83074 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices 

(3) You can file a paper copy of your 

comments by mailing them to the 

Commission. Be sure to reference the 

project docket number (CP20–503–000) 

on your letter. Submissions sent via the 

U.S. Postal Service must be addressed 

to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, 

DC 20426. Submissions sent via any 

other carrier must be addressed to: 

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 

Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 

20852. 

Filing environmental comments will 

not give you intervenor status, but you 

do not need intervenor status to have 

your comments considered. Only 

intervenors have the right to seek 

rehearing or judicial review of the 

Commission’s decision. At this point in 

this proceeding, the timeframe for filing 

timely intervention requests has 

expired. Any person seeking to become 

a party to the proceeding must file a 

motion to intervene out-of-time 

pursuant to Rule 214(b)(3) and (d) of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedures (18 CFR 385.214(b)(3) and 

(d)) and show good cause why the time 

limitation should be waived. Motions to 

intervene are more fully described at 

https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/ferconline/how-guides. 

Additional information about the 

project is available from the 

Commission’s Office of External Affairs, 

at (866) 208–FERC, or on the FERC 

website (www.ferc.gov) using the 

eLibrary link. The eLibrary link also 

provides access to the texts of all formal 

documents issued by the Commission, 

such as orders, notices, and 

rulemakings. 

In addition, the Commission offers a 

free service called eSubscription which 

allows you to keep track of all formal 

issuances and submittals in specific 

dockets. This can reduce the amount of 

time you spend researching proceedings 

by automatically providing you with 

notification of these filings, document 

summaries, and direct links to the 

documents. Go to https://www.ferc.gov/ 

ferc-online/overview to register for 

eSubscription. 

Dated: December 15, 2020. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2020–28095 Filed 12–18–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Western Area Power Administration 

Reauthorization of Permits, 

Maintenance, and Vegetation 

Management on Western Area Power 

Administration Transmission Lines on 

National Forest System Lands, 

Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah (DOE/ 

EIS–0442) 

AGENCY: Western Area Power 

Administration, DOE. 

ACTION: Record of decision. 

SUMMARY: The Western Area Power 

Administration (WAPA) has determined 

that it will implement the proposed 

action, or Project, as described in the 

Reauthorization of Maintenance and 

Vegetation Management on Western 

Area Power Administration 

Transmission Lines on Forest Service 

Lands, Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah 

final environmental impact statement 

(Final EIS) (DOE/EIS–0442). The 

proposed action includes changing 

WAPA’s vegetation management and 

facility maintenance practices in some 

rights-of-way (ROWs) along 

approximately 273 miles of electrical 

transmission lines on National Forest 

System (NFS) lands in Colorado, 

Nebraska, and Utah. The U.S. Forest 

Service (USFS) was a joint lead agency 

on the EIS and proposes to authorize the 

changes through new Special Use 

Permits (SUPs) and Operations and 

Maintenance (O&M) Plans. This Record 

of Decision (ROD) was prepared in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA), Council on Environmental 

Quality (CEQ) regulations for 

implementing NEPA, and U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) NEPA 

regulations. 

DATES: The ROD was effective when it 

was signed by WAPA’s Administrator 

on December 8, 2020. All known 

interested parties, agencies, tribes, and 

the public will be notified of this ROD 

directly via the Project mailing list and 

via paid advertising, news releases, or 

other appropriate means. 

ADDRESSES: The Final EIS, this ROD, 

and other Project documents are 

available on the Project website at 

https://www.wapa.gov/transmission/ 

EnvironmentalReviewNEPA/Pages/ 

vegetation-management.aspx. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information on the Project, 

the EIS process or this ROD, please 

contact Ms. E. Lynn Burkett at 

Headquarters A9400, Western Area 

Power Administration, P.O. Box 281213, 

Lakewood, CO 80228–8213, email 

burkett@wapa.gov, telephone (720) 962– 

7000. For general information on the 

DOE NEPA review process, please 

contact Brian Costner, Office of NEPA 

Policy and Compliance, GC–54, U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20585–0119, email AskNEPA@

hq.doe.gov, telephone (202) 586–4600 or 

(800) 472–2756, facsimile (202) 586– 

7031. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: WAPA is 

a Federal power marketing 

administration within DOE that markets 

and delivers Federal wholesale electric 

power (principally hydroelectric power) 

to municipalities, rural electric 

cooperatives, public utilities, irrigation 

districts, Federal and State agencies, 

Native American tribes, and other 

wholesale customers in 15 western and 

central States. WAPA’s Rocky Mountain 

Customer Service Region (RM) operates 

in Arizona, Colorado, most of Wyoming, 

and portions of Kansas, Nebraska, New 

Mexico, and Utah. 

