University of Nevada, Las Vegas 

Research Foundation 

SOLAR TECHNOLOGY CENTER 

January 2009 

Final Environmental Assessment 

and 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

DOE/EA-1622 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Golden Field Office 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

1617 Cole Boulevard 

Golden, Colorado 80401 
This Environmental Assessment was prepared on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy by the University of Nevada, Las 

Vegas Research Foundation with contractual assistance from Ninyo & Moore, Inc. and MBP Consulting, LLC. 
Finding of No Significant Impact Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 
Finding of No Significant Impact Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 
Finding of No Significant Impact Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 
Finding of No Significant Impact Solar Technology Center 

This page intentionally left blank.

January 2009 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................1 

1.2 National Environmental Policy Act .........................................................................................................1 

1.2 Purpose and Need.................................................................................................................................2 

1.3 Scoping..................................................................................................................................................2 

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES.....................................................................3 

2.1 Proposed Action (UNLV Research Foundation Proposed Project)........................................................3 

2.1.1 Location .................................................................................................................................3 

2.1.2 Field Station and Test Areas..................................................................................................3 

2.1.3 Operations .............................................................................................................................7 

2.1.4 Public Information Resource Center ......................................................................................7 

2.1.5 Environmental Protection Measures ......................................................................................7 

2.2 No Action Alternative .............................................................................................................................8 

2.3 Alternate Sites Considered and Eliminated............................................................................................8 

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ......................................................................9 

3.1 Land Use ...............................................................................................................................................9 

3.1.1 Existing Environment .............................................................................................................9 

3.1.2 Impacts of Proposed Action ...................................................................................................9 

3.2 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................11 

3.2.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................11 

3.2.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................12 

3.3 Biological Resources ...........................................................................................................................13 

3.3.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................13 

3.3.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................15 

3.4 Cultural Resources and Native American Concerns............................................................................17 

3.4.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................17 

3.4.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................18 

3.5 Geological Resources..........................................................................................................................18 

3.5.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................18 

3.5.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................19 

3.6 Noise ...................................................................................................................................................19 

3.6.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................20 

3.6.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................20 

3.7 Safety and Occupational Health ..........................................................................................................20 

3.7.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................20 

3.7.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................21 

3.8 Socioeconomic Factors .......................................................................................................................21 

3.8.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................21 

3.8.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................22 

3.9 Utilities and Transportation ..................................................................................................................22 

January 2009 i 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

3.9.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................22 

3.9.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................23 

3.10 Visual Quality.......................................................................................................................................24 

3.10.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................24 

3.10.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................24 

3.11 Waste Management and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................................25 

3.11.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................25 

3.11.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................25 

3.12 Water Resources.................................................................................................................................26 

3.12.1 Existing Environment ...........................................................................................................26 

3.12.2 Impacts of Proposed Action .................................................................................................26 

3.13 Intentional Destructive Acts .................................................................................................................27 

3.14 Environmental Consequences of the No Action Alternative.................................................................27 

4.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION................................................................................29 

5.0 COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES AND SHORT-TERM USES.......................................................................31 

6.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................................33 

TABLES 

Table 1. Desert Tortoise Sign Observed in the Survey Area....................................................................................14

Table 2. Estimated Desert Tortoise Density based on Corrected Sign per Acre ......................................................14

Table 3. Estimated Desert Tortoise Density in the Survey Area...............................................................................14

Table 4. Population and Income Demographics.......................................................................................................22

FIGURES 

Figure 1. Vicinity Map................................................................................................................................................ 4

Figure 2. Aerial Location ........................................................................................................................................... 5

Figure 3. Solar Technology Center Site Plan and Utilities Plan................................................................................. 6

Figure 4. Land Uses in Project Area ....................................................................................................................... 10 

 

APPENDICES 

APPENDIX A Scoping Letter and Distribution List 

APPENDIX B Scoping Response Letters 

APPENDIX C Draft EA Comment Letters and Responses 

 

January 2009 ii 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

ACRONYMS 

APE area of potential effect 

bgs below ground surface 

BLM Bureau of Land Management 

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality 

CER Center for Energy Research 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CO carbon monoxide 

DAQEM Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management 

dB decibel 

dBA A-weighted decibel 

DOE Department of Energy 

EA environmental assessment 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

°F degrees Fahrenheit 

GPS global positioning system 

Ldn day-night average sound level 

MSHCP Clark County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan 

MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act 

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

NAC Nevada Administrative Code 

NDEP Nevada Division of Environmental Protection 

NDOW Nevada Department of Wildlife 

NDSL Nevada Division of State Lands 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NOx nitrogen oxides 

NRHP National Register of Historic Places 

NRS Nevada Revised Statutes 

NSO Nevada Solar One 

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Act 

P.L. Public Law 

PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter 

PV photovoltaic 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

January 2009 iii 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office 

SIP State Implementation Plan 

STC Solar Technology Center 

SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan 

UNLV University of Nevada, Las Vegas 

UNLV-CER University of Nevada, Las Vegas Center for Energy Research 

U.S. United States 

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

VOCs volatile organic compounds 

ZOI zone-of-influence

January 2009 iv 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

The United States (U.S.) Congress provided funding in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2005 (Public Law 108-

447) to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for renewable energy resources, including the establishment of a Solar 

Technology Center (STC) at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV). The DOE is proposing to provide funding 

from this Appropriations Act to the UNLV Research Foundation to construct and operate the STC in collaboration with 

the UNLV Center for Energy Research (CER). The STC, hereinafter referred to as the Proposed Action, would 

operate for research and development, educational training, and as a center for renewable energy and conservation 

information. 

The UNLV Research Foundation is an affiliated foundation of UNLV whose mission is to support research projects 

and develop the university’s research and technology parks for scientific and financial growth. The Research 

Foundation manages select federal research grants and contracts for UNLV. The CER is affiliated with the College of 

Engineering at UNLV. The CER is a focus area for research, information exchange, and education in energy topics, 

including solar energy utilization schemes. The CER collaborates with people from a variety of disciplines and 

industries to work on specific energy issues and interests, and seeks funding sources for this work. 

1.2 National Environmental Policy Act 

The proposal to use federal funds for the STC is a federal action subject to the procedural requirements of the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S. Code 4321 et seq.). The Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) Parts 1500-1508) and DOE’s implementing procedures for compliance with NEPA (10 CFR Part 

1021.330 et seq.) require that DOE, as a federal agency: 

• assess the environmental impacts of its Proposed Action; 

• identify any adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided should the Proposed Action be 

implemented; 

• evaluate alternatives to the Proposed Action, including a No Action Alternative; 

• describe the relationship between local short-term uses of the environment and the maintenance and 

enhancement of long-term productivity; and 

• characterize any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that would be involved should 

the Proposed Action be implemented. 

These requirements must be met before a final decision is made to proceed with any proposed federal action that 

could cause significant impacts to human health or the environment. This Environmental Assessment (EA) meets 

DOE’s regulatory requirements under NEPA and provides the necessary information for DOE and other state and 

federal agencies to make informed decisions regarding the construction and operation of the proposed STC. 

This EA evaluates the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the Proposed Action. For purposes of 

comparison, this EA also evaluates the impacts that would occur if DOE did not provide funding and the STC is not 

constructed (the No Action Alternative). There are no other alternatives analyzed in detail, but alternate sites that 

were considered for the proposed STC location and eliminated from further analysis are briefly discussed. 

This draft EA will be available to interested members of the public and to federal, state, and local agencies for review 

and comment prior to DOE’s final decision on the Proposed Action. 

January 2009 1 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

1.2 Purpose and Need 

The DOE’s Proposed Action is to provide up to $744,059 of financial assistance to the UNLV Research Foundation in 

support of the construction and operation of the STC. The Proposed Action would support DOE’s mission to reduce 

dependency on fossil fuels. By providing financial assistance to support this project, DOE would support national 

energy needs and the development of alternative fuel sources. 

Continued research and testing is needed to develop and advance different solar technologies for cost-effective use 

by the industry in different geographic and environmental settings. The purpose for the STC is to operate as a 

research and educational facility to assist industry with these challenges in developing efficient and reliable renewable 

energy technologies. 

The CER is located on the main campus of UNLV. The ability to construct and test different solar technologies is 

limited by the amount of available land area, classroom space, and unobstructed sunlight. The proposed STC would 

provide the additional area needed to expand the CER and attract prospective industry partners for research 

opportunities. 

1.3 Scoping 

Scoping is the process of identifying alternatives to the Proposed Action and determining the scope of environmental 

issues to be addressed in the EA. Federal, state, and local agencies, tribal government representatives, elected 

officials, businesses, and organizations and special interest groups were notified of the Proposed Action in May 2008. 

The DOE mailed postcards directing the recipients to DOE’s public reading room website to read a scoping letter that 

described the Proposed Action and requested assistance in identifying potential issues that should be evaluated in 

this EA. The scoping letter with project location maps and the distribution list of recipients are included in Appendix A. 

Comments in response to the scoping letter were received from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and from 

the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW), Nevada Division of State Lands (NDSL), and Nevada State Historic 

Preservation Office (SHPO) via the Nevada State Clearinghouse. Copies of these response letters are included in 

Appendix B. 

The comments from USFWS and NDOW pertained to federal and state protected wildlife and migratory birds that 

potentially use the project area and provided impact minimization measures. The NDOW also expressed concern of 

solution chemistry if evaporative or cooling ponds would be part of the project, and provided requirements to 

authorize biological monitors to survey for and remove state protected wildlife from the project site. The USFWS was 

also concerned about the source and amount of water that would be needed for operation and maintenance of solar 

panels, and the potential spread of non-native plants from construction activities. The NDSL was concerned about 

cumulative visual impacts to users of adjacent public lands and provided suggestions for lighting and building 

materials and colors that are compatible with the surrounding natural environment. The SHPO indicated support for 

the project as written. 

