Subject: Floodplain/Wetland Statement for the Interconnection
[Federal Register: August 31, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 170)]
[Notices]
[Page 45979-45982]
>From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31au01-43]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Western Area Power Administration
Floodplain/Wetland Statement for the Interconnection of the
Sundance Energy Project with the Western Area Power Administration's
Liberty-Coolidge 230-kilovolt Transmission Line (DOE/EIS-0322)
AGENCY: Western Area Power Administration, DOE.
ACTION: Notice of record of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: PPL Sundance Energy, LLC, (Sundance) applied for an
interconnection and transmission service from the Western Area Power
Administration (Western) for the Sundance Energy Project, Pinal County,
Arizona. To accommodate the request, Western has decided to upgrade and
add to its transmission system in order to incorporate the new
generation into the system. This Record of Decision (ROD) and Statement
of Findings have been prepared in accordance with Council on
Environmental Quality regulations for implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), Department of
Energy (DOE) Procedures for Implementing NEPA (10 CFR part 1021), and
DOE's Compliance with Floodplain/Wetland Review Requirements (10 CFR
part 1022). Western's decision for its action considered the
environmental ramifications of the Sundance Project. Western has
determined that no significant environmental impacts would result from
construction, operation, and maintenance of the Sundance Energy
Project, the natural gas pipelines, the approximately 7 miles of new
high-voltage transmission lines, or from the upgrade of approximately 5
miles of the Liberty-Coolidge 230-kilovolt (kV) and Coolidge Signal
115-kV Transmission Lines.
DATES: Western will take no action within floodplains until the
completion of a 15-day public review period, ending September 17, 2001.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on Western's Floodplain Statement of
Findings should be addressed to Mr. John Holt, Environment Manager,
Desert Southwest Customer Service Region, Western Area Power
Administration, P.O. Box 6457, Phoenix, AZ 85005; fax (602) 352-2630,
email holt@wapa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John Holt, Environment Manager, at
the above address or by phone (602) 352-2592.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Western is the lead Federal agency under
NEPA for the Sundance Energy Project. No Federal, State, or Tribal
organizations requested cooperator status. Western has decided to enter
into interconnection agreements with Sundance, and to construct,
operate, and maintain transmission system additions to provide the
interconnection with its transmission system. The transmission system
additions selected as part of the Proposed Action addressed in the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) include a new 230-kV bay at
Western's existing Coolidge Substation, an upgrade of the existing
Coolidge-Signal 115-kV #2 Transmission Line to 230-kV, and an expansion
of the existing Signal Substation. Western also selected new single-
and double-circuit 230-kV transmission line additions as described
under Alternative 3 in the EIS. Alternative 3 was selected over the
Proposed Action transmission system additions and two transmission line
alternatives because it would have less impact on agricultural
activities. The selected transmission line would involve the
construction of one new double-circuit 230-kV transmission line and one
new single-circuit 230-kV transmission line, both heading north from
the western edge of the powerplant towards Western's existing Liberty-
Coolidge 230-kV Transmission Line. As the new transmission lines reach
the South Side Canal, they would run northeast until they meet the
Liberty-Coolidge 230-kV Transmission Line. The west circuit of the new
double-circuit 230-kV transmission line would interconnect with
Western's existing Liberty-Coolidge 230-kV Transmission Line, heading
west to Liberty. The east circuit of the new double-circuit 230-kV
transmission line would join the new single-circuit 230-kV transmission
line and become a new double-circuit 230-kV transmission line on
Western's existing Liberty-Coolidge 230-kV Transmission Line right-of-
way, heading east towards Coolidge. The north circuit of this new
double-circuit 230-kV transmission line would interconnect to the
existing Liberty-Coolidge 230-kV Transmission Line and continue on the
existing alignment north and then east to Coolidge. The south circuit
of this new double-circuit 230-kV transmission line would become a
single-circuit
[[Page 45980]]
transmission line and continue east until it meets Western's existing
Coolidge-Signal 115-kV #2 Transmission Line. The new 230-kV
transmission line would combine with Western's existing Coolidge-Signal
115-kV #2 Transmission Line as a new double-circuit transmission line,
heading north and east along the Coolidge-Signal 115-kV #2 Transmission
Line alignment into Coolidge Substation.