Background 

On August 10, 1996, during a period 

of high temperatures and high 

electricity demand, a transmission line 

sagged into filbert trees near Portland, 

Oregon, leading to a cascade of power 

outages as far away as southern 

California. Executive Order 13212, 

Actions To Expedite Energy-Related 

Projects (May 18, 2001), declared the 

increased production and transmission 

of energy in a safe and environmentally 

sound manner to be essential to the 

well-being of the American people and 

called for the improvement and 

streamlining of cooperation among 

Federal agencies to expedite projects 

that would increase the production, 

transmission, or conservation of energy. 

In August 2003, the cascading results of 

another equipment failure led to an 

enormous power outage in the Northeast 

and Midwest, affecting approximately 

45 million people in the United States 

and 10 million people in Ontario, 

Canada. The U.S.-Canada Power System 

Outage Task Force found that, again, 

transmission line sag into overgrown 

trees in rural Ohio sparked the outage. 

In response to these outages, Congress 

added, as part of the Energy Policy Act 

of 2005 (Pub. L. 109–58), a new section 

215 to the Federal Power Act. Among 

other things, the new section 215 

authorized the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (FERC) to 

certify an ‘‘Electric Reliability 

Organization’’ to create mandatory and 

enforceable reliability standards, subject 

to FERC review and approval. FERC 

certified the North American Electric 

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices 83075 

1Mandatory Reliability Standards for the BulkPower System, Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218, 

order on reh’g, Order No. 693–A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053 

(2007). 2Letter Order Approving Reliability Standard 

FAC–003–4, FERC Docket No. RD16–4–000 (Apr. 

26, 2016). 

Reliability Corporation (NERC) as the 

Electric Reliability Organization. The 

Energy Policy Act of 2005 also requires 

Federal agencies to expedite approvals 

to allow owners or operators of 

transmission facilities access to the 

facilities to comply with applicable 

standards, including vegetation 

management standards. 

FERC approved NERC’s original 

Reliability Standard, FAC–003–1, 

‘‘Transmission Vegetation Management 

Program’’ (NERC Standard) on March 

16, 2007,1 and the standard became 

mandatory and enforceable on June 18, 

2007. The most recent version of the 

NERC Standard is FAC–003–4, 

‘‘Transmission Vegetation 

Management.’’ The revised standard 

was approved on April 26, 2016,2 and 

became mandatory and enforceable on 

October 1, 2016. 

To enhance WAPA’s compliance with 

NERC’s Transmission Vegetation 

Management Reliability Standard, 

industry standards, and WAPA’s policy 

and guidance, WAPA proposes to 

improve the way it manages vegetation 

along its ROWs on NFS lands in 

Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah. WAPA 

owns, operates, and maintains 

approximately 273 miles of 

transmission line ROWs on NFS lands 

in Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah. 

Specifically, the Project includes WAPA 

RM transmission facilities and access 

routes located on NFS lands managed 

by seven National Forests in the Rocky 

Mountain Region (Region 2) and one 

National Forest in the Intermountain 

Region (Region 4). These National 

Forests and Grasslands include the 

Arapahoe—Roosevelt; Ashley; Grand 

Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison; 

Medicine Bow—Routt; Pike—San Isabel; 

Samuel R. McKelvie; San Juan; and 

White River. 

Purpose and Need for Agency Action 

WAPA needs to improve the way it 

manages vegetation along its 273 miles 

of transmission line ROWs on NFS 

lands with the following purposes and 

objectives: 

1. To ensure that WAPA can safely 

and reliably operate and maintain its 

existing electrical transmission facilities 

to deliver electrical power. 

2. To further WAPA’s compliance 

with NERC’s Transmission Vegetation 

Management Reliability Standards, 

industry standards, and WAPA’s policy 

and guidance. 

3. To ensure that WAPA’s 

transmission facilities remain 

operational for the useful life of the 

facilities. 

4. To protect public and worker 

safety. 

5. To reduce the risk of wildfires 

caused by transmission lines and the 

risk to the facilities from fire. 