January 2009 2 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 

The DOE proposes to provide financial assistance to the UNLV Research Foundation to support construction and 

initial operation of the STC in collaboration with the UNLV-CER. This section describes general and site-specific 

activities that would occur if the STC was constructed as planned (i.e., Proposed Action) and if it was not constructed 

(i.e., No Action Alternative). 

2.1 Proposed Action (UNLV Research Foundation Proposed Project) 

The UNLV Research Foundation proposes to use DOE funding to establish the STC where existing and new solar 

technologies and prototypes would be researched, developed, and tested for the renewable energy industry. 

2.1.1 Location 

The proposed STC would be constructed on land leased from the City of Boulder City, Nevada. The site is located 

approximately 15 miles southwest of Boulder City in the Eldorado Valley (see Figure 1). The triangular shaped site 

covers about 33 acres on the north side of Eldorado Valley Drive approximately 1.5 miles west of U.S. Highway 95 

(see Figure 2). The site is located in Section 5, Township 25 South, Range 63 East, Mount Diablo Baseline and 

Meridian in Clark County. 

2.1.2 Field Station and Test Areas 

The proposed STC would include a field station with a parking lot and two test areas. Grading, construction, and 

development of the STC would encompass an area of less than 10 acres, or slightly less than one-third of the entire 

site. The Nevada Solar One (NSO) concentrating solar power plant operated by Acciona Energy forms the west 

border of the site, and an underground natural gas pipeline owned by Southwest Gas Corporation and a dirt road 

parallels the east border. The site plan for the proposed STC is shown on Figure 3. 

The field station would be a modular building of approximately 1,500 square feet of classroom and work space, 

research laboratory, reception area, storage area, and washroom facilities. The reception area would include space 

for educational information such as posters and brochures on alternative energy technologies and information on the 

various research projects. The field station would be constructed according to local building codes. The foundation 

and building for the field station would require a seismic site class determination according to the International 

Building Code and in accordance with the City of Boulder City building code. 

The outside test areas could include photovoltaic (PV) panels, parabolic trough collectors, and solar dishes. Based 

on the type of technology that would be installed and tested, the outside test areas may be graded and concrete 

footings or pads may be installed, as needed. The lifetime of the installation would depend on the type of technology 

being tested and the tests agreed to between UNLV-CER and the industry partner. Currently the only plan is for 

installation of the building. Other disturbances may take place as business develops but would occur within the STC 

footprint. The site is expected to be dynamic, with UNLV-CER and industry partnering to evaluate new technologies 

as they become available. 

The STC would be enclosed by an eight-foot chain-link fence. Approximately 1,800 linear feet of fence would be 

constructed inside the site boundaries and would tie into the existing NSO power plant fence on the west side. 

Utilities that would be installed for the STC include a septic system and drain (leach) field, water, and 

telecommunications (see Figure 3). The UNLV Research Foundation is coordinating with Acciona Energy for access 

to a fiber optic conduit for telecommunications. Approximately 325 feet of fiber would be installed from the

January 2009 3 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Figure 1. Vicinity Map 

January 2009 4 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Figure 2. Aerial Location of Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 5 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Figure 3. Solar Technology Center Site Plan and Utilities Plan 

January 2009 6 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

southwest corner of the site to the field station. A temporary diesel-fueled generator (approximately 20 kilowatts) 

would be used until power is produced at the site. Approximately 400 feet of waterlines would be installed from the 

Boulder City main line located along Eldorado Valley Drive on the south edge of the site to the field station and to a 

fire hydrant. The UNLV Research Foundation would be responsible for obtaining an excavation permit from the City 

of Boulder City and installing all utilities. 

2.1.3 Operations 

The UNLV-CER would manage the tasks for each research project at the STC and ensure that project objectives are 

met and public services are continued. The UNLV-CER focuses on renewable energy research and collaborates with 

energy industry partners in developing solar energy technologies including concentrating PV and thermal 

technologies. The CER anticipates researching and testing the following technologies at the STC: concentrating 

solar power, concentrating PV point focus and linear arrays, flat plate PV, energy storage, and tracking and control 

systems. The STC would also be used to conduct research on new energy efficient and post-consumer products for 

use in residential and commercial construction, as well as different types of energy conserving technologies (i.e., 

insulations, surface coatings, textures, roofing, appliances, and windows). 

University students would have opportunities to receive hands-on experience and work with industry partners in 

conducting research and in developing renewable energy technologies. At least one student would participate in 

each research project. The research laboratory would allow students to meet with visitors and provide them 

information on emerging technologies, receive advice on renewable energy applications, monitor and maintain 

renewable energy equipment, and work with companies on development of new technologies. 

The STC would be occupied as needed for the different research projects; therefore, there would not be set hours of 

operation. Signage would be posted around the facility providing information on research work being installed or 

conducted. 

Acciona Energy is one candidate organization that may test and evaluate solar equipment at the STC. Other 

companies in the solar industry would be contacted by the UNLV Research Foundation and UNLV-CER regarding 

use of the STC for testing and evaluation of equipment and technologies. 

2.1.4 Public Information Resource Center 

The proposed STC would serve the public by being a local resource center for renewable energy and conservation 

information. Visitors would be able to tour the STC to receive general information regarding ongoing research and 

testing projects, and additional information would be provided in print and electronic media about commercial 

technologies currently available to the general public. Contact information for the STC would be posted at the site 

and on a website that would be created for the STC. Tours of the STC would be scheduled by appointment. 

2.1.5 Environmental Protection Measures 

Measures will be incorporated into the construction and operation of the STC to minimize or avoid potential impacts to 

the surrounding environment and to safeguard the health and safety of construction workers, employees, students, 

and the public. The UNLV Research Foundation and the UNLV-CER will be responsible for incorporating appropriate 

measures into construction bid documents and implementing measures in operational practices at the STC. These 

measures include: 

• Obtain a dust control permit from the Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental 

Management and implement control measures to reduce fugitive dust such as watering the site or applying 

soil stabilizers and installing a construction entrance with track-out control devices. 

January 2009 7 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

• Stabilize disturbed land surfaces with pavement, ground cover (i.e., rock or mulch), or landscaping after 

construction is completed to minimize fugitive dust, soil erosion, and runoff. 

• Pay mitigation fees based on the number of ground surface acres disturbed to fund management actions 

that benefit the desert tortoise. 

• Implement a construction worker awareness program on protocols to follow if the state protected Gila 

monster or federal protected desert tortoise is encountered on the site during construction. 

• Conduct a survey of the site by a qualified biologist to confirm the absence of bird nests and nesting activity 

if clearing and grading activities are scheduled to occur during breeding season (generally mid-March 

through mid-August). Prohibit construction around active nests (containing eggs or young) until they are no 

longer active or the young birds have fledged. 

• Use solid fence posts or post caps, and fill any holes in the posts with rivets or nuts and bolts to prevent 

injury to migratory birds that may perch on the fence. 

• Eradicate any invasive weed species that take root on disturbed ground surfaces during construction and 

before ground cover is installed. Construction equipment will be cleaned of potential sources of invasive and 

noxious weed seeds prior to use at the site. 

• Cease work and contact a qualified archaeologist and DOE if unexpected cultural deposits are discovered 

during construction. Take appropriate measures to identify and treat the resource after DOE consults with 

the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer. 

• Wear personal protective equipment required by occupational safety and health regulations, including 

hearing protection while operating construction equipment. Train students and employees in the UNLV Risk 

Management and Safety Program. Request public visitors to adhere to the safety program and practices 

established for the STC while on site. 

• Obtain a construction storm water general permit and prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution 

Prevention Plan. Follow best management practices such as installing silt fences, straw bales, or sand bags 

for temporary erosion and sediment controls to minimize runoff from the site during construction. 

• Select building materials and colors that are compatible with the natural environment and select security 

lighting that illuminates downward. Use native vegetation in any landscaping around the STC. 

2.2 No Action Alternative 

A No Action Alternative is considered in the EA and provides a benchmark enabling decision-makers to compare the 

magnitude of environmental effects of the alternatives (including the Proposed Action). Under the No Action 

Alternative, DOE would not provide funding and the STC would not be constructed on the site leased from Boulder 

City. 

While it is possible that the STC could be built and operated without DOE financial assistance, that scenario would 

not provide for a meaningful No Action Alternative analysis, as it would be identical to the Proposed Action. For 

purposes of this EA, the No Action Alternative is evaluated as if the proposed STC were not built and operated. 

2.3 Alternate Sites Considered and Eliminated 

Two alternate locations were originally considered for development of the proposed STC but have since been 

eliminated from further consideration. The UNLV Research Foundation initially considered 360 acres to the south of 

Eldorado Valley Drive. This site was rejected by the City of Boulder City because the City wanted this land available 

for future energy development that would provide a revenue source. A parcel of 40 acres on the west side of the 

NSO power plant was also considered. However, Acciona Energy requested this land remain open for possible future 

expansion of the NSO power plant. For these reasons, these alternate locations have been eliminated from further 

discussion and evaluation as potential alternatives for the proposed STC site. 

January 2009 8 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 

The following sections describe the existing environment in the project area, which is defined as the location 

proposed for the STC and the surrounding area that would likely be affected if the Proposed Action is implemented. 

The existing environmental conditions serve as a baseline from which to identify and evaluate potential environmental 

changes attributable to the Proposed Action and No Action Alternative. The potential direct and indirect, adverse and 

beneficial, and long-term and short-term impacts of the propose action are evaluated by resource and compared to 

the environmental consequences of the No Action Alternative. 

3.1 Land Use 

Land use is described by land ownership and the governing entities’ management plans and zoning that define land 

use types and regulate development patterns. 