This decision is based on a review of the environmental impacts of
the project as addressed in the Draft and Final EIS, a review of all
comments received during the 30-day waiting period after issuance of
the Final EIS, and Western's abilities to continue to meet its current
contractual obligations and customer needs, and maintain regional
transmission reliability with the interconnection.
The Sundance Energy Project EIS (Draft issued March 2001, Final
issued June 2001) addresses the effects of constructing and operating a
nominal 540-megawatt, natural gas-fired, simple cycle, electrical
generation peaking plant south of Coolidge, Arizona, in rural Pinal
County. PPL Sundance Energy, LLC, owns the property on which it will
build the powerplant. The project will include the construction of a
natural gas transmission system for supplying fuel to the plant site,
and a water transmission system for inlet air cooling, emission
control, and on-site use. Western has no decision regarding these
components of the project. Western did take into account the
environmental ramifications of the whole project as addressed in the
EIS in making its decision.
Alternatives Considered
No Action
Under the no action alternative, Western would not grant an
interconnection to its system. Without the ability to interconnect with
Western's system, the proposed project and appurtenant facilities would
not be built. Existing environmental conditions would not change,
although there may be adverse economic impacts due to the absence of
needed electricity to meet peak energy demands. The No Action
Alternative would result in slightly fewer overall environmental
impacts, however, it was not selected because it would not meet the
needs defined in the Sundance Energy Project EIS. The No Action
Alternative would not have allowed Western to meet its obligations
defined by its own Open Access Transmission Tariff, which was
implemented to meet the intent of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) order to open transmission line access (FERC Order
Nos. 888 and 888-A).
Facility
Western dismissed from full analysis alternative sites to the
generating facility. The State of Arizona Corporation Commission has
jurisdiction over siting of powerplants and made no suggestion
regarding alternative sites or systems during their siting process.
Western has no decision regarding the siting of the generating
facility.
Gas Pipeline
There were no pipeline alternatives addressed in the EIS. Western
has no decision regarding the proposed gas supply for the project.
High Voltage Transmission Lines
Three routing alternatives, in addition to the proposed action,
were evaluated. The proposed action addressed in the EIS would be a
``loop-in-loop-out'' from the existing Liberty-Coolidge 230-kV line to
the Sundance facility. This would involve a double circuit 230-kV line
due north out of the plant site, approximately 8 miles up Tweedy Road
to the interconnection with Western's existing Liberty-Coolidge 230-kV
line. The proposed action would also include building a new 230-kV
transmission line from the Sundance facility to an expanded Signal
Substation, 1.5 miles east of the Sundance facility, and upgrading the
existing Coolidge-ED2 115-kV line to 230-kV from the Signal Substation
to the Coolidge Substation. The proposed action was not selected due to
higher impacts on agricultural activities compared to the selected
alternative.
Alternative 1
Alternative 1 would be identical to the proposed action with one
new double-circuit 230-kV transmission line and one new single-circuit
230-kV transmission line. Alternative 1 would have all three circuits
going north from the powerplant towards Western's existing Liberty-
Coolidge 230-kV Transmission Line. The one new single-circuit 230-kV
transmission line would follow the same alignment as the double circuit
to the intersection of the Liberty-Coolidge line with Western's
existing Coolidge-ED2 115-kV Transmission Line, where it would follow
that route into the Coolidge Substation. This alternative was not
selected due to higher impacts on agricultural activities.