6. To control the spread of noxious 

weeds. 

7. To maintain sound relationships 

with landowners and land managers. 

8. To ensure that WAPA has access to 

its transmission facilities for 

maintenance and emergency response. 

9. To ensure that the costs associated 

with maintaining the transmission 

system can be controlled following 

sound business principles, including 

achieving technical and economic 

efficiencies to minimize impacts on 

transmission line tariff costs and 

electrical power rates. 

10. To allow flexibility to 

accommodate changes in transmission 

system operation and maintenance 

requirements. 

11. To minimize impacts to 

environmental resources. 

WAPA’s Proposed Action—Proposed 

Project 

WAPA proposes to change the way it 

manages vegetation in the ROWs for the 

transmission lines it owns, operates, or 

maintains. The proposed action would 

require the USFS to re-authorize and 

issue SUPs for each transmission line 

and authorize WAPA to manage 

vegetation along WAPA ROWs on NFS 

lands using an integrated vegetation 

management (IVM) approach, for which 

WAPA would develop new O&M Plans. 

This approach is based on the American 

National Standard Institute Tree, Shrub 

and Other Woody Plant Maintenance— 

Standard Practices (Integrated 

Vegetation Management, a. Electric 

Utility ROW (ANSI A300 (Part 7)–2006 

IVM)). WAPA would control vegetation 

growth and fuel conditions that threaten 

transmission lines. The proposed action 

would balance the purpose of and need 

for agency action with the need to 

comply with environmental regulations 

and USFS requirements, address 

potential impacts to environmental 

resources, and incorporate public and 

agency comments. It incorporates the 

design features developed to protect 

environmental resources. It is important 

to note that vegetation management and 

maintenance of WAPA’s transmission 

facilities has been ongoing for many 

years, so the proposed action merely 

makes these routine activities more 

proactive under the IVM approach. 

The vegetation management proposal 

includes an initial treatment plan for 

areas that have been identified for 

treatment. The initial treatment would 

affect approximately 1,610 acres of the 

approximately 4,055 acres of 

transmission line ROWs on NFS lands. 

In the EIS, WAPA identified six broad 

categories of existing conditions in the 

ROWs. The condition of the vegetation 

in the ROW determines whether the 

ROW would need to be treated soon, 

needs treatment over the longer term, or 

is unlikely to need treatment for some 

time. WAPA routinely monitors ROWs 

to determine vegetation conditions. The 

proposed action includes vegetation 

management options based on the 

conditions in the ROWs. Table ES–1 

summarizes the six categories of ROW 

conditions and vegetation management. 

83076 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices 

TABLE ES–1—CATEGORIES OF RIGHT-OF-WAY CONDITIONS AND VEGETATION TREATMENT METHODS

Category Vegetation Examples Frequency of treatment Treatment methods 

1 ................... Compatible with the transmission line.The lines span canyons and 

there will likely always be 

adequate clearance between vegetation and the 

transmission line conductors—even with larger mature trees; a vegetation 

community that is already a 

stable, low-growth one 

(e.g., grasses, forbs, 

bushes, and shrubs) so that 

vegetation at mature height 

is not a threat to the transmission line.

None expected for the duration of the authorization, but 

ROW monitoring will be 

needed to ensure conditions have not changed. 

None expected. 

2 ................... Fast-growing incompatible 

species that are presently 

not acceptable, and over 

the long term, the vegetation is likely to include incompatible vegetation types 

that would require monitoring and treatment.

Mature lodgepole pine, mature aspen, and other species on high-quality growth 

sites.

• Initial treatment expected 

within 1 to 5 years. 

• Maintenance treatments are 

expected to be relatively 

frequent (expected 2- to 6- 

year return intervals). 

• Accessible sites would favor 

use of mechanized equipment and removal of salvageable material. 

• Inaccessible sites would 

favor use of hand felling. 

3 ................... Fast-growing incompatible 

species of trees that are in 

an acceptable condition, but 

over the long term, incompatible vegetation treatments would be needed.

Immature lodgepole pine and 

aspen. Other species on 

high-quality growth sites.

• Maintenance treatments are 

expected to be relatively 

frequent (expected 2- to 6- 

year return intervals, but 

this will vary depending on 

site conditions). 

• Accessible sites would favor 

mechanized equipment, 

with removal of salvageable 

material. 