3.1.1 Existing Environment 

Boulder City began as a construction camp in 1930 for the workers building Hoover Dam and remained a government 

town until the passage of the Boulder City Act and formal incorporation as an independent municipal government in 

1960. The U.S. Congress passed Public Law (P.L.) 85-339 in 1958 to provide for the direct sale of 126,775 acres of 

public land in the Eldorado Valley in Clark County, Nevada to the Colorado River Commission acting on behalf of the 

State of Nevada. The Colorado River Commission purchased 107,412 acres in 1995 from the U.S. Department of 

Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and subsequently sold it to the City of Boulder City. This area is referred 

to as the Eldorado Valley Transfer Area and extended the City’s corporate limits significantly to the south and west. 

The sale of the Eldorado Valley Transfer Area by the BLM was subject to specific land uses, including approximately 

3,000 acres for solar energy development, approximately 6,000 acres for recreation use, and the remaining for 

conservation of the desert tortoise (BLM, 1994). 

The proposed STC site is owned by the City of Boulder City and is part of Clark County Assessor’s parcel number 

213-00-001-002. The Boulder City Comprehensive Master Plan has this parcel zoned “ER” for Energy Resource 

Zone. According to the zoning ordinance for Boulder City, a permitted use for this zone is the development of private 

and/or public solar electric generation facilities, electrical transmission and distribution facilities, ancillary facilities, and 

other similar uses (Boulder City, 1997). The City currently has 3,040 acres zoned for energy development land use in 

the Eldorado Valley Transfer Area, of which less than 500 acres has been developed and the rest is open desert. 

Land adjacent to the Energy Resource Zone is zoned “GO” for Government. The permitted use for this zone is public 

or quasi-public uses and preservation of open space real property (Boulder City, 1988). The City granted an 

easement to Clark County for this land, consisting of approximately 85,000 acres, as a condition of the sale by the 

BLM. The Desert Conservation Program manages the easement for the preservation and protection of the desert 

tortoise and its habitat. 

The proposed STC site is undisturbed, vacant land located in the Eldorado Valley Transfer Area on the land zoned for 

energy development. Land uses and zoning designations are shown on Figure 4. 

3.1.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

The purpose for the STC is to conduct research and testing of new and emerging solar energy technologies, and 

therefore, operation of the STC would be compatible with the zoning designation of the land on which it is proposed to 

be constructed. The City of Boulder City has zoned and dedicated the use of this land for energy development. 

January 2009 9 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Figure 4. Land Uses in the Project Area 

January 2009 10 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Construction of the STC would convert approximately 10 acres of open desert land to developed facilities. The 

facilities would be planned, designed, and constructed in compliance with the Boulder City Comprehensive Master 

Plan and appropriate city codes. The STC in its proposed location would not conflict with other adjacent land uses or 

zoning designations. 

3.2 Air Quality 

Air quality is characterized by the existing concentrations of various pollutants and the climatic and meteorological 

conditions that influence the quality of the air. Precipitation, wind direction and speed, and atmospheric stability are 

factors that determine the extent of pollutant dispersion. 

3.2.1 Existing Environment 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 

for criteria pollutants, which are those compounds that cause or contribute to air pollution which could endanger 

public health and the environment. These pollutants may directly or indirectly originate from diverse mobile and 

stationary sources. The criteria pollutants include carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, lead, 

ozone, particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in 

diameter. While ozone is a regulated pollutant, it is not emitted directly from sources but is formed by a combination 

of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) reacting with sunlight in the atmosphere. 

Air quality is determined by comparing ambient air levels with the upper concentration limits of the NAAQS for each 

criteria pollutant. Geographic areas that exceed NAAQS are designated as non-attainment for the specific pollutant 

that is in violation of the standard, whereas areas that meet NAAQS are designated as being in attainment for the 

criteria pollutant. An area designated as unclassified is assumed to be in attainment. 

In Nevada, the geographic areas (airsheds) for air quality compliance are defined as hydrographic areas. The 

proposed STC is located in the Eldorado Valley which is hydrographic area 167. This airshed is designated as nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone standard and unclassified or attainment for the other criteria pollutants (40 CFR § 

81.329). However, the Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management (DAQEM) has 

designated the Eldorado Valley airshed as a “management area” for CO, PM10, NOx, and VOCs (Clark County, 2004). 

This designation is a preemptive measure to address an area that has a high probability of causing a non-attainment 

designation or causing an exceedence of the NAAQS. The DAQEM submitted the 8-Hour Ozone Early Progress Plan 

for Clark County, Nevada (Clark County, 2008a) establishing steps to reach attainment status. 

There is no air quality monitoring station within the project area. The nearest station, which monitors ozone and 

PM10, is located over 15 miles to the northeast in Boulder City. Sources of air pollutants in the project area include 

the El Dorado Energy power plant, NSO power plant, windblown dust from disturbed ground surfaces, fugitive dust 

from off-road vehicle use, and emissions from vehicles traveling on Eldorado Valley Drive and U.S. Highway 95. 

The climate for the project area is typical of the Mojave Desert – hot summers, mild winters, and very little rain. 

Temperatures usually exceed 100 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) in the summer with the humidity normally less than 10 

percent. Winters are typically mild with average highs near 60°F. The sky is sunny approximately 85 percent of the 

year. The majority of precipitation (less than five inches) falls between January and March; however, the monsoonal 

flow during July and August brings desert thunderstorms, flash floods, and strong winds. High wind events can 

generate widespread areas of blowing dust and sand. Average annual wind speed is about 9.3 miles per hour and is 

predominantly from the southwest. (National Weather Service, 2008) 

January 2009 11 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

3.2.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

Changes in the concentrations of atmospheric pollutants as a result of specific actions constitute an air quality impact. 

This section discusses impacts to air quality from construction and subsequent operations of the proposed STC. 

Construction of the proposed STC would include grading approximately 10 acres of the 33-acre site resulting in 

localized, short-term increases in fugitive dust (PM10 emissions). Exhaust from construction vehicles and heavy 

equipment would also result in localized, short-term increases in CO and NOx emissions. The increase in PM10 would 

be primarily from soils disturbed during clearing and grubbing vegetation and from grading the site, and from vehicles 

and heavy equipment moving across the site during construction. Construction of the proposed STC is projected to 

take less than two months and construction traffic is estimated between four to ten vehicles a day. The PM10 State 

Implementation Plan for Clark County (Clark County, 2001) provides an equation to estimate emissions from 

construction activities. For general construction sites that do not include cut and fill areas, large-scale earthmoving 

operations, or heavy traffic volumes, an emission factor of 0.11 tons per acre per month is used to estimate PM10

increases. Using this equation, the conservative increase in PM10 emissions from construction activities would be 

approximately 2.2 tons (0.11 tons PM10 x 10 acres x 2 months). For comparison, this is well below the threshold of 70 

tons per year allowed by the DAQEM from a major stationary emission source in the Eldorado Valley airshed. 

The proposed STC would not be a major stationary emission source and therefore would not be subject to Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration provisions or New Source Review permitting requirements of the Clean Air Act. A portable 

diesel-fueled generator would be needed temporarily to provide power to the field station until the STC is operational 

and producing its own power. The generator would qualify as a categorically-exempt emission source and would not 

require an air permit from the DAQEM to operate. Total emissions from the generator would be dependent on hours 

of operation but would likely include negligible amounts CO, NOx, and PM10. 

Solar technologies that would be researched and tested at the STC would not be major sources of criteria pollutants. 

Current and likely future solar technologies produce near-zero carbon dioxide emissions which would be a beneficial 

impact to the air quality. 

Construction activities that disturb soils and that emit or have the potential to emit particulate matter must obtain a 

dust control permit from the DAQEM and submit a dust mitigation plan specifying the control measures that would be 

implemented during construction to reduce fugitive dust and minimize impacts to air quality. Dust control measures 

would include watering the site or applying soil stabilizers, installing a construction entrance with track-out control 

devices, and stabilizing disturbed land surfaces with pavement or landscaping after construction is completed. 

Given the small area of the proposed site, minimal number of vehicles, anticipated short duration of the construction, 

and implementation of dust control measures, the potential direct impacts to air quality would be temporary and 

negligible. 

Section 176(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act requires federal agencies to determine if the federal action conforms to 

applicable state implementation plans (SIPs) for achieving and maintaining the NAAQS. A federally sponsored or 

funded action must not cause emissions of criteria pollutants (or their precursors) above EPA’s established threshold 

levels in designated non-attainment or maintenance areas. The threshold emission rates in a non-attainment area for 

ozone are 100 tons per year of NOx or VOCs. Emissions sources to construct and operate the proposed STC would 

not be remotely close to exceeding threshold levels of NOx or VOCs and therefore the Proposed Action is assumed to 

conform to the SIP. 

January 2009 12 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

3.3 Biological Resources 

The biological resources of interest include the common native and introduced plants and animals, species afforded 

special protections, and the vegetative communities on and in the vicinity of the proposed site. 

3.3.1 Existing Environment 

Vegetation: Mojave creosote bush scrub is the characteristic vegetation community in the project area. The 

proposed site is dominated by creosote bush (Larrea tridentata) and white bursage (Ambrosia dumosa). Other plants 

noted during a field survey of the proposed site include desert marigold (Baileya multiradiata), apricot globemallow 

(Sphaeralcea ambigua), Mormon tea (Ephedra spp.), Mediterranean grass (Schicmus spp.), fescue (Vulpia spp.), 

filaree (Eriodium spp.), cheesebush (Hymenoclea salsola), four-winged saltbush (Atriplex canescens), and shadscale 

(Atriplex confertifolia). There were no cactus or yucca plants observed on the proposed site. 

Common Wildlife: Wildlife that could typically be found on and adjacent to the proposed site include black-tailed 

jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), white-tailed antelope squirrel (Ammospermophilus leucurus), desert pocket mouse 

(Chaetodipus spp.), desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida), desert kit fox (Vulpes macrotis), western whiptail lizard 

(Cnemidoporous tigris), side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), and desert iguana (Dipsosaurus dorsalis). These 

species are fairly common and widespread throughout the project area; however, only the western whiptail lizard, 

black-tailed jackrabbit, and a sidewinder (Crotalus cerastes) were observed during a field survey conducted by MBP 

Consulting, LLC in mid-spring 2008. 