Alternative 2
Alternative 2 would be identical to Alternative 1 except that the
new single-circuit 230-kV transmission line would follow the same
alignment until it crosses Western's existing Coolidge-ED2 115-kV #1
Transmission Line. The new single-circuit 230-kV transmission line
would continue east until it meets Western's existing Coolidge-Signal
115-kV #2 Transmission Line. The new single-circuit 230-kV transmission
line alignment then heads north and east adjacent to the Coolidge-
Signal 115-kV #2 Transmission Line into Coolidge Substation. This
alternative was not selected due to higher impacts on agricultural
activities.
Comments Received During the Waiting Period
Three comment letters were received on the final EIS. Two comment
letters stated that the change in air pollution control technology to
Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) following issuance of the draft EIS
required a supplement to the draft to allow the public to comment. The
change to SCR technology was based on EPA Region IX and Pinal Country
Air Quality Control District permit requirements. Western recognizes
the concerns expressed by the commentors regarding ammonia
transportation, storage, and use. Western will require the Sundance
Energy Project to develop and implement an emergency response plan in
accordance with State and local regulations.
The Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX (EPA), expressed
concern over potential human health effects through the long-term use
of Central Arizona Project (CAP) water mixed with waste water for
irrigating crops. There is little potential for environmental or human
health effects from the use of reclaimed waste water for irrigation.
The only potential vector for the waste water to affect human health is
the irrigation of food crops. The water would be used to irrigate
alfalfa, Bermuda grass, cotton, and barley. Barley has the potential to
be used in products for human consumption, and alfalfa could be fed to
livestock ultimately consumed by humans. As shown in the Final EIS in
Table 4-17, the waste water would be blended with CAP water to
approximate the water quality in existing on-site ground water wells,
currently used to irrigate the same lands where the blended waste water
would be applied. Therefore, the potential to affect human health would
be approximately the same as the current and past irrigation
[[Page 45981]]
practices on the site and within the general area of Pinal County. For
the reasons discussed above, and the fact that the waste water would be
blended and stored in a lined pond prior to its discharge as irrigation
water, the potential vectors for environmental effects would be
limited. The liner would be designed to eliminate effects to ground
water. There are no surface waters in the area other than the canals
from which the CAP water would be extracted. There are no aquatic
resources in the area and the ponds would be fenced to exclude
wildlife. Waterfowl can land on the pond but the constituency of the
water will not differ materially from that of local irrigation ponds,
canals, effluent lakes, or other bodies of water currently available to
them. Sundance Energy will be required to monitor the quality of waste
water as part of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
Water Reuse Permit. The monitoring plan will ensure that waste water
matches existing groundwater quality, thus minimizing potential adverse
human health and environmental effects. If concentrations of any
constituents approach levels known to be chronically toxic to wildlife,
the sampling frequency will be increased to at least quarterly. Weekly
observations of bird use at the ponds will be recorded, and the area
around the pond would be monitored for wildlife mortalities. If
concentrations of any constituents reach acutely toxic levels and the
extended bird use of the ponds is high or substantial wildlife
mortalities are recorded, Sundance will implement measures to reduce
the toxicity by removing the toxic sediments or reducing wildlife use
through exclusion or distraction devices.
EPA requested actual flow rates and chemical constituents of
reclaimed water and waste water. The Draft EIS indicates that less than
1 million gallons per year of regeneration waste water will be produced
and the constituents of that were listed in Table 4-17 in the Draft EIS
and updated in Table 4-17 of the Final EIS.
Additionally, EPA requested the status of the various State water
permits. The Aquifer Protection Permit Application and Wastewater Reuse
Permit Application are currently being developed to submit to the
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. The Sundance Energy
Project would not be operated without these permits. Both applications
will be submitted in mid-August 2001. Sundance Energy would be required
to monitor the quality of the wastewater as a part of the Reuse Permit.
EPA commented on the potential for wildlife to accumulate
wastewater constituents, which is addressed above. Briefly, the waste
water would be blended, if necessary, in order to bring all constituent
levels to the level of existing available water. There would be no
additional accumulation of heavy metals or trace elements beyond that
which currently exists in the region. However, both the Arizona
Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
received copies of and had opportunities to review the Draft and Final
EIS. Information on the toxicity of any of the constituents in the
water can be found at or http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/new/chrback.htm or
http://www.oehha.org/cal_ecotox/.
