CEQ Guidance on Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Policy Act (CEQ 1997). 5.1 Physical and Temporal Boundaries of Cumulative Impacts In general, physical boundaries for cumulative impacts analysis varied by resource and were identical to those analysis areas used in Chapter 3.0 to determine the context of Project impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Draft 2014-2015 Transmission Plan This Revised Draft Transmission Plan Reflects a Number of Changes from the Draft Plan Released on February 2, 2015
    Forward to the Revised Draft 2014-2015 Transmission Plan This revised draft transmission plan reflects a number of changes from the draft plan released on February 2, 2015. To assist our stakeholders following the transmission plan cycle, we have summarized a number of those changes: 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 ISO has confirmed with Duke American Transmission Company that DATC’s request window submission for the San Luis Transmission Project was sent, but not received on the original request window submission timeline. It has subsequently been resent and received by the ISO. Accordingly, the plan has been revised to incorporate the review of the to the request window submission. A number of clarifications and edits have been added throughout the plan to address other stakeholder comments. 2014-2015 ISO Transmission Plan March 19, 2015 Table of Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 The Transmission Planning Process ................................................................ 3 Collaborative Planning Efforts .......................................................................... 4 Advancing Preferred Resources ....................................................................... 6 Reliability Assessment
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Geological Association Publication 30.Pub
    Utah Geological Association Publication 30 - Pacific Section American Association of Petroleum Geologists Publication GB78 239 CENOZOIC EVOLUTION OF THE NORTHERN COLORADO RIVER EXTEN- SIONAL CORRIDOR, SOUTHERN NEVADA AND NORTHWEST ARIZONA JAMES E. FAULDS1, DANIEL L. FEUERBACH2*, CALVIN F. MILLER3, 4 AND EUGENE I. SMITH 1Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, University of Nevada, Mail Stop 178, Reno, NV 89557 2Department of Geology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 *Now at Exxon Mobil Development Company, 16825 Northchase Drive, Houston, TX 77060 3Department of Geology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235 4Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154 ABSTRACT The northern Colorado River extensional corridor is a 70- to 100-km-wide region of moderately to highly extended crust along the eastern margin of the Basin and Range province in southern Nevada and northwestern Arizona. It has occupied a criti- cal structural position in the western Cordillera since Mesozoic time. In the Cretaceous through early Tertiary, it stood just east and north of major fold and thrust belts and also marked the northern end of a broad, gently (~15o) north-plunging uplift (Kingman arch) that extended southeastward through much of central Arizona. Mesozoic and Paleozoic strata were stripped from the arch by northeast-flowing streams. Peraluminous 65 to 73 Ma granites were emplaced at depths of at least 10 km and exposed in the core of the arch by earliest Miocene time. Calc-alkaline magmatism swept northward through the northern Colorado River extensional corridor during early to middle Miocene time, beginning at ~22 Ma in the south and ~12 Ma in the north.
    [Show full text]