• Inaccessible sites would 

favor use of hand felling. 

4 ................... Slow-growing incompatible 

species of mature vegetation that is not acceptable, 

and over the long term, 

treatments for incompatible 

vegetation would be needed 

to control re-growth.

Mature spruce and fir. Other 

species on harsh sites.

• Initial treatment is expected 

within 2 to 5 years, depending on site conditions and 

vegetation growth. 

• Maintenance treatments are 

expected to be relatively infrequent on sites with incompatible species with 

slow growth rates, perhaps 

5 or more years, depending 

on site conditions. 

• On sites with good access, 

mechanized equipment 

would be favored, and salvageable material would be 

removed. 

• On sites with poor access, 

hand felling and other manual methods would typically 

be used. 

5 ................... These sites have slow-growing incompatible species, 

and the ROW is in an acceptable condition; but over 

the long term, the incompatible species would need to 

be monitored and treated.

Immature spruce and fir. 

Other incompatible species 

on harsh sites.

• Maintenance treatments are 

expected to be relatively infrequent, perhaps 5 years 

or longer, depending on site 

conditions. 

• On sites with good access, 

mechanized equipment 

would be favored, and salvageable material would be 

removed. 

• On sites with poor access, 

hand felling and other manual methods would typically 

be used. 

6 ................... Treatments in these areas of 

ROW are driven largely by 

the conditions of the fuel 

load. Typically, they include 

areas with low-growing 

vegetation types characterized by having high fuel 

loads. Sites are characterized by dense, woody vegetation capable of high-intensity fire, with transmission 

lines having relatively low 

conductor-to-ground clearances.

Sagebrush, Gambel oak, 

dense lodgepole regeneration, and pinyon and juniper 

pine.

• Initial treatments are expected. This could include 

mechanical removal of 

vegetation near structures 

and from areas of the 

ROW. 

• Maintenance treatments as 

needed. Need is determined from ROW monitoring. 

• In areas with good access, 

mechanized treatment such 

as mowing would be favored. 

• In areas with poor access, 

manual treatments would 

typically be used. 

• Gambel oak could be treated with herbicides. 

These areas are proposed for 

mechanical treatment to remove 

incompatible tall-growth species, while 

addressing a buildup of fuels from 

several decades of previous vegetation 

management activities. Treatments 

could include logging, chipping, and 

grinding of trees and existing debris 

using mechanized equipment and other 

activities developed in coordination 

with the USFS. Following completion of 

the initial treatment in an area, the ROW 

would be maintained in a desired 

condition that is generally defined by a 

lack of incompatible vegetation species. 

The desired condition depends on the 

ROW conditions and incorporates 

design features that protect sensitive 

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 245 / Monday, December 21, 2020 / Notices 83077 

resources. As a joint-lead agency, and in 

support of WAPA’s proposed action, the 

USFS would re-authorize and issue 

SUPs for each transmission line and 

authorize WAPA to manage vegetation 

and conduct maintenance activities 

along WAPA ROWs on NFS lands. The 

USFS would permit these activities 

through new SUPs and O&M Plans. 

Each specific WAPA vegetation 

management or maintenance activity 

would be assessed by the USFS prior to 

initiation using a process defined in 

O&M Plans developed in conjunction 

with the SUPs. 

Alternatives 

WAPA and the USFS evaluated a no 

action alternative that would leave the 

existing WAPA vegetation management 

and maintenance activities in place 

under the existing USFS permits and 

O&M Plans. This alternative would not 

meet WAPA’s purpose and need or the 

objectives given above. The 

environmentally-preferred and agencypreferred alternative is the proposed 

action. While initial treatment activities 

would cause higher impacts than no 

action, over the long term, after the 

desired conditions are achieved, the 

wildfire hazard would be much reduced 

and vegetation management activities 

would be less intensive and less 

frequent. Overall, resource impacts 

would be substantially lower compared 

with no action. All practicable means of 

avoiding or minimizing environmental 

impacts have been incorporated into the 

proposed action and its related standard 

maintenance practices, and specific 

additional resource protections may be 

included in the new SUPs, WAPA’s 

O&M Plans, and individual action 

reviews. 