EPA asked the status of consultations with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE) and the ADEQ regarding crossing of ``Waters of the
United States'' with the transmission lines and pipelines. Any wetland
disturbance that would occur as a result of pipeline or transmission
line construction would be covered under Nationwide Permit 12. The EIS
describes three potential gas interconnections: two onsite and one that
would require the construction of a 14-mile pipeline offsite. It is
currently anticipated that the two on-site interconnections would be
sufficient to provide an adequate gas supply to the project and, if so,
the off-site pipeline may not be needed. Therefore, permitting by COE
for this pipeline has not been initiated and would be initiated only at
such time that it is certain that it is needed for the project and a
detailed pipeline design is developed as is required for the
notification to the COE. Similarly, notification to the COE for the
transmission lines would be submitted as detailed designs for them are
completed. They are anticipated to affect wetlands or waters of the
United States because the lines would not be designed to span all
canals, mapped floodplains, or other wet areas.
EPA recommended the project commit to working with the local
community and concerned public regarding an emergency response plan and
measures. The Sundance Energy Project has already initiated contact
with the Eleven Mile Corner School. Additionally, Sundance Energy would
be working with the State and Pinal County to develop emergency
response plans as required by the types and amounts of chemicals used
and stored on the Project site. Western will ensure that a Spill
Control and Countermeasure Plan is developed in accordance with
applicable Federal, State, and local regulations and that an emergency
response plan is developed.
EPA expressed concerns regarding noise levels that would be
experienced by nine residences relatively close to the Project.
Sundance Energy has completed the rezoning for the project and has
received its industrial use permit from Pinal County. The project is
currently working with Pinal County on local building and site issues.
Currently, Pinal County has indicated that a berm would not be needed
for visual or noise screening. Western will ensure that local noise
ordinances are met.
EPA requested information regarding the Arizona Corporation
Commission's (Commission) powerplant siting process. Generally, the
Commission requires submitting an Application for a Certificate of
Environmental Compatibility (ACEC). The ACEC requires the applicant to
provide descriptions of the facilities it intends to develop, along
with environmental information on air quality, biological, cultural,
and recreational resources. Public meetings are held by the Arizona
Power Plant and Line Siting Committee to recommend to the Commission
whether or not to issue the Certificates. The Commission then holds
public hearings to make its final determination. PPL Sundance Energy,
LLC, has received a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility from the
Commission. Through the Arizona power plant siting process, information
was provided regarding other site options that were considered and
evaluated by Sundance Energy. When siting a gas-fired powerplant,
proximity to available gas and transmission are important for
minimizing both costs and environmental impacts. In the case of
Sundance Energy, the transmission interconnection point was the
Coolidge Substation, and the nearest available gas was located at the
two lines where the current site for the project is located. Therefore,
the project could be located at the Coolidge Substation, on the
existing pipelines, or some reasonable location between them. Sites at
or near the Coolidge Substation were considered but were dismissed
because of costs, proximity to the Gila River floodplain, proximity to
the Casa Grande National Monument, proximity to the Gila River Indian
Reservation, and increased potential for impacts to cultural resources.
Sites between the two were dismissed because of proximity to the
National Monument, the town of Coolidge, and other residential areas.
EPA requested a detailed description of the different alternatives
developed for the high-voltage transmission line
[[Page 45982]]
routes. These are detailed in Table S-1 in both the Draft and Final
EIS. Briefly, the alternative selected as the environmentally preferred
alternative, although slightly longer, impacts less agricultural land
and has less potential to adversely affect local transportation.
Transmission line routing options were all developed to try to utilize
existing rights-of-way (canals, roads, pipelines, and transmission
lines) and field lines to minimize establishing new rights-of-way that
were not necessary and/or avoid needlessly traversing the middle of
properties. The Proposed Action and Alternatives 1 and 2 were developed
to take advantage of those various routing opportunities between the
Project site and the Coolidge Substation. Alternative 3 was developed
in direct response to comments from local landowners and the Arizona
power plant and transmission line siting committee in order to mitigate
concerns they had about the effects that the other transmission line
alternatives would have on their continued use of their property.