Threatened and Endangered Species: A species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is so designated 

because of danger of its extinction as a consequence of economic growth and development without adequate 

conservation. The desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) is the only federally listed species known to occur in the 

project area. The Mojave population of the desert tortoise was listed as threatened by the USFWS in 1990. 

The desert tortoise is a large herbivorous reptile that inhabits desert scrub vegetation with annual precipitation from 

two inches to eight inches. The optimal habitat is creosote bush scrub but creosote bursage complex, shadscale 

scrub, saltbush scrub, and blackbrush scrub can also be suitable habitat. The tortoise can be found at elevations to 

7,300 feet above mean sea level, but more favorable habitat occurs between 1,000 feet and 3,000 feet. Annual 

wildflowers and native desert grasses, especially galleta and Indian rice grass, are preferred forage. Burrows are 

excavated in gently sloping terrain and sandy-gravelly soils to steep slopes and rocky soils. Soils must be friable 

enough for tortoises to dig burrows but also firm enough to prevent collapse. Desert tortoises are generally most 

active during the spring and early summer when mating behaviors are exhibited and annual plants are more 

prevalent. Additional activity occurs after summer rainstorms and during warmer autumn months. The remainder of 

the year the tortoises are in burrows protected from the extreme conditions of the desert. 

A field survey for desert tortoise was performed on May 4, 2008 in accordance with the protocol described in 

Procedures for Endangered Species Act Compliance for the Mojave Desert Tortoise (USFWS, 1992). The proposed 

STC site was surveyed using the presence-or-absence survey method, which is the recommended method for areas 

below 5,000 feet elevation within the known range of the desert tortoise. This method is used when surface 

disturbing actions would result in clearing or crushing of vegetation. 

The presence-or-absence survey consisted of linear transects spaced approximately 30 feet apart to provide 100 

percent coverage of the area. Transects were narrowed where the vegetation reduced views of the ground surface. 

Zone-of-influence (ZOI) transects were surveyed on land adjacent to the proposed site. The purpose of ZOI transects 

is to determine if adjacent land supports desert tortoise that may overlap into the survey area and be affected by the 

Proposed Action. The ZOI transects were spaced approximately 60 feet apart and extended approximately 900 feet 

to the east and approximately 1,200 feet to the north of the proposed site. 

January 2009 13 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Data collected to determine presence of tortoise habitat included number of live tortoises, burrows, scat, carcasses, 

and other signs such as tracks, courtship rings, drinking sites, egg shells, and grazed vegetation. Burrows were 

inspected for presence of tortoise and tortoise sign by illuminating the burrow cavity with sunlight reflected from a 

hand-held mirror. Tortoise signs were recorded on data sheets and mapped using global positioning system (GPS) 

coordinates. To avoid overestimating tortoise population densities, the total sign are adjusted (i.e., corrected) to 

account for sign clearly attributable to the same tortoise. For example, scat located adjacent to a burrow would equal 

two total sign but would be counted as one corrected sign. Burrows that could not be positively identified as 

associated with desert tortoise (i.e., burrow classes 4 and 5) were not counted as corrected sign. The type and 

number of sign observed are displayed in Table 1. 

Table 1. Desert Tortoise Sign Observed in the Survey Area 

Survey Area Acres1 Live 

Tortoise Carcass Burrow Scat Other Sign2 Total Sign Corrected 

Sign 

STC Site 33 0 0 30 1 1 32 16 

Zone-of-Influence 86 0 0 16 2 0 18 9 

1 Approximate 

2 Tracks, egg shells, drinking sites, courtship rings, or grazed vegetation 

Estimated numbers of tortoise (i.e., density) are quantified using corrected sign per acre based on a linear regression 

model using triangular-strip survey transects, and a density scale developed for Nevada. Table 2 shows the results of 

this methodology developed to estimate tortoise density. 

Table 2. Estimated Desert Tortoise Density based on Corrected Sign per Acre 

Corrected Sign per TriangularStrip Transect1 Corrected Sign per Acre2 Tortoises per 

Square Mile1 Relative Density 

0 0.0 – 0.1 0 – 10 Very Low 

1 – 3 0.2 – 0.6 10 – 45 Low 

4 – 7 0.7 – 1.4 45 – 90 Moderate 

8 – 11 1.5 – 2.1 90 – 140 High 

12+ 2.2 + 140 + Very High 

1 Methodology from Berry and Nicholson (1984) and Karl (1981) 

2 Corrected sign per triangular-strip transect divided by 5.5, which is amount of acres surveyed in one triangular-strip transect 

The estimated numbers of tortoise in the survey area are displayed in Table 3. Although the results of the survey 

indicate low density on the proposed STC site, the project area is considered good habitat overall to support a tortoise 

population. The surrounding area in the Eldorado Valley is part of the Boulder City Conservation Easement managed 

by Clark County for the protection of desert tortoise and habitat (see Section 3.1.1). The low density on the proposed 

STC site may be attributed to the fragmented habitat created by the NSO power plant, natural gas pipeline, and road 

that border the site. The adjacent area density would likely have been higher had the area been surveyed for 100 

percent coverage. The lack of winter and spring precipitation combined with the sparse covering of annual grasses 

may also be factors affecting the absence of tortoise in the survey area. 

Table 3. Estimated Desert Tortoise Density in the Survey Area

Survey Area Acres Corrected 

Sign 

Corrected 

Sign/Acre 

Tortoises/ 

Square Mile 

Square 

Miles 

Estimated 

Tortoise Numbers

Relative 

Density 

STC Site 33 16 0.48 10 – 45 0.05 1 – 2 Low 

Zone-of-Influence 86 9 0.10 0 – 10 0.13 0 – 1 Very Low 

State Protected and Sensitive Species: The Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) lists species of native flora and 

fauna identified for preservation and protection because populations are declining and habitats are deteriorating. The 

Gila monster (Heolderma suspectum) is classified as a sensitive reptile (NAC 503.080) and the loggerhead shrike 

January 2009 14 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

(Lanius ludovicianus) is classified as a sensitive bird (NAC 503.050). These species have the potential to occur in the 

project area. The geographic range and habitat of the banded Gila monster overlap with that of the desert tortoise. 

This venomous lizard is found below 5,000 feet elevation on rocky slopes and landscapes of upland desert scrub 

interspersed with desert washes. The loggerhead shrike prefers open dry plant communities of creosote bush and 

uses cactus spines to impale and immobilize prey. 

Migratory Birds: Most birds are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The MBTA provides protection 

of nearly all species of birds from harm by prohibiting the destruction of active nesting habitat. The Mojave creosote 

bush scrub vegetation community provides habitat for foraging and nesting for a variety of songbird and raptors; 

however, only the common raven (Corvus corax) was observed during the field survey of the proposed STC site in 

May 2008. Although there are numerous burrows on the proposed site, no western burrowing owls (Athene 

cunicularia) were observed. 

Invasive Species/Noxious Weeds: Executive Order 13112 Invasive Species directs federal agencies to make 

efforts to prevent the introduction and spread of invasive plant species. Invasive species are usually destructive, 

difficult to control or eradicate, and generally cause ecological and economic harm. A noxious weed is any plant 

designated by a federal, state, or county government as injurious to public health, agriculture, recreation, wildlife, or 

property. The control of noxious weeds is regulated by the Nevada Department of Agriculture under Nevada Revised 

Statute (NRS) 555. Invasive species and noxious weeds are generally found in disturbed soil conditions. The 

proposed STC site is mostly undisturbed and no noxious weeds or invasive species were observed during the field 

survey conducted in May 2008. 

3.3.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

Surface disturbance from construction would impact biological resources. The extent of disturbance relative to 

adjacent or replacement habitat types determines the significance of the impact. 

Vegetation: Grading the proposed site for construction would have a direct impact on approximately 10 acres of 

vegetation. The loss of predominately creosote bush and white bursage would be negligible because of the 

abundance of similar undisturbed vegetation in the project area. Any landscaping of disturbed areas around the field 

station and parking lot would include native vegetation. Vegetation would be controlled in the test areas to avoid 

interfering with equipment operation. 

Common Wildlife: Construction activities would displace common wildlife species that inhabit or use the proposed 

site for forage or cover and potentially cause direct mortality of less mobile species, such as reptiles. Similar habitat 

on adjacent open land would support the displaced species and thus potential impacts would be negligible. The 

typical species that could be impacted are widely distributed and thus loss of some individuals and habitat would not 

impact the populations throughout their range. 

Threatened and Endangered Species: Construction activities would directly disturb approximately 10 acres of low 

density habitat. The analysis of impacts to desert tortoise and tortoise habitat conservatively assumes the 33 acres of 

the site would be affected, and therefore, the potential for incidental take of one to two tortoises (see Table 3). 

Typical direct impacts from construction may include increased mortality or injury from tortoises and burrows being 

crushed by vehicles and equipment, increased harassment of tortoises being moved out of harm’s way, and loss of 

forage and increased fragmentation of habitat. Potential impact to forage and fragmentation of habitat would be 

negligible since the proposed site is already fragmented from adjacent habitat and is relatively small compared to 

surrounding forage sources. 

Impacts to the desert tortoise from development of this part of the Eldorado Valley were addressed in USFWS 

Biological Opinion File No. 1-5-94-F-283. This opinion was issued to the BLM for the sale of 107,412 acres of federal 

land in accordance with the Eldorado Valley Act (P.L. 85-339), including approximately 3,000 acres designated for 

January 2009 15 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

solar energy development in which the proposed STC site is located. With the establishment of a conservation 

easement to preserve and protect tortoises and habitat, it was determined the land sale and development for solar 

energy would not likely jeopardize the continued existence of the desert tortoise and would not likely destroy or 

adversely modify designated critical habitat (BLM, 1994). Therefore, implementing the Proposed Action should not 

have a different determination or conclusion. 

