[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 105 (Friday, May 31, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25299-25302]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11393]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2019-N054; FXES11140100000-190-FF01E00000]
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Final Habitat
Conservation Plan for the Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project, Lewis and
Thurston Counties, Washington
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce the
availability of a final environmental impact statement (EIS) and a
final habitat conservation plan (HCP) addressing the Skookumchuck Wind
Energy Project (project) in Lewis and Thurston Counties, Washington.
The Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project LLC (applicant) is requesting an
incidental take permit (ITP) covering the take of one threatened
species listed under the Endangered Species Act, and two non-listed
federally protected species (collectively referred to as covered
species) likely to be caused by the operation of the project over a 30-
year period. The HCP describes the steps the applicant will take to
minimize, mitigate, and monitor incidental take of the covered species.
The final EIS has been prepared in response to the ITP application in
accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy
Act.
DATES: The Service's ITP decision will occur no sooner than 30 days
after publication of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's notice
of the final EIS in the Federal Register, and will be documented in a
record of decision (ROD).
ADDRESSES: You may obtain copies of the documents by any of the
following methods:
Internet: http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-
R1-ES-2019-N054.
Upon Request: You may call Curtis Tanner at 360-753-4326
to request alternative formats of the documents or make an appointment
to inspect the documents during normal business hours at the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, 510 Desmond
Dr. SE, Suite 102, Lacey, WA 98503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Curtis Tanner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Washington Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES);
telephone: 360-753-4326; email: [email protected]. Hearing or
speech impaired individuals may call the Federal Relay Service at 800-
877-8339 for TTY assistance.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service), announce the availability of a final environmental impact
statement (EIS) and a final habitat conservation plan (HCP) addressing
the Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project (project) in Lewis and Thurston
Counties, Washington. The Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project LLC
(applicant) is requesting an incidental take permit (ITP) covering the
take of one threatened species listed under the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and two non-listed
federally protected species (collectively referred to as covered
species) likely to be caused by the operation of the project over a 30-
year period. The HCP describes the steps the applicant will take to
minimize, mitigate, and monitor incidental take of the covered species.
The final EIS has been prepared in response to the ITP application, in
accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
The applicant is seeking an ITP authorizing take of the following
covered species: Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus), bald
eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos).
The murrelet is listed as threatened under the ESA. Bald and golden
eagles are not listed under the ESA, but are protected under the Bald
and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA; 16 U.S.C. 668-668d).
If issued, the ITP would authorize take of the covered species that
may occur as a result of their collision with project wind turbines,
and as a result of the applicant carrying out site management and
maintenance activities over the 30-year permit term. The applicant is
not seeking ITP coverage for the construction phase of the project,
which includes, without limitation, the construction of roads and
turbine pads, and the erection of 38 commercial wind turbines,
transmission lines, and meteorological towers. The applicant is also
not seeking ITP coverage for the decommissioning of project facilities.
The applicant anticipates completing project construction prior to
implementation of the HCP.
The HCP describes the anticipated amount of take of each covered
species, and the steps the applicant will implement to minimize and
mitigate the impacts of that taking. The HCP also describes the life
history and ecology of
[[Page 25300]]
the covered species, the biological goals and objectives of the HCP,
the impact of the anticipated taking on the affected populations of
each covered species, adaptive management procedures, and take
monitoring procedures.
The Service prepared the final EIS in response to the ITP
application and in consideration of comments received on the draft EIS,
in accordance with the requirements of NEPA.
Background
The project site encompasses approximately 9,700 acres of
forestlands in Thurston and Lewis Counties, Washington. The applicant
intends to initiate turbine operations in 2019, or as soon as possible
thereafter. A detailed description of the project is presented in
chapter 2 of the HCP. The majority of the project is located in Lewis
County, Washington, including all 38 wind turbines. Some supporting
infrastructure is located in Thurston County, Washington. The wind
energy generation facility is located on a prominent ridgeline on the
Weyerhaeuser Company's Vail Tree Farm, located approximately 18 miles
east of Centralia, Washington.
The project is expected to produce an output of approximately 137
megawatts (MW) of electricity from 38 wind turbines, each of which is
492 feet tall (from ground to vertical blade tip) with rotor diameters
of 446 feet. The turbine operating prescriptions presented in chapter 2
of the HCP include curtailment regimes and site management
prescriptions.
Pre-project monitoring identified the presence of each covered
species in the project area. The applicant determined that adverse
effects to each of the covered species are unavoidable, and developed
the HCP to cover take of those species caused by project operations
over a period of 30 years. The HCP details measures the applicant will
implement to minimize, mitigate, and monitor the unavoidable incidental
take of the covered species.
Avoidance and minimization measures in the HCP to benefit the
marbled murrelet include seasonal curtailment of turbine blades
(turbine blades are fully stopped and feathered into the wind) and site
management prescriptions to maintain transmission and distribution line
flight diverters, shield artificial light sources, reduce murrelet
collisions with vehicles on the project site, and minimize the
artificial increase of potential nest predators in the project area.