Alternative 3 was selected.
Mitigation Measures
All measures addressed in the EIS to minimize adverse impacts from
the transmission system additions have been adopted. Table 2-4 in the
Draft EIS lists the standard mitigative measures that are part of
Western's proposed action. These would be used for the transmission
line additions. Some of the measures include restricting vehicular
traffic to existing access roads or public roads, recontouring and
reseeding disturbed areas, environmental awareness training for all
construction and supervisory personnel, and mitigation of radio and
television interference generated by transmission lines. Additionally,
Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans for modified
facilities will be reviewed to ensure new equipment is addressed.
In addition, Western will ensure that PPL Sundance Energy, LLC,
implements the following measures:
1. Detailed emergency response plan and SPCC plans that meet
Federal, State, and local requirements.
2. Implement conditions of individual or nationwide 404 permits if
needed for new pipeline construction across waters of the United
States.
3. Conduct pre-construction surveys along the new pipeline route to
ensure impacts to special status species do not occur.
A Mitigation Action Plan with annual reporting requirements will be
developed for the project to comply with DOE regulations found at 10
CFR part 1021.33 and made available to the public.
Western is the lead Federal agency for compliance with Section 106
of the National Historic Preservation Act for all components of the
project. All archaeological and traditional cultural properties
determined significant in consultation with the Arizona State Historic
Preservation Officer and interested tribes will be avoided. If they are
somehow not avoided, a mitigation plan will be developed in
consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer and the
interested tribes. Cultural resource monitoring, if needed, will take
place during construction of new high voltage transmission lines and
pipelines.
Western is also the lead for compliance with Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act. A biological assessment was prepared and
submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) with a
determination that the project could affect but not adversely affect
any candidate, proposed, or listed species. This Record of Decision is
being issued based on verbal concurrence from the Service on Western's
determination and written concurrence is expected soon. Additionally,
during informal consultation, the Service requested, and Western has
agreed, if the 14-mile long pipeline is built, the crossing of the
Santa Cruz Wash would be enhanced for the cactus ferruginous pygmy owl.
The enhancement will include planting mesquite trees on either side of
the pipelines to facilitate emigration of the owl.
Floodplain and Wetlands Statement of Findings
Construction of the Sundance Energy Project would not alter the
natural drainage patterns on site. The immediately surrounding area is
primarily agricultural and contains irrigation canals, which will move
water around and away from the facility. No floodplain classifications
for the site and surrounding area have been mapped. The storm water
flows will be retained on site in constructed basins to minimize sheet
flows.
The new gas pipeline would cross portions of the 100-year flood
zone of the Santa Cruz Wash but is not anticipated to affect the
floodplain. The ground surface would remain relatively unchanged from
pre-development conditions.
All transmission system alternatives, including the selected
transmission line alternative and the upgrade of the Coolidge-Signal
line, would traverse the 100-year flood zone of McClellan Wash near
Coolidge. A large portion of the floodplain is spanned by the existing
transmission facility. It would not be practical to use existing
transmission line structures and rights-of-way without going through
the floodplain. No new transmission structures are expected to be
placed in the floodplain. Instead, work would be confined to existing
structures, resulting in short-term, temporary disturbances to the
floodplain. If, after final project design, additional new structures
are needed in the floodplain, they will be designed to conform to
applicable Federal, State, and local floodplain protection standards.
A portion of the facility gets inundated during heavy rain events.
A wetland delineation study was performed on the site and found none of
the criteria needed to identify a wetland (i.e., soils, hydrology, and
vegetation) existed. No wetlands would be affected by the proposed
action.
Dated: August 20, 2001.
Michael S. Hacskaylo,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 01-22008 Filed 8-30-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P