[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 67 (Friday, April 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15239-15240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8450]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket Nos. CP94-29-000, CP94-29-001 and CP94-29-002]
Paiute Pipeline Company; Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Paiute Pipeline Expansion II
Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues
April 1, 1996.
The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss environmental impacts of the construction and operation of
facilities proposed in the Paiute Pipeline Expansion II Project.\1\
this EA will be used by the Commission in its decision-making process
to determine whether an environmental impact statement is necessary and
whether or not to approve the project. The U.S. Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) and Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit of the U.S.
Forest Service (LTBMU) will be cooperating agencies in the preparation
of the EA.
\1\ Paiute Pipeline Company's application was filed with the
Commission under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of
the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of the Proposed Project
On October 18, 1994, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) or Commission) issued a Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Paiute Expansion II Project in
docket No. CP94-29-000. The purpose of the notice was to request
comments on environmental issues.
On March 4, 1996, Paiute Pipeline Company (Paiute) filed an
amendment to its original application in Docket No. CP94-29-002 that
represents a change in the scope of the Expansion II Project. From the
standpoint of the environmental analysis the changes are:
The deletion of four pipeline segments from the project,
reducing the total miles of pipeline construction from 53.8 miles to
19.8 miles:
The deletion of all new compression requirements; and
The changes in pipeline routing of the North Tahoe Loop.
In its present application Paiute wants to expand the capacity of
its facilities in Nevada to transport an additional 12,788 million
cubic feet of gas to Southwest Gas Corporation-Northern Nevada and
Southwest Gas Corporation-Northern California (collectively, known as
Southwest Gas). To accomplish this, Paiute seeks authority to:
Construct and operate the North Tahoe Loop consisting of
11 miles of 16-inch-diameter pipeline in Washoe County and Carson City,
Nevada;
Construct and operate the Incline Village Loop consisting
of 3.0 miles of 12-inch-diameter pipeline and 200 feet of 8-inch-
diameter pipeline in Washoe County, Nevada;
Construct and operate the South Tahoe Loop consisting of
5.8 miles of 12-inch-diameter pipeline in Douglas County, Nevada;
Modify the California Check Meter and Wadsworth Pressure
Limiting Station, both located in Washoe County, Nevada; and
Relocate the South Tahoe Pressure Limiting Station located
in Douglas County, Nevada.
The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix
1.\2\
\2\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register. Copies are available from the
Commission's Public Reference and files Maintenance Branch, Room 2A,
888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, or call (202) 208-
1371. Copies of the appendices were sent to all those receiving this
notice in the mail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In connection with Paiute's proposal, Southwest Gas plans to
construct about 18.5 miles of pipeline ranging from 6 to 12 inches in
diameter along various parts of its existing pipeline system. The
facilities would extend from the interconnection with Paiute's
facilities at the Nevada-California border in Placer County, California
to Truckee, California. Southwest Gas' project is under the
jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and
is subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). The CPUC completed its CEQA review of Southwest Gas'
project and approved the project on April 26, 1995.
We have made a decision to not address the impacts of the
nonjurisdictional facilities planned by Southwest Gas because it would
be
[[Page 15240]]
duplicative of the review conducted by the CPUC and the project has
already been approved. However, we will briefly describe their location
and status in the EA.
Land Requirements for Construction
Construction of the proposed facilities would require about 101.3
acres of land. Following construction, about 79.1 acres would be
maintained as permanent right-of-way, 94 percent of which is Paiute's
existing pipeline right-of-way. Only 4.4 acres would be new permanent
right-of-way. The remaining 22.2 acres would be restored and allowed to
revert to its former use. No land disturbance would be associated with
the modification of either the California Check Meter or the Wadsworth
Pressure Limiting Station.
The EA Process
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals.
We call this ``scoping''. The Main goal of the scoping process is to
focus the analysis in the EA on the important environmental issues. By
this Notice of Intent, the Commission requests public comments on the
scope of the issues it will address in the EA. All comments received
are considered during the preparation of the EZ. State and local
government representatives are encouraged to notify their constituents
of this proposed action and encourage them to comment on their areas of
concern.
The EA will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the
construction and operation of the proposed project under these general
headings:
Geology and soils.
Endangered and threatened species.
Water resources and fisheries.
Vegetation and wildlife.
Public safety.
Air quality and noise.
Wetland and riparian habitats.
Land use and visual resources.
Cultural resources.
We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the proposed
project, or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
Our independent analysis of the issues will be in the EA. The EA
will then be mailed to Federal, state, and local agencies, public
interest groups, interested individuals, affected landowners,
newspapers, libraries, and the Commission's official service list for
these proceedings. We will consider all comments on the EA before we
recommend that the Commission approve or not approve the project.
Currently Identified Environmental Issues
We have already identified several issues that we think deserve
attention based on a preliminary review of the proposed facilities and
the environmental information provided by Paiute. Keep in mind that
this is a preliminary list:
Construction within or adjacent to roads could affect
traffic flow and access to businesses and residences. Construction
would occur within or adjacent to U.S. Route 50 for the North Tahoe
Loop; U.S. Route 395, State Route 57, State Route 206 for the South
Tahoe Loop; and Sugarpine Drive, Knotty Pine Drive, Silvertip Drive,
Ponderosa Avenue, and State Route 28 for the Incline Village Loop.
The North Tahoe loop would cross 3.4 miles of land managed
by the BLM, including a 0.7-mile-long crossing of Centennial Park.
The North Tahoe Loop would cross 1.0 mile of Washoe Lake
Nevada State Park.
The North Tahoe Loop would cross 0.4 mile of land managed
by the U.S. Forest Service, Toiyabe National Forest.
Seven perennial streams would be crossed and a total of
0.2 acre of wetland would be affected.
About 56 residences would be within 50 feet of the
proposed construction rights-of-way.
The list of issues may be added to, subtracted from, or changed
based on your comments and our analysis.
Public Participation
You can make a difference by sending a letter addressing your
specific comments or concerns about the project. You should focus on
the potential environmental effects of the proposal, alternatives to
the proposal (including alternative routes), and measures to avoid or
lessen environmental impact. The more specific your comments, the more
useful they will be. You do not need to re-submit comments if you have
already done so. Please follow the instructions below to ensure that
your comments are received and properly recorded:
Address your letter to: Lois Cashell, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426;
Reference Docket Nos. CP94-29-000 et al.;
Send a copy of your letter to: Ms. Lauren O'Donnell, EA
Project Manager, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE., PR-11.1, Washington, DC 20426; and
Mail your comments so they will be received in Washington,
DC on or before May 2, 1996.
If you wish to receive a copy of the EA, you should request one
from Ms. O'Donnell at the above address.
Becoming an Intervenor
In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an official party to the proceedings or an ``intervenor''.
Among other things, intervenors have the right to receive copies of
case-related Commission documents and filings by other intervenors.
Likewise, each intervenor must provide copies of its filings to all
other parties. If you want to become an intervenor you must file a
motion to intervene according to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214) (see appendix 2). You do not
need intervenor status to have your scoping comments considered.
Additional information about the proposed project is available from
Ms. Lauren O'Donnell, EA Project Manager, at (202) 208-0325.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-8450 Filed 4-4-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
