[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28562-28565]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14007]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Appalachian Power Company Transmission Line Construction-
Cloverdale, Virginia, to Oceana, West Virginia. George Washington and
Jefferson National Forests, Appalachian National Scenic Trail, the New
River, and R.D. Bailey Lake Flowage Land. Virginia Counties of
Botetourt, Roanoke, Craig, Montgomery, Pulaski, Bland, and Giles and
the West Virginia Counties of Monroe, Summers, Mercer, and Wyoming
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Revised Notice--Revises the publication date for the Draft
Environmental Impact Statements; and identifies the dates and locations
for seven public information meetings on the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare a draft and final
environmental impact statement on a proposed action to authorize the
Appalachian Power Company (name recently changed to American Electric
Power) to construct a 765,000-volt transmission line across
approximately twelve miles of the George Washington and Jefferson
National Forests, as well as portions of the Appalachian National
Scenic Trail, the New River (at Bluestone Lake) and R.D. Bailey Lake
Flowage Easement Land (at Buyandotte River).
The federal agencies identified a study area in which alternatives
to the proposed action were developed. The study area includes land
located in the Virginia counties of Botetourt, Roanoke, Craig,
Montgomery, Pulaski, Bland and Giles and the West Virginia counties of
Monroe, Summers, Mercer and Wyoming.
The Applachian Power Company (APCo) proposal involves federal land
under the administrative jurisdiction of the USDA Forest Service
(George Washington and Jefferson National Forests), the USDI National
Park Service (Appalachian National Scenic Trail) and the US Army Corps
of Engineers (New River and R.D. Bailey Lake Flowage Easement Land).
The Forest Service is the lead agency and is responsible for the
preparation of the environmental impact statement. The National Park
Service and the US Army Corps of Engineers are cooperating agencies in
accordance with 40 CFR 1501.6.
In initiating and conducting the analysis the federal agencies are
responding to the requirements of their respective permitting processes
and the need for the APCo to cross federal lands with the proposed
transmission line.
The Forest Service additionally will assess how the proposed
transmission line conforms to the direction contained in the Jefferson
National Forest's Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). Changes in
the LRMP could be required if the transmission line is authorized
across the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests.
[[Page 28563]]
The total length of the electric transmission line proposed by the
APCo is approximately 115 miles.
The Notice of Intent for the proposed action was published in the
Federal Register on November 21, 1991 (56 FR 58677-58679). The Notice
was revised on March 13, 1992 (57 FR 8859), April 24, 1992 (57 FR
15049), June 16, 1993 (58 FR 33248-33250), June 21, 1994 (59 FR 31975-
31978), June 9, 1995 (60 FR 30511-30514) and October 3, 1995 (60 FR
51770-51773).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Bergmann, Forest Service Project
Coordinator, George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, 5162
Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, Virginia, 24019/ (540) 265-6005.
TO PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE FEDERAL AGENCIES: Write to the George
Washington and Jefferson National Forests, Attn: Transmission Line
Analysis, 5162 Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, Virginia, 24019.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: APCo submitted an application to the
Jefferson National Forest (name changed to George Washington and
Jefferson National Forest in 1995) for authorization to construct a
765,000-volt electric transmission line across approximately twelve
miles of the National Forest. Portions of the Appalachian National
Scenic Trail, the New River (at Bluestone Lake), and R.D. Bailey Lake
Flowage Easement Land (at Guyandotte River) would also be crossed by
the proposed transmission line.
Studies conducted by APCo and submitted to the Virginia State
Corporation Commission, as part of its application and approval
process, indicate a need to reinforce its extra high voltage
transmission system by the mid-to-late 1990s in order to maintain a
reliable power supply for projected demands within its service
territory in central and western Virginia and southern West Virginia.
A study to evaluate potential route locations for the proposed
transmission line was prepared for APCo through a contract with
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (VPI) and West
Virginia University (WVU). The information gathered by VPI and WVU,
along with other information collected during the analysis process,
will be utilized in the preparation of the environmental impact
statement. Information about the transmission line proposal is
available from the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests.
The decisions to be made following the Federal agencies' analysis
are whether the Forest Service, the National Park Service, and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers will authorize APCO to cross the George
Washington and Jefferson National Forests, the Appalachian National
Scenic Trail, and the New River and R.D. Bailey Lake Flowage Easement
Land, respectively, with the proposed 765,000-volt transmission line
and, if so, under what conditions a crossing would be authorized.
In preparing the draft environmental impact statement, a range of
routing alternatives was considered to meet the purpose and need for
the proposed action. A no action alternative was also analyzed. Under
the no action alternative APCO would not be authorized to cross the
George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, the Appalachian
National Scenic Trail, the New River or R.D. Bailey Lake Flowage
Easement Land. The alternatives developed by VPI and WVU will also be
considered.