The Clark County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) was developed to address the take of listed 

species eligible for federal protection under the ESA and species that may become listed in the future. The USFWS 

issued a permit under Section 10 of the ESA to allow incidental take of the desert tortoise and numerous other 

species by private action on non-federal lands within Clark County, which would include the proposed STC site. 

However, the MSHCP does not allow for incidental take resulting from federal actions on non-federal lands; therefore, 

Section 7 of the ESA would govern the take of desert tortoise for this project. The DOE consulted with the USFWS 

pursuant to Section 7 of the ESA to confirm that the direct or indirect impacts of providing financial assistance for the 

construction and operation of the STC may affect but is not likely to adversely affect the desert tortoise, and therefore, 

would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. 

To minimize and mitigate the effects of the Proposed Action, the UNLV Research Foundation would comply with the 

terms and conditions of the Section 10 incidental take permit for the MSHCP, which includes the remuneration of fees 

to fund management actions that benefit the desert tortoise. The fees would be based on $550 per acre of surface 

disturbance and would be paid prior to beginning construction. It is estimated that fees would be required for less 

than 10 acres of disturbance and would be determined from the final site grading plan that would be submitted to the 

City of Boulder City for approval. Construction workers will be informed of procedures to follow should a live desert 

tortoise be encountered during construction, including avoidance, vehicle checks, and contact information for the 

Clark County Tortoise Pick-Up Service. Although the Proposed Action may affect the desert tortoise, with 

implementation of any additional mitigation measures required by the USFWS, the DOE’s actions are not likely to 

adversely affect the continued existence and recovery of the Mojave population of the species. 

State Protected and Sensitive Species: The Proposed Action would not affect species classified as protected or 

sensitive by the State of Nevada. Suitable habitat of rocky outcrops and desert washes for the Gila monster is not 

found on the proposed STC site and the absence of cacti limits the use of the site by the loggerhead shrike for 

hunting and feeding. Although an encounter with a Gila monster is not expected during construction, the encounter 

protocol (see Appendix B, page B-7) will be provided to the construction contractor for awareness purposes as 

requested by NDOW. 

Migratory Birds: Construction activities would displace any birds foraging on the proposed site; however, potential 

impacts would be negligible because of available adjacent habitat and the mobility of the species. There were no 

observations made during the field survey that the proposed site was being used or had been used by nesting birds. 

However, if clearing and grading activities are scheduled to occur during breeding season (generally mid-March 

through mid-August), a qualified biologist will survey the site to confirm the absence of nests and nesting activity, and 

inspect burrows, cracks, and crevices for burrowing owls. Construction will not be allowed around active nests 

(containing eggs or young) until they are no longer active or the young birds have fledged. The area to be avoided 

will be appropriate to the species but at least 250 feet distance from burrowing owl nests. 

Raptors and perching birds can get their talons and feet caught in hollow fence posts. To prevent this potential 

impact, fence posts will either be solid or have fence caps, and holes will be filled with rivets or nuts and bolts. 

Invasive Species/Noxious Weeds: Surface disturbance and construction activities could facilitate the establishment 

and spread of invasive species and noxious weeds. Aggressive non-native species could become established if 

ground disturbance is extensive and lengthy. However, the size of disturbance for the proposed STC and the short 

length of time before the ground surface is stabilized would minimize the risk of invasive species becoming 

established and therefore any potential impacts would be negligible. Preventive measures such as monitoring and 

January 2009 16 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

eradication will be implemented to reduce weeds from invading the proposed site after ground disturbance occurs. 

Heavy equipment transferring among construction sites could also introduce invasive species; however, because of 

the relatively small scale of this site and distance from other ongoing construction, it is likely that equipment would 

mobilize to the proposed site only once and thereby minimize this risk. Construction contractors will be required to 

use equipment that has been cleaned of potential sources of invasive and noxious weed seeds. 

3.4 Cultural Resources and Native American Concerns 

Cultural resources are the physical remains of past human activity and include prehistoric and historic sites, 

structures, features, or locations considered important to a culture or a community for scientific, traditional, religious, 

or other reasons. Prehistoric archaeological resources may include features such as rock shelters, lithic scatters, 

rock rings, habitation structures, or roasting pits. Historic sites may include buildings, structures, refuse deposits, or 

transportation routes and trails. 

3.4.1 Existing Environment 

The project area or area of potential effect (APE) for cultural resources is defined as the area that is potentially 

impacted physically, visibly, and/or audibly by the Proposed Action. The APE is proposed at a one mile radius from 

the proposed STC site. Information in this section on the cultural resources has been summarized from NEPA 

documents and from a search of records of cultural resources surveys completed in the APE (BLM, 1994; DOE, 

1996; Knight & Leavitt, 2008). 

A search of records was conducted at the Southern Nevada Archaeological Archive located at the Harry Reid Center 

on the UNLV campus. There have been five surveys completed within the APE; no sites recorded were determined 

eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The NSO power plant site was surveyed but no 

report was available in the archives. The NRHP, State Register of Historic Places, and other historical documents 

were reviewed to determine the potential for cultural resources in the project area. The nearest property listed on the 

NRHP is the Sloan Petroglyphs, which is approximately 13 miles to the northwest of the proposed STC site. The 

General Land Office map dated 1941 shows that the old highway that pre-dated U.S. Highway 95 passed through 

Section 5, which is the same section where the proposed STC site is located. (Knight & Leavitt, 2008) 

The proposed STC site lies in the Eldorado Valley in southern Nevada, an area with a prehistory that may span the 

past 10,000 years or more. Properties ranging from the early prehistoric period to historic mining and ranching sites 

are known to exist. Most of the cultural resources that have been recorded in the project area have resulted from 

transmission line and power line surveys. Prehistoric sites have been recorded around the perimeter of Eldorado Dry 

Lake, located approximately three miles to the north-northeast of the proposed STC site. Two temporary camps have 

been recorded but both sites were recommended as not eligible for the NRHP. Other sites in the area date to the 

historic period and are not eligible for the NRHP. The other sites are mostly isolated occurrences of cans, which may 

have been left behind by prospectors or by Hoover Dam construction workers passing through the area. (DOE, 1996) 

The project area was included in a Class II cultural resources inventory of 107,412 acres completed by the BLM in 

1994 prior to the sale of the land in accordance with the Eldorado Valley Act (P.L. 85-339). That inventory consisted 

of a number of 160-acre blocks that represented an approximate 10 percent sample of the survey area. The BLM 

documented in Report 5-2244 that the inventory was sufficient to characterize the cultural resources in the area 

designated for sale. The land identified for the proposed STC was included in that survey and is located between 

survey blocks 19 and 20 in Sections 6 and 5, respectively. No cultural resources were recorded in either of those 

160-acre blocks. There were five prehistoric sites and two large diffuse prehistoric lithic scatters of 18 subsites 

recorded during the inventory but were determined not eligible for the NRHP. Therefore, the BLM determined, and 

the SHPO concurred, that the land sale would have no effect on historic properties. (BLM, 1994) 

January 2009 17 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Groups of Southern Paiute and Mohave people lived within or used parts of the Eldorado Valley at the time of first 

European contact. The Colorado River defines the southern boundary of Southern Paiute territory where it formed 

the core of Mojave territory. There are spiritual and physical Indian trails associated with the Eldorado Valley. The 

trails were used by Pahrump and Las Vegas Paiutes to travel to places along the Colorado River. The valley is also 

associated with Indian funeral songs, including the Cry Ceremonial. The McCullough Mountains (which define the 

western edge of Eldorado Valley) are important to American Indian people because of trails, sacred sites, plants, and 

animals of cultural sensitivity. (DOE, 1996) 

3.4.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action would not affect any historic property listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP and there are no 

known cultural resources on the proposed STC site that would be impacted by construction. Based on the results of 

the BLM’s 1994 survey and others completed in the APE, it is concluded that the presence of unknown archaeological 

artifacts, sites, or features on the proposed STC site is unlikely. 

Although Indian trails are known to cross through the Eldorado Valley, the small size of the proposed site adjacent to 

existing energy developments would not likely have an impact to a traditional Native American resource. 

As the lead federal agency, DOE consulted with the SHPO and Native American tribes in accordance with Section 

106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The DOE has determined that providing financial assistance to 

construct and operate the STC would have no affect to historic properties determined eligible for the NRHP or 

traditional cultural sites deemed important to Native Americans, and requested concurrence with this determination 

from the SHPO and tribes. By letter dated December 16, 2008, the SHPO concurred with this determination (see 

Appendix C, page C-2). DOE did not receive any response from the tribes. 

In the unlikely event of an unexpected discovery of cultural deposits during construction of the proposed STC, work 

will cease in the area of discovery, an appropriate DOE authority and an archaeologist will be contacted, and 

measures will be taken to identify and treat the resource. 

3.5 Geological Resources 

Geological resources include the physical surface and subsurface features including landforms, topography, soils, 

minerals, and hazards. 

3.5.1 Existing Environment 

The project area is in the Eldorado Valley in the southwestern portion of the Great Basin subdivision within the Basin 

and Range Physiographic Province. The valley is a vast area of open and undeveloped lands formed by the 

McCullough Range to the west, the Eldorado Mountains to the east, the River Mountains to the north, and the 

Highland Range to the south. The mountains range in elevation from approximately 3,000 feet to over 7,000 feet. 

The elevation of the proposed STC site ranges from approximately 1,820 feet to 1,750 feet from south to north. The 

topography in the immediate vicinity of the site exhibits an approximate 1.3 percent slope to the northwest. 

The floor of the Eldorado Valley consists of alluvial, aeolian, and playa deposits surrounded by more steeply sloping 

alluvial aprons of poorly sorted gravel and sand deposits. The sediments can be up to 4,000 feet thick in some parts 

of the valley. The soils on the proposed site consist of the Tonopah-Arizo association, which are fan remnants and 

aprons deposited from the eroding adjacent mountain ranges. The soils are very gravelly to extremely gravelly sandy 

loam with surface rock fragments and cobbles. These soils are excessively drained. Geotechnical borings were 

drilled and percolation tests were conducted in May 2008 to determine subsurface conditions at the proposed site in 

preparation for construction (Ninyo & Moore, 2008). One soil boring was drilled to a depth of 15 feet below ground 

January 2009 18 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

surface (bgs). The soil boring encountered silty gravel with sand from the surface to a depth of five feet bgs and silty 

sand with gravel below five feet. 