Mitigation measures in the HCP to benefit the marbled murrelet include
acquisition and permanent management of conservation lands to promote
the preservation and enhancement of suitable nesting habitat for the
species, and funding the removal of abandoned or derelict fishing nets
in the Salish Sea in which murrelets can become entangled and drown.
Avoidance and minimization measures in the HCP to benefit the bald
eagle and the golden eagle include site management prescriptions to
remove mammal carrion to reduce scavenging by eagles on the project
site, minimize cover for prey animals such as rabbits to reduce prey-
based attractions of eagles to the project site, and testing of eagle
detection-based turbine curtailment technologies intended to reduce
eagle collisions with operating turbine blades. If effective, the
turbine curtailment triggered by automated eagle-detection will be
implemented routinely. Mitigation measures in the HCP intended to
benefit bald eagles and golden eagles consist of retrofitting power
poles to reduce the occurrence of eagle collisions with power lines and
electrocution.
The action considered in the final EIS is approval of the HCP and
issuance of an ITP with a term of 30 years to the applicant, if permit
issuance criteria are met.
Endangered Species Act
Section 9 of the ESA and its implementing regulations prohibit
``take'' of fish and wildlife species listed as endangered. The ESA
implementing regulations extend, under certain circumstances, the
prohibition of take to threatened species (50 CFR 17.31). Under section
3 of the ESA, the term ``take'' means to ``harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in
any such conduct'' (16 U.S.C. 1538). Under section 10(a) of the ESA,
the Service may issue permits to authorize incidental take of listed
fish and wildlife species. ``Incidental take'' is defined by the ESA as
take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an
otherwise lawful activity. Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA contains
provisions for issuing ITPs to non-Federal entities for the take of
endangered and threatened species, provided the following criteria are
met:
1. The taking will be incidental;
2. The applicant will, to the maximum extent practicable, minimize
and mitigate the impact of such taking;
3. The applicant will ensure that adequate funding for the plan
will be provided;
4. The taking will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the
survival and recovery of the species in the wild; and
5. The applicant will carry out any other measures that the Service
may require as being necessary or appropriate for the purposes of the
HCP.
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Though the applicant is requesting incidental take for bald and
golden eagles under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA, consistency with
the requirements of BGEPA is also necessary. The BGEPA prohibits take
of eagles where ``take'' is defined as to ``pursue, shoot, shoot at,
poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, destroy, molest, or
disturb'' and where ``disturb'' is further defined as ``to agitate or
bother'' a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely
to cause, based on the best scientific information available: (1)
Injury to an eagle; (2) a decrease in its productivity, by
substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering
behavior; or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with
normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior (50 CFR 22.3).
Under 50 CFR 22.26, the Service has the authority to authorize take
of bald and golden eagles (generally, disturbance, injury, or killing)
that occurs incidental to an otherwise lawful activity. For the Service
to issue such a permit, the following required determinations must be
met (see 50 CFR 22.26(f)):
1. The taking will be compatible with the preservation of the bald
or golden eagle (further defined by the Service to mean ``consistent
with the goals of maintaining stable or increasing breeding populations
in all eagle management units and the persistence of local populations
throughout the geographic range of each species'');
2. The taking will protect an interest in a particular locality;
3. The taking will be associated with, but not the purpose of, the
activity;
4. The taking will be avoided and minimized by the applicant to the
extent practicable;
5. The applicant will have applied all appropriate and practical
compensatory mitigation measures, when required pursuant to 50 CFR
22.26(c);
6. Issuance of the permit will not preclude issuance of another
permit necessary to protect an interest of higher priority as set forth
in 50 CFR 22.26(e)(7); and
7. Issuance of the permit will not interfere with ongoing civil or
criminal action concerning unpermitted past eagle take at the project.
The Service can provide eagle take authorization through an ITP for
an HCP, which confers take authorization under the BGEPA without the
need for
[[Page 25301]]
a separate permit, as long as the permit issuance criteria under both
ESA and BGEPA will be met by the conservation measures included in the
applicant's HCP. See 50 CFR 22.11(a).
National Environmental Policy Act Compliance
The development of the HCP and the proposed issuance of an ITP
under this plan comprise a Federal action that triggers the need for
compliance with NEPA. We prepared a draft EIS and reviewed public
comments in preparation of a final EIS to analyze the environmental
impacts of a range of alternatives related to the issuance of the ITP
and implementation of the conservation program under the HCP. The
alternatives include a no-action alternative and three action
alternatives: Proposed action (alternative 1), a modified site design
for the proposed action (alternative 2), and an enhanced curtailment
regime alternative (alternative 3).
