SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING REPORT Gateway West Transmission Line Project Prepared for: Bureau of Land Management January 7, 2015 Scoping Report Gateway West Transmission Line Project TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Brief Project Description............................................................................................ 1 2.0 SCOPING PROCESS......................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Scoping Announcements .......................................................................................... 5 2.1.1 Federal Register............................................................................................ 5 2.1.2 Scoping Materials ......................................................................................... 5 2.1.3 Media Releases and P ublic Service Announcements............................. 5 2.1.4 Public Scoping Meetings ............................................................................. 6 3.0 COMMENT ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Comment Analysis ..................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Processing Comments .............................................................................................. 7 3.3 Scoping Comment Summary ................................................................................... 7 4.0 ISSUES IDENTIFIED DURING SCOPING ..................................................................... 9 4.1 NEPA Process ............................................................................................................ 9 4.2 Purpose and Need for the Project ........................................................................... 9 4.3 Proposed Action ......................................................................................................... 9 4.4 Relationship of the SEIS to Other Federal Policies .............................................. 9 4.5 Out of Scope Comments ......................................................................................... 10 4.6 Support for the Project and/or the Proposed Action ........................................... 10 4.7 Opposition to the Project ......................................................................................... 10 4.8 General Comments on Segments 8 and 9 and on Other Routes..................... 10 4.9 Mitigation, E nhancement, and Monitoring ............................................................ 11 4.10 Land Use ................................................................................................................... 12 4.11 Wildlife, Wildlife Habitat, and Vegetation.............................................................. 13 4.12 Scenery and Visual Resources .............................................................................. 14 4.13 Cultural Resources and Historic Trails ................................................................. 14 4.14 Socioecomomic Issues............................................................................................ 15 4.15 Agriculture ................................................................................................................. 15 4.16 Recreation ................................................................................................................. 15 4.17 Water Resources and Use...................................................................................... 16 4.18 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas ........................................................................... 16 4.19 Transportation ........................................................................................................... 16 4.20 Geologic Hazards, Safety, and Electrical Environment ..................................... 17 4.21 Effects on the State and Counties ......................................................................... 17 4.22 Cumulative Effects ................................................................................................... 17 Supplemental EIS January 7, 2015 iii Scoping Report Gateway West Transmission Line Project List of Tables Table 1. Legal Notices in Newspapers of Record............................................................... 5 Table 2. Meeting Posters Displayed in the Community ...................................................... 6 Table 3. Public Scoping Meeting Dates, Locations, and Attendance ................................. 6 Table 4. Main Comment Categories ................................................................................... 8 List of Figures Figure 1. Segments 8 and 9 Proponent Proposed Routes .................................................. 3 List of Appendices Appendix A Issues Identified in the 2009 Scoping Process Appendix B Comment Codes and Table Appendix C Public Notices Supplemental EIS January 7, 2015 iv Scoping Report Gateway West Transmission Line Project 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report describes the public scoping process for the Gateway West Transmission Line Project (Gateway West or Project) Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS). It documents outreach efforts, summarizes the comments received, and identifies any issues raised and suggested alternatives to the proposed action. Comments will be addressed in the Draft SEIS rather than in this summary. The document has been prepared for the public, the decision-maker, and SEIS team members to easily see the common themes in scoping comments, and issues. Issues generated from these comments, as well as issues considered in the 2013 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) will be used to analyze Project effects in the Draft SEIS. The Draft SEIS will include a table with a brief description of how each comment was handled during development of the Draft SEIS. The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) conducted scoping initially in 2008. In the summer of 2009, additional routes were added for consideration and the BLM asked for additional comments. The original set of issues developed from these scoping comments are attached as Appendix A. Additional scoping comments submitted for the SEIS, as well as the codes used to group like comments, are grouped by issue and attached as Appendix B. Scoping is an ongoing process, and comments received after the close of the SEIS scoping period (October 24, 2014) will be considered in the SEIS when it is feasible; however, those comments have not been summarized in this report. 1.1 BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION On May 7, 2007, Idaho Power Company and PacifiCorp (doing business as Rocky Mountain Power), collectively known as the Proponents, applied to the BLM for a right-of-way (ROW) grant to use the National System of Public Lands for portions of the Project. The original application was revised in October 2007, August 2008, May 2009, and January 2010 to reflect changes and refinements in their proposed Project and in response to feedback from the public regarding routing alternatives. The Plan of Development (POD) has been revised several times in response to Project changes and recommendations from BLM, other reviewing agencies, and public comment. The Proponents submitted a revised application for Segments 8 and 9 in August 2014. The BLM will consider this application in accordance with 43 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 2800, and decide whether to issue the ROW Grant for one or both of these segments. The original Project consisted of rebuilding one 230-kilovolt (kV) line and constructing two new 230-kV lines between Windstar and Aeolus; a 345-kV line to connect the new Anticline Substation to the existing Jim Bridger Substation; and 500-kV system from Windstar to Hemingway, comprising 10 transmission line segments with a total length of approximately 1,103 miles. The Project would extend from the Windstar Substation (located near the Dave Johnston Power Plant in Glenrock, Wyoming) to the Hemingway Substation (located near Melba, Idaho, approximately 20 miles southwest of Boise, Idaho). The eastern route 230-kV line and the 500-kV line between Windstar and Aeolus were dropped prior to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), resulting in a Project with a total length of approximately 1,000 miles. The BLM published the FEIS for this Project on April 26, 2013, and a Record of Decision (ROD) on November 14, 2013. In that ROD, the BLM deferred offering a ROW grant for 2 of the 10 segments (e.g., Segments 8 and 9) to allow additional time for federal, state, and local permitting agencies to examine additional options regarding routing of these segments as well as mitigation and enhancement measures for these segments. Supplemental EIS January 7, 2015 1 Scoping Report Gateway West Transmission Line Project New information has become available since the publication of the FEIS and ROD regarding Segments 8 and 9. The BLM requested the Boise Resource Advisory Council (RAC) to establish a subcommittee to examine options for resolving siting issues associated with Segments 8 and 9. The RAC subcommittee considered numerous routing, most of which were similar to the routes already considered in the FEIS. They also considered design options not previously studied in detail. The majority of the subcommittee members submitted