No geologic faults have been identified across the proposed site but the Black Hills, Holocene age fault is located 

approximately seven miles to the northwest at the base of the McCullough Range. North-south trending faults 

associated with the Eldorado Mountains are located to the east and southeast of the proposed site. Eldorado Valley 

is located within Seismic Zone 2B as defined by the Uniform Building Code, which is an area with moderate damage 

potential from seismic hazards associated with known faults. 

Mineral resources in the project area include a fair potential for sand and gravel. Hard rock mining for gold, silver, 

copper, lead, and zinc historically occurred in the Eldorado Canyon district in the southern part of the Eldorado 

Mountains and along the northern end of the Opal Mountains. There is no active mining known in the project area. 

3.5.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

Site preparation, construction, and operation of the proposed STC would have negligible impacts to the geological 

resources in the project area. Construction activities would be primarily surface structures or shallow below ground 

installations. Grading would be required to level the site and compact the soil for construction but extensive cut-andfill is not anticipated. Because the slope is minor, changes to landforms and topography would be negligible. The 

total disturbed area would be approximately 10 acres, which would be the minimum necessary to construct the field 

station, parking lot, and test areas. The triangular-shaped parcel limits the use of the northern tip of the site and thus 

less ground surface would be disturbed. Topsoil would be stockpiled for reuse on the site after construction is 

completed but the small size of the site may make this practice impracticable. Soils would be lost due to physical 

alteration of the existing soil profile but this loss would be negligible. 

Ground disturbance would result in increased erosion potential from exposure of bare soils to wind and storm water 

runoff. Trenches excavated for utilities would be backfilled as soon as possible to minimize erosion. Best 

management practices such as applying water or soil palliatives would be implemented during construction to 

minimize soil erosion and exposed surfaces would be landscaped after construction is completed. 

The potential for extractable hard rock minerals is low and mining for sand and gravel in the project area is not 

planned, therefore, the Proposed Action would have no adverse impacts on mineral resources. 

3.6 Noise 

Noise is defined as unwanted sound that interferes with normal activities or in some way reduces the quality of the 

environment. Response to noise varies according to its type, its perceived importance, its appropriateness in the 

setting and time of day, and the sensitivity of the individual receptor. 

A decibel (dB) is the physical unit commonly used to describe sound levels. Sound measurement is further refined by 

using an “A-weighted” decibel (dBA) scale that more closely describes how a person perceives sound. People tend 

to exhibit differing sensitivity to noises generated by time of day, with noise at night being more annoying than 

daytime noise. Therefore, a day-night average noise level (Ldn) is used to determine whether noise would be 

perceived adversely. The EPA developed an index (threshold) to assess noise impacts from a variety of sources 

using residential receptors. If Ldn values exceed 65 dBA, residential development is not recommended (EPA, 1974). 

Noise sensitive receptors are defined as the occupants of a facility or a location where a state of quietness is a basis 

for use or where excessive noise interferes with the normal use of the facility or location. Typical noise sensitive 

receptors include schools, hospitals, churches, libraries, homes, parks, and wilderness areas. Some species of 

wildlife may also be sensitive to noise. 

January 2009 19 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

3.6.1 Existing Environment 

The project area is a rural environment with low ambient noise levels. Sources of noise include the power generating 

stations at the El Dorado Energy plant and the NSO power plant, the natural gas line regulating station, truck traffic on 

U.S. Highway 95, and off-road vehicles. The project area experiences low to moderate noise levels. Although no 

specific data are available, background noise levels at the proposed STC site would be expected to range from 40 

dBA (rural area during the day) to 60 dBA (commercial area heavy traffic), with occasional spikes related to 

equipment starting and stopping and off-road vehicles passing the site. 

The visitor center at the El Dorado Energy power plant could be defined as a noise sensitive receptor. This facility 

serves as a classroom and museum; however, the sensitivity of the receptor is limited by the purpose for the function. 

The visitor center serves to educate people about the energy industry and noise from the adjacent power plant is 

therefore expected and acceptable. The administration building at the NSO power plant is not a noise sensitive 

receptor because its basis of use is industrial operations. Public lands and wilderness areas in the vicinity would be 

considered noise sensitive. 

3.6.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

Construction of the proposed STC would result in temporary increases in ambient noise levels for approximately two 

months. A variety of construction equipment such as graders, backhoes, trenchers, jackhammers, cement trucks, 

dump trucks, and delivery trucks would generate noise intermittently and during daylight hours. Noise levels from 

construction sites measured approximately 90 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the center of the site (CERL, 1978). 

Sites in flat-lying areas with minimal vegetation experience noise attenuation at a rate of 6 dBA for each doubling of 

distance between the source and the receptor (CERL, 1978). A receptor located between 800 and 1,000 feet away 

from the proposed STC site would hear noise levels at approximately 65 dBA and therefore would not be negatively 

impacted by construction activities. With no noise sensitive receptors within this distance, the Proposed Action would 

not have an impact. 

Heavy equipment would generate noise that could affect the onsite workers during construction. Construction 

equipment typically emits noise in the 85 dB to 100 dB range. The construction contractor would require workers to 

wear hearing protection in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations. 

Operational noise from solar panel arrays that may be installed on the proposed STC site would be negligible and 

would likely be inaudible against ambient levels. Performing outdoor maintenance, repositioning test equipment, and 

using tools in the test areas of the proposed STC would temporarily increase ambient noise levels but no receptors 

would be impacted. 

 

3.7 Safety and Occupational Health 

Safety is an integral part of all DOE actions including the responsibility to protect workers and to safeguard the natural 

and human environment. 

3.7.1 Existing Environment 

The Eldorado Valley where the proposed STC is located is predominantly undeveloped open desert. Safety and 

health considerations are associated with the environmental elements (primarily during summer months), including 

potential for heat stroke, heat exhaustion, dehydration, and poisonous spider and snake bites. Emergency services 

for fire, police, and medical are provided by the City of Boulder City. Medical facilities are located in Boulder City, 

approximately 20 miles from the proposed STC site. 

January 2009 20 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

3.7.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

Construction and trade workers would be exposed to safety and health hazards faced at similar construction sites. 

Potential impacts to the health and safety of the workers would be minimized by adherence to federal, state, and local 

regulations, OSHA regulations, and to the safety plans of the general contractor. No unusual construction site 

considerations are expected during the installation of solar power arrays and associated equipment. 

The UNLV-CER would establish a program for a safe work environment for students. Students and workers 

operating the STC may be exposed to minor amounts of hazardous chemicals that may be used in research and 

testing projects. Students and workers are subject to the policies provided by the UNLV Risk Management and 

Safety program (UNLV, 2006). These policies include, but are not limited to, Emergency Response Planning, 

Material Safety Data Sheets, Chemical Inventory Management Program, Environmental Management and Laboratory 

Safety, and Occupational Safety. Students and workers would receive training in worker exposure and use of 

personal protective equipment to prevent injuries. The STC would not produce or store any chemicals that would 

result in catastrophic release or exposure to the general public. There would be no radioactive sources or materials 

maintained at this facility. No unique occupational health or safety hazards would be expected from working at the 

STC. 

The general public would not be adversely impacted by the construction and operation of the proposed STC. The 

remote location of the site and construction of a fenced enclosure would minimize exposure of the public to potential 

safety hazards at the site. Public visitors to the STC would be requested to follow the established UNLV rules and 

safety precautions established for the STC to minimize accidents or injuries, and to protect the integrity of ongoing 

testing projects. 

3.8 Socioeconomic Factors 

Socioeconomic factors describe the local economy, employment, and demographics that may be influenced by the 

Proposed Action. 

3.8.1 Existing Environment 

Economy and Employment: Boulder City is located in Clark County, Nevada, which is one of the fastest growing 

counties in the U.S. Through 2006, the economy of Clark County was experiencing significant increases in job 

growth, labor force, personal income, and property valuation. Boulder City, on the other hand, has been controlling 

growth for years. As of 2007, Boulder City's population has remained steady, the unemployment rate is less than the 

U.S. average, and jobs have increased by 3.8 percent, but the City's cost of living is over 18 percent higher than the 

U.S. average. 

Environmental Justice: Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people 

regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and 

enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people, 

including a racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic group, should bear a disproportionate share of the adverse environmental 

consequences resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of federal, state, local, 

and tribal programs and policies. 

Federal agencies must identify and address disproportionately high and adverse effects of federal projects on the 

health or environment of minority and low-income populations (Executive Order 12898). An environmental justice 

population is defined as a population being at least half minority status or at least half low-income status, or this 

status is meaningfully greater than the general population. A minority is defined as Black or African-American, 

Hispanic or Latino, Asian, American Indian and Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander. The U.S. 

January 2009 21 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Census Bureau defines the average poverty threshold as a maximum annual income of $23,691 or less for a family of 

four for the year 2006 (U.S. Census, 2006). 

The proposed STC site is located within the corporate limits of Boulder City in a rural area zoned for energy 

development. The project area is in census tract 57.03 that encompasses Eldorado Valley. The demographics of this 

census tract are compared against the demographics of Boulder City to identify any potential environmental justice 

population. As shown in Table 4, the numbers of Blacks and Hispanics residing in the census tract are 14 percent 

and 10 percent more, respectively, than the City as a whole. These percentages can be viewed as being 

meaningfully greater as compared to the general population of Boulder City and therefore defined as an 

environmental justice population in regards to minority status. 