No-Action Alternative: Under the No-Action Alternative (Options A
and B), no permit would be issued, and the applicant's HCP would not be
implemented. This alternative consists of two options: Option A--No
Project Operations and Option B--No Project. Option A assumes the
applicant would construct the project before the Service makes a final
permit decision, but would not operate the project without an ITP.
Option A is included in the final EIS because the applicant informed
the Service that it may initiate and complete construction of the
project before the Service makes a decision on the ITP application.
Option B assumes that the applicant would not construct the project
without an ITP. Under this option, nothing would change from current
conditions and no impacts on the human environment would result from
the project.
Alternative 1 (Proposed HCP): Issuance of the requested permit and
implementation of the conservation program described in the applicant's
HCP. Alternative 1 is the Service's preferred alternative.
Alternative 2: Under the Modified Project Site Design Alternative,
the project would not operate the five wind turbine generators (WTGs)
closest to documented marbled murrelet nest locations for the duration
of the ITP. The Service would issue an ITP authorizing the level of
incidental take expected to result from operation and maintenance of
the remaining 33 WTGs and site management activities.
Alternative 3: Under the Enhanced Curtailment Alternative, all 38
WTGs would operate under an expanded set of curtailment measures
intended to minimize the potential for take of the covered species. The
Service would issue an ITP authorizing the level of incidental take
expected to result from covered activities in accordance with the
additional curtailment measures.
The environmental consequences of each alternative were analyzed in
the final EIS. The types of effects on covered species were similar
across action alternatives, with take resulting from project operations
being mitigated through land acquisition, derelict net removal, and
power pole retrofits. Increasing the use of avoidance and minimization
measures through different turbine curtailment regimes can reduce the
amount of take of covered species and the amount of renewable
electricity produced; a commensurate reduction in the amount of
derelict net removal and power pole retrofits are expected with
alternatives that increase turbine curtailment. Public comments
received in response to the draft EIS were considered, and the final
EIS reflects clarifications of the existing analysis to address public
comments. The final EIS does not identify an environmentally preferred
alternative, because the alternatives reflect a mix of outcomes
relating to the amount of renewable energy production versus the extent
of effects on covered species, for which there is no single metric of
environmental preference.
EPA's Role in the EIS Process
The EPA is charged with reviewing all Federal agencies' EISs.
Therefore, EPA is publishing a notice in the Federal Register
announcing this EIS, as required under section 309 of the Clean Air Act
(42 U.S.C. 7401). EPA's notices are published on Fridays. EPA serves as
the repository (EIS database) for EISs prepared by Federal agencies.
All EISs must be filed with EPA. You may search for EPA comments on
EISs, along with EISs themselves, at https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.
Public Involvement
The Service published a notice of intent (NOI) to prepare a draft
EIS in the Federal Register on May 3, 2018 (83 FR 19569). The NOI also
announced a public scoping period (May 3, 2018, through June 4, 2018),
during which we invited interested parties to provide written comments
related to the proposal. Two public scoping meetings were held, in
Lacey, Washington, on May 8, 2018, and in Centralia, Washington, on May
10, 2018, in accordance with NEPA procedures (40 CFR 1501.7). Using
public scoping comments, we prepared a draft EIS to analyze the effects
of the alternatives on the human environment. The Service published a
notice of availability (NOA) of the draft EIS in the Federal Register
on November 30, 2018 (83 FR 61664), opening a 45-day public comment
period. The Service also posted the Federal Register NOA, notice of
public scoping meeting, draft HCP, draft EIS, and a news release at
http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/. Two public open-house meetings were held, on
December 5, 2018, in Chehalis, Washington, and on December 10, 2018, in
Lacey, Washington, to solicit additional input from the public on the
draft EIS and draft HCP. A total of 17 comment letters and electronic
submissions were received from the public. The official comment period
ended on January 14, 2019.
Next Steps
We will evaluate the permit application, associated documents, and
public comments in reaching a final decision on whether the application
meets the requirements of section 10(a) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.). We will evaluate whether the proposed permit action would comply
with section 7 of the ESA by conducting an intra-Service section 7
consultation. We will use the results of this consultation, in
combination with the above findings, in our final analysis to determine
whether or not to issue an ITP. If the requirements are met, we will
issue the ITP to the applicant. We will issue a record of decision and
issue or deny the ITP no sooner than 30 days after publication of the
EPA's NOA of the final EIS in the Federal Register.
Public Review
We are not requesting public comments on the final EIS and HCP, but
any written comments we receive will become part of the public record
associated with this action. Before including your address, phone
number, email address, or other personal identifying information in
your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment--including
your personal identifying information--may be made publicly available
at any time. While you can request in your comment that we withhold
your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or
businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their
entirety.
[[Page 25302]]
Authority
We provide this notice in accordance with the requirements of
section 10(c) of the ESA and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 17.22
and 17.32) and NEPA and its implementing regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).
Dated: May 8, 2019.
Robyn Thorson,
Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-11393 Filed 5-30-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P