In July of 1994, the Federal agencies identified a number of
alternatives to the proposed action in the Virginia counties of
Botetourt, Roanoke, Craig, Montgomery, Pulaski, Bland, and Giles and
the West Virginia counties of Monroe, Summers, and Mercer. These
alternative corridors were modified by the Federal agencies in May
1995. A public comment period was afforded by the Federal agencies on
these alternative corridor modifications between May 25 and Jun3 30,
1995.
The Federal analysis includes an analysis of the effects of the
proposed transmission line along the entire proposed route as well as
all alternative routes which were considered in detail.
The significant issues identified for the Federal analysis are
listed below:
--The construction and maintenance of the 765kV transmission line and
the associated access roads and right-of-way may (1) affect soil
productivity by increasing soil compaction and erosion; (2) affect
geologic resources (karst areas, Peters, Lewis, Potts Mountains,
Arnolds Knob) and unique geologic features like caves through blasting,
earthmoving or construction machinery operations; and (3) result in
unstable structural conditions due to the placement of the towers.
--The construction and maintenance of the 765kV transmission line and
the associated access roads and right-of-way may (1) degrade surface
and ground water quality due to the application of herbicides; (2)
degrade surface and ground water quality because of sedimentation
resulting from soil disturbance and vegetation removal; (3) reduce the
quantity of ground and spring water due to the disturbance of aquifers
resulting from blasting, earthmoving or construction machinery
operation; and (4) adversely affect the commercial use of ground and
surface waters due to herbicide contamination and sedimentation.
--The construction and maintenance of the 765kV transmission line and
the associated access roads and right-of-way may affect existing
cultural resources, and historic structures and districts through the
direct effects of the construction and maintenance activities and by
changing the existing resource setting.
--The operation and maintenance of the 765kV transmission line and the
associated access roads and right-of-way may adversely affect human
health through (1) direct and indirect exposure to herbicides; and (2)
exposure to electromagnetic fields and induced voltage.
--The construction of the 765kV transmission line may adversely affect
the safety of those operating aircraft at low altitudes or from
airports located near the transmission line.
--The operation of the 765kV transmission line may (1) adversely affect
communications by introducing a source of interference; (2) increase
noise levels for those in close proximity to the line.
--The construction, operation, and maintenance of the 765kV
transmission line and the associated access roads and right-of-way may
(1) adversely affect trails (including the Appalachian Trail) and trail
facilities by facilitating vehicle access through new road construction
and the upgrading of existing roads; and (2) reduce hiker safety by
facilitating vehicle access to remote trail locations.
--The construction, operation, and maintenance of the 765kV
transmission line and the associated access roads and right-of-way may
affect hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, boating, and birding
opportunities and experiences because (1) the setting in which these
pursuits take place may be altered; and (2) the noise associated with
the operation of the line may detract from the backcountry or
recreation experience.
--The construction and operation of the 765kV transmission line and the
associated access roads and right-of-way may affect local communities
by (1) reducing the value of private lands adjacent to the line; (2)
decreasing tax
[[Page 28564]]
revenues due to the reductions in land value; and (3) influencing
economic growth, industry siting, and employment.
--The construction, operation, and maintenance of the 765kV
transmission line and the associated access roads and right-of-way may
(1) conflict with management direction contained in resource management
plans and designations; (2) affect the uses that presently occur on and
adjacent to the proposed right-of-way; (3) affect the wild, scenic,
and/or recreational qualities of the New River; (4) affect sensitive
land uses like schools, churches, and community facilities; (5) affect
the cultural attachment residents feel toward Peters Mountain; (6)
affect the scenic and/or recreational qualities of the Appalachian
National Scenic Trail (Appalachian Trail); and (7) result in family
displacement.
--The construction, operation, and maintenance of the 765kV
transmission line and the associated access roads and right-of-way may
adversely affect the visual attributes of the area because the line,
the associated right-of-way, and access roads may (1) alter the
existing landscape; and (2) conflict with the standards established for
scenic designations.
--The construction, operation, and maintenance of the 765kV
transmission line and the associated access roads and right-of-way may
affect wildlife, plant and aquatic populations, habitat, and livestock
because (1) habitats are created, changed, or eliminated; (2)
herbicides are used and herbicides may be toxic; (3) the transmission
line presents a flight hazard to birds; (4) electromagnetic fields and
induced voltage may be injurious.
--The construction of the 765kV transmission line and the associated
access roads and right-of-way may have a disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low
income populations as indicated in Executive Order 12898.
--The construction and operation of the 765kV transmission line may
adversely affect astronomical observation activities at the Martin
Observatory (VPI) due to the introduction of obstructions to the sky
(lines and towers), the introduction of light from coronal discharge,
and the disruption of sensitive electronic equipment by electromagnetic
fields.
--The construction and operation of the 765kV transmission line may
adversely affect seismological observation activities at the VPI
seismic stations located near Forest Hill and Potts Mountain.