Table 4. Population and Income Demographics 

Area Total1 White Black 

American 

Indian2 Asian 

Pacific 

Islander Hispanic3 Other 

Median 

Household 

Income

Tract 57.03 2,702 1,847 367 20 137 5 388 81 $35,531 

Percent of Total Population1 68 14 1 5 <1 14 3 

Boulder City 14,966 14,149 107 108 107 24 650 190 $50,523 

Percent of Total Population1 95 <1 <1 <1 <1 4 1 

 1 Does not equal total population or 100% by race and ethnicity because of census reporting by individuals. 

 2 Data represents ethnic grouping of American Indian alone or in any combination. 

 3 Data represents Hispanic or Latino of any race. 

 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 

3.8.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

Economy and Employment: The Proposed Action does not include a residential component or require an influx of 

workers and employees and therefore would not be expected to increase population or change the demographic 

character of the project area. The Proposed Action would generate short-term employment opportunities during 

construction activities. There would be no impact to long-term employment opportunities as UNLV students and 

faculty would be operating the STC. 

Operation of the STC would potentially provide economic benefits to UNLV-CER and to the City of Boulder City from 

renewable energy generated at the site. 

Environmental Justice: The analysis indicates that the proposed STC would be located in a census tract that has a 

meaningfully higher percentage of minorities than the general population of Boulder City. However, there are no 

people living adjacent to or in close proximity to the site and thus no environmental justice populations would be 

impacted. Construction and operation of the STC would not have long-term or adverse health or environmental 

impacts and therefore no impacts would be disproportionately borne by any one population. 

3.9 Utilities and Transportation 

Utilities and transportation are the infrastructure necessary to support the STC including electricity, water, sewer, 

communications, and access. 

3.9.1 Existing Environment 

Utilities: The proposed STC would be located adjacent to the NSO power plant and approximately one mile from the 

El Dorado Energy generating plant. Both of these properties generate power that is provided to the NV Energy 

January 2009 22 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Company (formerly Nevada Power Company) electrical grid system located to the west of the project area. The 

generated power is delivered through overhead power lines which run along Eldorado Valley Drive. The proposed 

STC site is vacant with no utilities. An underground natural gas pipeline owned by Southwest Gas Corporation 

parallels the east border of the project site. Fiber optic cables and telecommunications are located underground 

within the Eldorado Valley Drive right-of-way adjacent to and south of the proposed STC site. 

Potable water service is provided by the City of Boulder City. The City receives treated water from the Southern 

Nevada Water Authority, the wholesale water provider to municipal water agencies in Clark County. The Colorado 

River via Lake Mead is the source of approximately 90 percent of the water. The City distributes treated water via an 

underground water main that parallels Eldorado Valley Drive in the right-of-way adjacent to and south of the site. 

There is no municipal sanitary sewer collection service provided to the Eldorado Valley. Developments install septic 

tanks and drain (leach) fields for wastewater treatment and disposal needs. 

Transportation: Eldorado Valley Drive is a two-lane asphalt road providing east/west access in the project area. 

The road is located along the south edge of the proposed STC site. Eldorado Valley Drive primarily serves the El 

Dorado Energy plant, NSO power plant, and McCullough switching station. Capacity of the road is more than 

adequate for current traffic levels. U.S. Highway 95 is a north/south, four-lane divided highway connecting Boulder 

City to Searchlight and Laughlin, Nevada. The highway is located approximately 1.5 miles to the east of the project 

site. The highway was recently expanded to four lanes to increase capacity. 

3.9.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

Utilities: The anticipated demand for utilities services to support construction and operation of the STC would be 

minimal, not require any system upgrades, and have no impact on the capacity demands of the service provider. The 

utilities needed for the proposed STC and the location of these utilities are shown in Figure 3. 

Construction of the STC would require obtaining access to public utilities. During construction, temporary electrical 

power would be provided by contractors to operate construction tools and machinery. Because of the short 

construction duration and minimal electrical needs, power would be provided by diesel-fueled generators. After 

construction, the STC would require power to operate the field station. The UNLV Research Foundation would 

purchase a small diesel-fueled generator of approximately 20 kilowatts as a temporary electrical power source until 

the STC is operational and able to generate enough power to sustain the operations. 

Construction and operation of the STC would require potable water. Water would be needed to serve the occupants 

of the field station and for use in cleaning and maintaining solar panels and arrays that would be installed. The length 

of the service line to the field station from the main water line in Eldorado Valley Drive is expected to be less than 500 

feet. The NSO power plant uses approximately 800 gallons of ionized water every two weeks to clean one loop of 

eight solar collectors (Potrovitza, 2008). The size and configuration of the STC site would not accommodate the 

testing of more than one to three solar collectors; therefore, estimated water consumption to support testing could be 

less than 200 gallons per week. The capacity of the Boulder City water system is adequate to meet the needs of the 

STC (Hanson, 2008). 

Natural gas would not be required to operate the STC and no impacts to that utility would occur. 

The STC would require telecommunications access. The UNLV Research Foundation is negotiating with Acciona 

Energy to tap an available fiber optic line in an existing conduit. The conduit runs from the west side of the NSO 

power plant and parallels Eldorado Valley Drive. The fiber optic line would be tapped in the southwest corner of the 

STC site and connected to the field station (see Figure 3). The available fiber line is adequate for the 

telecommunication needs of the STC. 

A septic system would be designed and installed for the STC to accommodate two restroom facilities located in the 

field station. The proposed location of the septic system is shown on Figure 3. The system would have a septic tank, 

January 2009 23 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

a distribution box, and a leach field. The wastewater would sit in the septic tank until the solids settle to the bottom. 

The remaining liquid would then pass through the distribution box where it is evenly distributed to the leach field 

where microbes would digest or remove most contaminates before they could reach the groundwater. Percolation 

testing was performed at the proposed leach field site in accordance with the Soil Percolation Test Procedure 

(Section XV) established by the Clark County District Board of Health. These percolation test results would be used 

to design the system. The septic tank is expected to be less than 5,000 gallons and therefore would be regulated by 

the Southern Nevada Health District. The leach field would be designed proportional to the tank size and would not 

extend off the STC property. Regulations require all commercial septic systems to be designed by a registered 

Nevada professional engineer and that engineer must certify proper installation of the system. Regular pumping and 

inspection would prolong the life of the septic system and proper functioning to ensure no impacts to groundwater 

sources. With proper design, installation, and maintenance, no impacts are expected. 

Transportation: Construction of the STC would temporarily increase the traffic volume of personal vehicles of 

construction workers as well as construction trucks and equipment on both Eldorado Valley Drive and U.S. Highway 

95. The estimated construction workforce would not be large, nor would the construction be long-term. It is 

estimated that up to 10 vehicles per day would be needed for approximately two months of construction. After 

construction is complete, workers and visitors to the STC would slightly increase traffic volume on both Eldorado 

Valley Drive and U.S. Highway 95 but would not impact available roadway capacity (Lerud, 2008). The STC would 

not be operational every day and therefore the number of vehicles traveling to the site would fluctuate. 

3.10 Visual Quality 

The physical and biological features of the landscape contribute to the scenic quality of an area and the visual appeal 

of an observer. 

3.10.1 Existing Environment 

The visual quality of the project area is characterized by expansive open space and dramatic basin and range 

landforms of the Eldorado Valley. The project area is surrounded by mountain ranges in each direction that drain to a 

large playa lakebed and flat valley. Elevations range from 1,700 feet to over 7,000 feet. Wildflowers and blooming 

shrubs and cacti add color to the landscape in spring and early summer. Visible manmade elements in the area 

include roads, overhead transmission lines, power generating plants and substations, and the field of solar panels. 

The NSO solar field viewed from the north off U.S. Highway 95 gives a blue hue to the landscape and appears to be a 

body of water. 

Lands managed by the BLM are classified based on relative value of the visual resource. Visual resource 

management Class I and Class II are the most valued, Class III represents a moderate value, and Class IV is of least 

value. The objective of these classes is to limit future impacts on the visual and aesthetic character of the public land. 

Activities on non-federal lands adjacent to BLM land are not restricted by these visual classifications. 

The mountain ranges surrounding the project area are Class II because of their wilderness designation (BLM, 1998). 

The scenic quality of the mountains is valued because of their visual appeal to users (i.e., hikers, campers). The BLM 

lands on the valley floor adjacent to the project area are Class III because of proximity to development and as a buffer 

between the more valued lands and metropolitan areas. 

3.10.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

The proposed STC site is located in an area designated for energy development. Removing vegetation and 

constructing the field station and test areas would impact the visual character of the immediate area and add other 

manmade elements to the landscape. The proposed STC site is less than 10 percent of the size of the adjacent 

energy facilities which dominate the visual quality of the area. The field station would be designed and constructed 

January 2009 24 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

using building materials and colors that are compatible with the natural environment. Landscaping around the STC 

would be with native vegetation and security lighting would illuminate downward to be less obtrusive. These design 

measures would minimize the visual intrusion of the building and meet the comprehensive planning requirements of 

Boulder City for the energy development zone. 

The STC may be visible by users of the adjacent wilderness areas; however, the quality of their wilderness 

experience would not be impacted because of the dominance the other energy facilities have on the landscape. 

3.11 Waste Management and Hazardous Materials 

Hazardous materials are substances that may present a danger to public health or safety or to the environment 

because of its quantity, concentration, or characteristic. Solid waste is non-hazardous and generally consists of 

household trash, landscaping waste, or construction debris. 

3.11.1 Existing Environment 

The proposed STC site is undisturbed, vacant land. There was no evidence of storage, disposal, or release of 

hazardous materials on the proposed site. Other than windblown trash, no wastes or waste products were observed 

during a field survey of the site. 

The City of Boulder City operates a Class I landfill for municipal solid waste. Solid waste is collected from residences 

and businesses by contractors and disposed at the landfill located on the east edge of the City. Horizontal and 

vertical expansion to the landfill is being reviewed to expand the capacity to 77 acres from the permitted 40 acres and 

extend the life of the landfill for many years. 

