Pacific Gas Transmission Company; Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed PGT Expansion II Project

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP93-618-000 and 00]

Pacific Gas Transmission Company; Intent To Prepare an

Environmental Assessment for the Proposed PGT Expansion II Project

June 22, 1994.

On November 17, 1993 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC

or Commission) issued a Notice of Intent to Prepare a Joint Draft

Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS)

with the California State Lands Commission (SLC) for the above proposed

PGT Expansion II Project and a related project proposed by Tuscarora

Gas Transmission Company in Docket CP93-685-000 (Tuscarora Pipeline

Project). The purpose of the Notice was to request comments on

environmental issues. On May 31, 1994, PGT filed an amendment to its

original application. In a June 8, 1994 response to a FERC staff data

request, PGT confirmed that no expansion of its mainline facilities is

required to provide service to the Tuscarora Pipeline Project. From the

standpoint of the environmental analysis, the important changes to the

PGT Expansion II Project are:

The elimination of the additional compression originally

proposed at the Sandpoint, Idaho and Rosalia, Washington Compressor

Stations;

The removal from the above proceedings of three meter runs

inside PGT's existing Malin Meter Station in southern Oregon; the meter

runs will still be necessary to serve the Tuscarora Pipeline Project,

but will now be proposed under section 157.208(a) of the Commission's

regulations (18 CFR 157.208(a)).

The elimination of one meter station proposed in Klamath

Falls, Oregon;

The addition of two service taps on the Medford Extension

Lateral;

Route realignments that increase the total miles of the

Medford Extension Lateral (pipeline) to be constructed from 84.17 miles

to 86.5 miles (see Table 1)1; and

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\The table and appendices are not printed in the Federal

Register, but have been mailed to all receiving this notice. Copies

are also available from the Commission's Public Reference Branch,

Room 3104, 941 North Capitol St., NE, Washington, DC 20426.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Route realignments that increase the total miles of the

Coyote Springs Extension Lateral (pipeline) to be constructed from

17.71 miles to 18.5 miles (see Table 1).

Prior to this amendment, the PGT Expansion II and the Tuscarora

Pipeline Projects were being processed concurrently because of the

inclusion in Docket No. CP93-618-000 of additional system compression

and the meter runs at Malin needed to deliver gas to the Tuscarora

Pipeline Project. However, the proposed amendment to eliminate the

compression and the proposal to build the meter runs under separate

authority make the PGT Expansion II Project a stand-alone proposal

which can be considered separately from the Tuscarora Pipeline Project.

Based on the above changes, we have determined that an

environmental assessment (EA), rather than an environmental impact

statement, is the appropriate document for analyzing the potential

environmental impacts associated with the PGT Expansion II Project. We

are now preparing this document. Since the PGT facilities will be

located outside the State of California, the SLC will not be a

cooperating agency in the preparation of this EA. We are proceeding

with a joint EIR/EIS with the SLC for the Tuscarora Pipeline Project.

The three meter runs inside PGT's existing Malin Meter Station will be

addressed as a related facility in that joint EIR/EIS.

The EA Process

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the

Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could

result from a major Federal action whenever it considers the issuance

of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. The EA we are

preparing will give the Commission the information it needs to do that.

If the EA concluded that the project would result in significant

environmental impacts, the Commission would prepare an environmental

impact statement. Otherwise a Finding of No Significant Impact would be

produced.

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, and to separate these from issues that are

insignificant and do not require detailed study. Although the scoping

of the original project has already been completed, we are now asking

for any additional comments only on the relocated or new portions of

the project as currently proposed. Local scoping meetings have already

been conducted for the original project. Additional scoping meetings

are not anticipated.

The EA will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the

construction and operation of the proposed projects under these general

subject headings:

Geology and paleontology.

Endangered and threatened species.

Visual resources.

Water resources.

Vegetation.

Land use.

Air quality and noise.

Wetland and riparian habitat.

Cultural resources.

Fish and wildlife.

Socioeconomics.

Soils.

We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the 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 result in the

publication of the EA which will 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.

Public Participation

You can make a difference by sending a letter with your specific

comments or concerns about the projects. You should focus on the

potential environmental effects of the new portions of the proposal

(see Table 1). You do not need to re-submit comments if you have

already done so in this proceeding. We are particularly interested in

alternatives to the proposals (including alternative routes), and

measures to avoid or lessen environmental impact. The more specific

your comments, the more useful they will be. 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, 825 North Capitol St., NE., Washington,

DC 20426;

Reference Docket No. CP93-618-001;

Send a copy of your letter to: Ms. Alisa Lykens, Project

Manager, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol St.,

NE., Room 7312 Washington, DC 20426; and

Mail your comments so they will be received in Washington

DC on or before July 28, 1994.

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) which is attached as appendix

1\2\. You do not need intervenor status to have your scoping comments

considered.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\See footnote 1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Environmental Mailing List

If you don't want to send comments at this time but still want to

receive a copy of the EA, please return the Information Request

(appendix 2)\3\. If you have previously returned the Information

Request you need not do so again.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\See footnote 1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional information about the proposed project is available from

Ms. Alisa Lykens, EA Project Manager, at (202) 208-0766.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 94-15587 Filed 6-27-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P