WAPA and the USFS considered an 

option to remove all tall-growing trees 

from the ROWs to maximize 

transmission line reliability and 

minimize wildfire hazard. However, 

vegetation conditions and terrain vary, 

and not all areas require the same 

treatment efforts. Where conductor 

clearances allow, such as spanning a 

drainage, taller vegetation can be 

allowed to remain in the ROW. This 

approach is included in the proposed 

action, and reduces resource impacts, 

visual effects, wildlife habitat impacts, 

and vegetation management costs. 

Similarly, an option to prohibit the use 

of herbicides was considered. This 

option would reduce WAPA’s ability to 

control incompatible vegetation and 

noxious weeds efficiently and 

effectively. Herbicide use can be done in 

an environmentally responsible way 

with minimal impact. Selective proper 

use of herbicides would reduce the 

number of vegetation management 

cycles and associated environmental 

impacts and allow the ROWs to reach 

the desired conditions more quickly. 

Public Involvement 

The Notice of Intent (NOI) was 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 8, 2010, launching the scoping 

process that extended through May 26, 

2010. The NOI invited public 

participation in the EIS scoping process 

and solicited public comments on the 

scope and content of the EIS. WAPA 

and the USFS solicited comments from 

Federal, State, and local agencies; tribal 

governments; other organizations; and 

the public, and announced 

opportunities to comment in various 

local news media. Chapter Four of the 

Final EIS lists agencies, organizations, 

and people who received copies. 

In April 2010, WAPA and the USFS 

hosted three public scoping meetings in 

Denver and Grand Junction, Colorado, 

and Vernal, Utah, which provided the 

public an opportunity to comment and 

ask questions about the Project and EIS 

development. Before each public 

meeting, WAPA and the USFS held 

interagency scoping meetings. 

The Notice of Availability (NOA) for 

the Draft EIS was published in the 

Federal Register on September 27, 2013. 

One public meeting was held in Denver, 

Colorado, on October 23, 2013; there 

were no attendees. WAPA and the 

Forest Service received four comment 

letters; two of the letters expressed 

support for the Project. The U.S. 

Department of the Interior letter 

indicated no comments on the Project, 

and the Environmental Protection 

Agency letter indicated a rating of Lack 

of Objections (LO) for the Project. No 

comments were received from the 

general public or tribes. 

The USFS has a pre-decisional 

objection process that follows the 

release of certain environmental 

documents, in this case the Final EIS. 

The objection filing period was 45 days, 

and no objections were filed during that 

time. 

Decision 

Informed by the analyses and 

environmental impacts documented in 

the Final EIS and related consultations, 

WAPA has selected the proposed action 

identified in the Final EIS as its 

decision for the Project. The proposed 

action will be the basis for the 

preparation of revised SUPs and 

associated O&M Plans. 

This ROD was prepared in accordance 

with the requirements of the CEQ 

regulations for implementing NEPA (40 

CFR parts 1500–1508) and the DOE 

NEPA regulations (10 CFR part 1021). 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Department of 

Energy was signed on December 8, 2020, 

by Mark A. Gabriel, Administrator, 

Western Area Power Administration, 

pursuant to delegated authority from the 

Secretary of Energy. That document 

with the original signature and date is 

maintained by DOE. For administrative 

purposes only, and in compliance with 

requirements of the Office of the Federal 

Register, the undersigned DOE Federal 

Register Liaison Officer has been 

authorized to sign and submit the 

document in electronic format for 

publication, as an official document of 

the Department of Energy. This 

administrative process in no way alters 

the legal effect of this document upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on December 

15, 2020. 

Treena V. Garrett, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. 

Department of Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2020–28016 Filed 12–18–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[Region 4 Library; FRL–10017–91–Region 4] 

Notice of Library Changes 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Informational notice. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is issuing this notice to 

advise the public of upcoming changes 

to the Region 4 Library. Region 4 will 

be reducing the size of its library space, 

decreasing the amount of print materials 

maintained in its collection, and ceasing 

all on-site library support services. The 

library will retain a small, targeted 

collection of reference material on-site 

which will be accessible by 

appointment only to EPA staff and the 

public (For appointments, see contact 

information below). In addition, EPA 

staff and the public will continue to 

have remote access to the full suite of 

library services available at EPA through 

the Andrew W. Breidenbach 

Environmental Research Center 

(AWBERC) Library, located in 

Cincinnati, Ohio. The AWBERC Library 

can be reached by email (CI_AWBERC_

Library@epa.gov) or by phone (513– 

569–7703). For more information about 

the EPA National Library Network and