Olympic Cross Cascade Pipeline Project, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Snohomish, King, Kittitas, Grant, Adams, and Franklin Counties, Washington

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Olympic Cross Cascade Pipeline Project, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie

National Forest, Snohomish, King, Kittitas, Grant, Adams, and Franklin

Counties, Washington

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service, USDA, as lead federal agency will prepare

an environmental impact statement on a proposal by Olympic Pipe Line

Company (OPL) to construct a new 230-mile underground/aboveground

pipeline to deliver motor gasoline, diesel fuel, and aviation jet fuel

from north of OPL's Woodinville Station, Washington to a new

distribution facility near the City of Kittitas, Washington and an

existing facility in Pasco, Washington. This environmental impact

statement will be a combined NEPA/SEPA document. The lead state agency

will be the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council. If approved,

construction would commence in 1997 and be completed in about one year.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received

in writing by April 8, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions concerning the scope

of the analysis to: Dennis E. Bschor, Forest Supervisor, Mt. Baker-

Snoqualmie National Forest, 21905--64th Avenue West, Mountlake Terrace,

WA 98043-2278.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steve Johnson, Project Manager, North Bend Ranger District, 42404 SE

North Bend Way, North Bend, WA 98045; phone (206) 888-1421.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Olympic Pipe Line Company (OPL), located

in Renton, Washington, proposes to construct a new 230-mile-long, 14-

inch-diameter pipeline from north of OPL's Woodinville Station near the

King/Snohomish County line, in western Washington, to a new

distribution facility near the City of Kittitas and to the existing

terminal facility in Pasco, in southeastern Washington. It would start

as a 14-inch pipeline in Snohomish County north of the King/Snohomish

County line, travel eastward and then southeast to North Bend, run east

along/near the Interstate 90 highway corridor, and cross over

Snoqualmie Pass. The pipeline would then continue eastward along/near

I-90 to the City of Kittitas where it will change to a 12-inch

pipeline, continue past Ellensburg and the Yakima Training Center,

cross under the Columbia River downstream of Wanapum Dam, run toward

the Columbia National Wildlife Refuge, and then travel south to Pasco

where it would connect with existing facilities. The pipeline would be

placed underground and above-ground, depending upon design

requirements, and six pump stations would be placed along the pipeline

route. The pipeline would transport motor gasoline, diesel fuel, and

aviation jet fuel.

If approved, construction would commence in 1997 and be completed

in about one year. Construction of the pipeline would require a 2- to

3-foot-wide and 36- to 60-inch-deep (or deeper) trench. Construction

typically occurs in about a 60-foot-wide area and the permanent right-

of-way would typically be about 30 feet wide. The pipeline, which would

be transported in 40- to 80-foot lengths, would be made of high-grade

steel coated with a polyolefin-type material to prevent corrosion. The

welds of the pipeline would be X-ray tested, and the entire line would

be hydrostatically tested to 125% of the maximum pressure allowed

during operation of the pipeline.

Scoping meetings to receive public comments on the project, and the

associated open houses and land use hearings, will occur as follows:

March 12, 1996 (Ellensburg High School, Ellensburg, WA); March 13, 1996

(Jackson High School, Mill Creek, WA); March 14, 1996 (Snoqualmie

Middle School, Snoqualmie, WA); March 26, 1996 (Royal High School,

Royal City, WA); March 27, 1996 (Columbia Basin Community College,

Pasco, WA); and March 28, 1996 (Othello High School, Othello, WA). Each

meeting date will begin with an open house at 5 p.m., followed by a

land use hearing and a scoping meeting. Potential issues of concern for

the environmental impact statement include the risk of a spill; impacts

to health and safety, soil erosion, stream and river crossings, water

quality, fish and wildlife, wetlands, agriculture, forest land, and

transportation and utilities; and compatibility with existing land

uses.

Three alternatives are considered for this project, including:

constructing an east-west pipeline route as proposed above; building a

new north-south pipeline from Renton, WA, to Portland, OR, and

continuing barging on the Columbia River to Pasco; or continuing with

the current no action alternative. Optional subcomponents to the

proposed action include: (1) Shortening the pipeline so that it

terminates in Moses Lake and rebuilding the Moses Lake-to-Spokane

pipeline; (2) using the same initial route but turning south near

Ellensburg and going through the Yakima Valley to Pasco; (3) routing a

300-mile pipeline through one of two alternative routes across Stevens

Pass and terminating it in Pasco; (4) routing the pipeline through one

of two other routes through Snoqualmie Pass and terminating in Pasco;

and (5) routing the pipeline through Stampede Pass and terminating in

Pasco. The no action alternative (existing practices) includes the

following subcomponents: (1) Piping to Portland and then barging from

there to Pasco on the Columbia River; (2) shipping by barge or tanker

from Puget Sound, south along the Washington coast to Portland, and

then transferring to river barges for shipment to Pasco on the Columbia

River; and (3) transporting by tanker truck across the Cascade

Mountains to Pasco. The only permit required for the project is an

Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council Site Certification.

The Forest Service will be the lead federal agency. Cooperating

agencies include the Bureau of Land Management (Joseph Buesing, Spokane

District Manager), Bureau of Reclamation (John W. Keys, III, Regional

Director), and Department of the Army (Lieut. General C.G. Marsh,

Installation Commander, Headquarters, I CORPS and Fort Lewis). This

environmental impact statement will be a combined NEPA/SEPA document.

The lead state agency under the Washington State Environmental Policy

Act will be the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (Allen J.

Fiksdal, EFSEC Project Manager).

Interested parties are invited to provide suggestions and comments

about the proposed project in writing to the address provided above, or

at the public hearings that will be held throughout the state. At this

time, it is estimated the draft environmental impact statement will be

issued during the summer of 1996. The final environmental impact

statement will be issued early in 1997.

The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will

be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes

the notice of availability in the Federal Register.

The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers

notice at this early stage of the project of several

[[Page 7468]]

court rulings related to public participation in the environmental

review process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact

statements must structure their participation in the environmental

review process 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 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 45-

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.).

Dated: February 15, 1996.

Gene R. Cyrus,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 96-4511 Filed 2-27-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M