Eldorado Ivanpah Transmission Project
NEPA Document Collection for: Eldorado Ivanpah Transmission Project
EIS
EIS/EIR for the Eldorado-Ivanapah Transmission Project
Proposed Action
On May 28, 2010, Southern California Edison Company (SCE) filed Application No. 09-05-027 with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Eldorado-Ivanpah Transmission Project.
The CPUC, as Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), as Lead Agency under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), prepared a Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) for consideration of SCE’s Eldorado-Ivanpah Transmission Project (EITP). the BLM issued a Record of Decision for the project on May 26, 2011.
The EITP would upgrade approximately 35 miles of existing single-circuit 115-kV subtransmission line to double-circuit 230-kV transmission line between the Ivanpah Dry Lake area and the existing Eldorado Substation, construct a new substation (Ivanpah Substation), install upgrades within the existing Eldorado Substation, and install a redundant telecommunications path between the Ivanpah and Eldorado substations. The redundant telecommunications path would be strung along the existing 500-kV Eldorado-Lugo transmission line for approximately 25 miles before it would be installed in a new underground duct for approximately 5 miles along the northern edge of Nipton Road to a new microwave tower outside Nipton, California. The EITP would be located in Clark County, Nevada and San Bernardino County, California near Primm, Nevada.
Conditions of Approval
The decision is conditioned on implementation of mitigation measures and monitoring programs as identified in the Final EIS, the Biological Opinion (BO) issued by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Programmatic Agreement (PA) signed by the California and Nevada State Historic Preservation Officers, and the issuance of all necessary local, state, and federal approvals, authorizations and permits.
Data Completion Notes
BLM Project website: http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/needles/Eldorado_Ivanpah_Trans.html CPUC Project website: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/Environment/info/ene/ivanpah/Ivanpah.html
Documents
EA/EIS Report:
Resource Analysis
Resource | Not Present |
Present, Not Affected |
Present, Potentially Affected |
Not Indicated |
Comment | Applicant Proposed Mitigation |
Agency Imposed Mitigation |
---|
Access and Transportation |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
Air Quality |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
(http://www.epa.gov/highgwp/electricpower-sf6/basic.html);
|
Special Status Species |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
|
Cultural Resources |
Cultural Resource Measures - Part 1 |
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
Conduct an intensive archaeological inventory of all areas that may be disturbed during construction and operation of the proposed project. A complete cultural resources inventory of the project area has been conducted, details of which are contained in a technical report. Should the project substantially change and areas not previously inventoried for cultural resources become part of the construction plan, the applicant would ensure that such additional areas are inventoried for cultural resources prior to any disturbance. All surveys would be conducted and documented according to applicable laws, regulations, and professional standards.
Avoid and minimize impacts on significant or potentially significant cultural resources wherever feasible. To the extent practical, the applicant would avoid or minimize impacts on archaeological resources, regardless of its CRHR or NRHP eligibility status. This includes siting all ground-disturbing activities and other project components outside a buffer zone established around each recorded archaeological site within or immediately adjacent to the right-of-way.
Project Final Design would avoid direct impacts on significant or potentially significant cultural resources. To the extent practical, all ground-disturbing activities and other project components would be sited to avoid or minimize impacts on cultural resources listed as or potentially eligible for listing as, unique archaeological sites, historical resources, or historic properties.
Criteria 1, 2, and 3, and NRHP Criteria A, B, and C. A report of the evaluation of each building or structure would be prepared providing a rationale for an assessment of significance consistent with professional standards and guidelines. The report would be filed with the appropriate Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System.
|
Cultural Resources |
Cultural Resource Measures - Part 2 |
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
The provisions of the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act are applicable when Native American human remains are found on federal land (BLM land in California and Nevada). The discovery of human remains would be treated as defined in the Construction Monitoring and Unanticipated Cultural Resources Discovery Plan.
|
Geology and Minerals |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
Invasive, Nonnative Species |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
|
Lands and Realty |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
Migratory Birds |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
|
Noise |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
advantage of low electrical draw periods during the nighttime hours. The applicant would comply with variance procedures requested by local authorities if required.
|
Paleontological Resources |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
The project paleontologist would direct identification, laboratory processing, cataloging, analysis, and documentation of the fossil collections. When appropriate, and in consultation with SCE, splits of rock or sediment samples would be submitted to commercial laboratories for microfossil, pollen, or radiometric dating analysis. After analysis, the collections would be prepared for curation (see APM PALEO-8). A final technical report would be prepared to summarize construction monitoring and present the results of the fossil recovery program. The report would be prepared in accordance with SCE, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology guidelines, and lead agency requirements. The final report would be submitted to SCE, the lead agency, and the curation repository.
|
Public Health and Safety |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
Recreation |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
Vegetation |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
|
Visual Resources |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
|
Wastes Hazardous or Solid |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
Water Quality |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
Wetlands and Riparian Zones |
|
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
|
Wildlife Resources |
General |
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
The applicant/holder must also ensure full compliance with the following Reasonable and Prudent Measures (RPMs) with implementing Terms and Conditions as described in the Biological Opinion for the project. Full compliance by the applicant/holder with these Terms and Conditions is required and is non-discretionary. The RPMs are noted below. The Terms and Conditions for each RPM is included in Appendix 4 of the ROD.
|
Wildlife Resources |
Desert Tortoise Impacts Reduction Measures |
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
|
Wildlife Resources |
Desert Tortoise Measures - Part 1 |
CloseAPM BIO-11: Desert Tortoise Measures:
|
Wildlife Resources |
Desert Tortoise Measures - Part 2 |
CloseAPM BIO-11: Desert Tortoise Measures:
|
Wildlife Resources |
Desert Bighorn Sheep Mitigation |
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
Work will immediately be stopped in the area if the biologists find occupied burrows within 100 feet of construction activities during preconstruction surveys.
|
Wildlife Resources |
Burrowing Owl Mitigation |
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
|
Wildlife Resources |
Gila Monster Mitigation |
CloseApplicant Proposed Measures (APM):
|
CloseMitigation Measures (MM):
|