Appalachian Power Company Transmission Line Construction- Cloverdale, VA, to Oceana, WV; George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, Appalachian National Scenic Trail, the New River, and R.D. Bailey Lake Flowage Easement Land; Virginia Counties of Botetourt, Roanoke, Craig, Montgomery, Pulaski, Bland, and Giles and the West Virginia Counties of Monroe, Summers, Mercer, and Wyoming

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Appalachian Power Company Transmission Line Construction-

Cloverdale, VA, to Oceana, WV; George Washington and Jefferson National

Forests, Appalachian National Scenic Trail, the New River, and R.D.

Bailey Lake Flowage Easement 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 and

final environmental impact statements; changes the name of the

responsible official for the National Park Service and provides updated

information on the federal agenices' analysis.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare a draft and final

environmental impact statement on a proposed action to authorize the

Appalachian Power Company 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 Guyandotte 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 Appalachian Power Company 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 Appalachian Power Company 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.

The total length of the electric transmission line proposed by the

Appalachian Power Company 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) and June 9, 1995 (60 FR 30511-30514).

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: The Appalachian Power Company submitted

[[Page 51771]]

an application to the Jefferson National Forests (the name changed 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 the Appalachian Power Company 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 the Appalachian Power Company

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

approval is available from the George Washington and Jefferson National

Forests.

The decisions to be made following the environmental analysis are

whether the Forest Service, the National Park Service, and the US Army

Corps of Engineers will authorize Appalachian Power Company 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 environmental impact statement a range of routing

alternatives will be considered to meet the purpose and need for the

proposed action. A no action alternative will also be analyzed. Under

the no action alterantaive 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 also be

considered.

In July of 1994, the federal agencies identified a number of

alternatives to the proposed action in the Virginia countries of

Botetourt, Roanoke, Graig, Montgomery, Pulaski, Bland, and Giles and

the West Virginia countries of Monroe, Summers and Mercer. These

alternative corridors were modified by the federal agencies in May of

1995. A public comment period was afforded by the federal agencies on

these alternative corridor modifications between May 25 and June 30,

1995.

The federal analysis will include an analysis of the effects of the

proposed transmission line along the entire proposed route as well as

all alternative routes which are 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 revenues due to the reduction 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; and (6)

affect the scenic and/or recreational qualities of the Appalachian

National Scenic Trail (Appalachian Trail).

--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

[[Page 51772]]

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, Mercer County and portions of Montgomery County.

This issue was expanded to include Giles 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 (US Army Corps of Engineers)

--Right-of-Way Easement (US Army Corps of Engineers)

--Consent to Easement (US 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 contracts 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 Appalachian Power Company

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 Forest Service routinely publishes newsletters describing

various aspects of the federal agencies analysis of the transmission

line proposal. The next newsletter is scheduled for publication in

October of 1995 and will include a revision to alternative corridors

currently being considered by the federal agencies.

The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be filed

with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public

review by April 12, 1996. This revises the October 20, 1995 date

previously announced. At that time, EPA will publish a notice of

availability of the draft environmental impact statement in the Federal

Register. The comment period on the draft environmental impact

statement will be 90 days from the date the EPA publishes the notice of

availability in the Federal Register.

Reviewers needed 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 contentious. 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 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 Appalachian Power Company

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

[[Page 51773]]

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, Dr., Forest Supervisor, George Washington and Jefferson National

Forests, 5162 Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, Virginia, 24019. The

responsible official for the National Park Service is changed from Don

King to Pamela Underhill, Acting Project Manager, Appalachian National

Scenic Trail, National Park Service, Harpers Ferry Center, Harpers

Ferry, West Virginia 25425. The responsible official for the 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 September 25, 1995.

William E. Damon, Jr.,

Forest Supervisor, George Washington and Jefferson National Forests.

[FR Doc. 95-24476 Filed 10-2-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M