--The construction and maintenance of the 765kV transmission line and
the associated access roads and right-of-way may affect the cultural
attachment that residents have for the valley between Blacksburg and
Catawba, Craig County, Giles County, Mercer County and portions of
Montgomery County.
The following permits and/or licenses would be required to
implement the proposed action:
--Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (Virginia State
Corporation Commission)
--Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (West Virginia Public
Service Commission)
--Special use Authorization (Forest Service)
--Right-of-Way Authorization (National Park Service)
--Section 10 Permit (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
--Right-of-Way Easement (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
--Consent to Easement (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
Other authorizations may be required from a variety of Federal and
State agencies.
Public participation will occur at several points during the
federal analysis process. The first point in the analysis was the
scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7). The Forest Service obtained
information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State and local
agencies, the proponent of the action, and other individuals or
organizations who are interested in or affected by the electric
transmission line proposal. This input will be utilized in the
preparation of the draft environmental impact statement. The scoping
process included, (1) identifying potential issues, (2) identifying
issues to be analyzed in depth, (3) eliminating insignificant issues or
those which have been covered by a relevant previous environmental
analysis.
Public participation was solicited through contacts with known
interested and/or affected groups, and individuals; news releases;
direct mailings; and/or newspaper advertisements. Public meetings were
also held to hear comments concerning the APCo proposal and to develop
the significant issues to be considered in the analysis.
A similar process of public involvement was implemented by the
federal agencies for the Preliminary Alternative Corridors announced in
July of 1995.
Other public participation opportunities will be provided
throughout the federal analysis process.
The draft environmental impact statement will be filed with the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review
by June 28, 1996. This revises the April 12, 1996 date previously
announced. At that time, EPA will publish a notice of availability of
the draft environmental impact statement in the Federal Register.
The federal agencies have established the following public meeting
schedule to explain the analysis documented in the draft environmental
impact statement and to hear comments related to the analysis. The
public meetings will begin at 4:00 p.m. and end at 8:00 p.m. on the
date and at the locations indicated:
July 31, 1996
McCleary Elementary School, Highway 615, New Castle, VA
August 2, 1996
Concord College, Vermillian Street, Athens, WV
August 6, 1996
Blacksburg High School, 520 Patrick Henry Drive, Blacksburg, VA
August 8, 1996
Twin Falls Resort State Park, Route 10, Mullens, WV
August 1, 1996
James Monroe High School, Weikel Road, Lindside, WV
August 5, 1996
Lord Botetourt High School, 755 Roanoke, Road (Highway 220), Daleville,
VA
August 7, 1996
Giles County High School, Route 460 (Business), Pearisburg, VA.
Reviewers need to be aware of several court rulings related to
public participation in the environmental impact statement review
process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must
structure their participation in the environmental review of the
proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the
reviewer's position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.
v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that
could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage but
that are not raised until after completion of the final environmental
impact statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts. City
[[Page 28565]]
of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin
Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980).
Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those
interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the 90-
day comment period so that substantive comments and objections are made
available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully
consider them and respond to them in the final environmental impact
statement.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives
formulated and discussed in the statement. (Reviewers may wish to refer
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing
the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.)
After the comment period ends on the draft environmental impact
statement, the comments will be analyzed, considered, and responded to
by the three federal agencies in preparing the final environmental
impact statement. The federal agencies have decided to await the
decisions of the Virginia State Corporation Commission and the West
Virginia Public Service Commission on the APCo proposal before
publishing the final environmental impact statement. It is not known
when the two Commission's will issue their decisions. When these
decisions are made the federal agencies will announce the publication
date of the final environmental impact statement.
The responsible officials will consider the comments, responses,
environmental consequences discussed in the final environmental impact
statement, and applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making a
decision regarding the proposal to cross federal lands with a 765,000-
volt transmission line. The responsible officials will document their
decisions and reasons for their decisions in a Record of Decision.
The responsible official for the Forest Service is William E.
Damon, Jr., Forest Supervisor, George Washington and Jefferson National
Forests, 5162 Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, Virginia, 24019. The
responsible official for the National Park Service is Pamela Underhill,
Park Manager, Appalachian National Scenic Trail, National Park Service,
Harpers Ferry Center, Harpers Ferry, West Virginia 25425. The
responsible official for the US Army Corps of Engineers in West
Virginia is Colonel Richard Jemiola, US Army Corps of Engineers,
Huntington District, 508 8th Street, Huntington, West Virginia 25701-
2070. The responsible official for the US Army Corps of Engineers in
Virginia is Colonel Andrew M. Perkins, Jr., US Army Corps of Engineers,
Norfolk District, 803 Front Street, Norfolk, Virginia 23510.
Dated: May 28, 1996.
William E. Damon, Jr.,
Forest Supervisor, George Washington and Jefferson National Forests.
[FR Doc. 96-14007 Filed 6-4-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