3.11.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

Construction activities present the potential to encounter previously unidentified contaminated soils or groundwater. 

Based on a site reconnaissance and review of operations at adjacent facilities, the likelihood of encountering 

contamination is extremely low and no impacts from contaminants would be expected during construction. Small 

amounts of potentially hazardous waste materials (e.g., waste oils, lubricants, solvents, cleaners, paints) would be 

generated during construction but proper use and storage of the materials would ensure no impact to workers and the 

environment. Use or storage of hazardous materials on site during construction will be in accordance with applicable 

regulations, and appropriate spill prevention measures will be implemented. If hazardous materials are spilled or 

deposited on the site during or after construction, the responsible party will immediately notify appropriate regulatory 

parties, take all necessary actions to clean up and properly dispose of the materials, and complete all reporting 

requirements. 

Operation of the STC is not expected to require hazardous materials other than those found in sealed photovoltaic 

panels, solar power systems, and various fluids commonly used in most industrial facilities. Research and testing 

activities may produce non-hazardous and hazardous wastes. The amount of hazardous waste generated would not 

likely require a small quantity generator identification number in accordance with the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA). Photovoltaic panels may contain hazardous materials, and although the panels are sealed 

under normal operating conditions, there is the potential for environmental contamination if damaged or improperly 

disposed upon decommissioning. Concentrating solar power systems may employ liquids such as synthetic oils or 

molten salts that may be hazardous and present spill risks. In addition, various fluids are commonly used in most 

industrial facilities, such as hydraulic fluids, coolants, and lubricants. These fluids may in some cases be hazardous 

and present a spill related risk. 

Any waste handling and disposal activities would conform to the requirements of RCRA, OSHA, and Nevada Division 

of Environmental Protection regulations. In the event hazardous waste is generated, UNLV-CER would package and 

January 2009 25 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

dispose of the hazardous waste through off-site commercial treatment and disposal firms. Proper planning, 

implementation of spill prevention plans, and good maintenance practices would minimize impacts to workers and the 

environment from hazardous materials. 

Small amounts of trash and household wastes generated by the occupants of the STC would be collected by 

contractors for disposal at the Boulder City Landfill. The amount of trash generated would not impact the capacity of 

the landfill (Martello, 2008).

3.12 Water Resources 

Water resources include groundwater, surface water sources including wetlands, and floodplains. 

3.12.1 Existing Environment 

The project area is situated in the Eldorado Valley hydrographic sub-basin of the Central Region groundwater basin. 

Groundwater that originates as precipitation over areas of higher elevation generally flows toward the axis of the 

basin and then north into the Las Vegas Valley or eastward into the Colorado River Valley. Groundwater under 

Eldorado Valley occurs at depths ranging from about 275 to 320 feet below land surface in the north-central part of 

the basin (Buqo and Giampaoli, 1988). Percolation tests were performed for the leach field for the proposed STC 

septic system. One soil boring was advanced to a depth of 15 feet and no groundwater was encountered (Ninyo & 

Moore, 2008). There are no groundwater wells within the project area. 

There are no intermittent or permanent surface water sources or wetlands in the project area. A small ephemeral 

drainage or swale crosses the proposed STC site from northeast to southwest. The flow of water in these smaller 

drainage systems occurs only during infrequent storm events and has no nexus to the Colorado River system and 

therefore would not be regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 

The Eldorado Valley is a closed basin; runoff from the adjacent mountain ranges and surface flow drain inward to a 

playa lake (Eldorado Dry Lake) located approximately three miles north of the proposed site. The storm waters that 

drain into the isolated playa evaporate soon after the storms end. 

The project area has been surveyed for flood hazards and mapped on the Federal Insurance Rate Map for 

unincorporated Clark County. The Eldorado Dry Lake is designated as a special flood hazard area subject to 

inundation by the one percent chance annual flood event (i.e., 100-year floodplain). The adjacent area surrounding 

the playa, which includes the proposed STC site, has been determined by the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency to be outside the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain (i.e., 500-year floodplain). 

3.12.2 Impacts of Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action would not likely impact any surface water or groundwater resources, or floodplains. 

Excavations are not anticipated to be deep enough to intercept groundwater. There are no surface waters, wetlands, 

or regulated ephemeral washes on the site that would be filled or altered to construct the STC. 

Storm water runoff from construction activities can have an impact on water quality, contributing sediment and other 

pollutants exposed at construction sites. Any potential impacts to water quality from construction activities would be 

short-term, localized, and negligible. With a large storm event, eroded soils and runoff of sediments and construction 

contaminants from the site could reach the playa lake if adequate control measures are not implemented and 

maintained during construction. The site would be graded and contoured to minimize disruption to natural flow 

patterns. The remaining exposed soil would be paved for the parking lot or landscaped, minimizing runoff and 

potential impacts to water quality. 

January 2009 26 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

The construction contractor for the UNLV Research Foundation will be required to file a Notice of Intent with the 

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for coverage under the general permit for storm water discharge 

associated with construction that disturbs more than one surface acre. The general permit requires a Storm Water 

Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be prepared and implemented. The SWPPP will outline best management 

practices such as silt fences, straw bales, or sand bags for temporary erosion and sediment controls to minimize 

runoff from the proposed site during construction. Installation of landscape materials as soon as practicable after 

construction will further minimize runoff that could affect surface water quality. 

Floodplain characteristics and values would not be impacted by the Propose Action because the site is not located 

within a regulated floodplain. 

Improperly functioning and overloaded septic systems are major sources of water pollution. Failing septic systems 

leak harmful pollutants, like bacteria and excess nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus), into groundwater. From there, 

pollutants make their way into lakes, streams, and rivers. Regular septic tank pumping, inspection, and maintenance 

would prolong the life of the septic system and leach field installed for the STC, and ensure proper functioning to 

minimize potential impacts to groundwater sources. 

3.13 Intentional Destructive Acts 

In December 2006, the DOE Office of General Counsel issued interim guidance stipulating that NEPA documents 

completed for DOE actions and projects should explicitly consider intentional destructive acts (i.e., acts of sabotage or 

terrorism). Construction and operation of the STC would not involve the transportation, storage, or use of radioactive, 

explosive, or toxic materials. Consequently, it is highly unlikely that construction or operation of the STC would be 

viewed as a potential target by saboteurs or terrorists. The project location is not near any national defense 

infrastructure or in the immediate vicinity of a major inland port, container terminal, freight trains, or nuclear power 

plants. The Proposed Action would not offer any targets of opportunity for terrorists or saboteurs to inflict adverse 

impacts to human life, heath, or safety. 

3.14 Environmental Consequences of the No Action Alternative 

Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not provide federal funding assistance for the construction and operation 

of the STC. The UNLV Research Foundation would not lease land from the City of Boulder City and the UNLV-CER 

would pursue solar technology research opportunities that could be tested using existing facilities on campus. 

There would be no change in land use and zoning designations. The proposed site would continue to be zoned for 

solar energy development. The triangular shape, minimal size, and adjacent constraints could adversely affect future 

interest in that parcel for its designated use. 

The No Action Alternative would not disturb surface soils for constructing facilities and extending public utilities, and 

thereby, destroying vegetation, displacing or disrupting wildlife, and affecting local air quality with increased fugitive 

dust. Site conditions would remain unchanged and desert tortoise densities could increase with improved annual 

vegetation cover. There would be no potential of locating or exposing a previously unknown cultural resource. 

There would be no manmade elements added to the visual character of the landscape that could be viewed by people 

using adjacent lands. 

The surface hydrology would not be altered and runoff from the site would not carry additional sediments or 

contaminants that could affect water quality at off-site locations. 

 

There would be no health and safety risks to workers or students under the No Action Alternative, and no increased 

risk to storing and using hazardous materials or generating and disposing of hazardous wastes from research 

January 2009 27 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

projects. There would be no short-term changes in ambient noise levels from construction activities and no additional 

vehicles on Eldorado Valley Drive. The opportunity to create short-term construction jobs in a slowing economy and 

the opportunity for a long-term source of energy generation for the City of Boulder City and the STC would be lost. 

The No Action Alternative would not satisfy the purpose and need for the Proposed Action. The benefits that would 

be gained from having a larger facility in which to conduct further research and testing of existing and emerging solar 

technologies would not be realized by the solar energy industry, by the public that desires alternative forms of energy, 

or by DOE. 

January 2009 28 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

4.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 

This section describes the impacts to the environment that may potentially occur because of the additive (i.e., 

cumulative) effects of implementing the Proposed Action with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future 

actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a 

period of time. 

Past and present actions included in the cumulative impact analysis include the construction and operation of the 

NSO solar power plant and the El Dorado Energy electrical power plant, and installation and upgrades to overhead 

electrical transmission lines, substations, and underground natural gas pipelines. The foreseeable future actions 

include the construction of new or expanded alternative energy facilities throughout the 3,000-acre area in Eldorado 

Valley designated for such development. 

Because the proposed site could eventually be developed for solar energy uses in accordance with the City’s plans 

for this area of the Eldorado Valley, the potential impacts to the resources as described for the Proposed Action would 

occur, but at some future time and by a different proponent. Therefore, the Proposed Action would not necessarily 

generate additive cumulative effects to the area, but may only affect the timing of those impacts. The areas that 

would most likely experience cumulative effects with the Proposed Action include: 

• Regional and local air pollutant emissions 

• Habitat loss 

• Visual landscape 

• Land use and development 

• Energy demand 

Regional and local air pollutant emissions: Air quality in the project area has been poor in the past and the area is 

in non-attainment for ozone. Construction emissions are short-term and with implementation of adequate dust control 

measures during and after construction, increases in PM10 emissions should not exceed NAAQS or affect the 

attainment designations in the airshed. Constructing new solar fields and increasing solar energy generation to 

provide electricity to the region would have a beneficial cumulative impact on air quality by reducing emissions of 

ozone precursors. Given the potential air quality benefits of renewable energy and energy efficiency research to be 

performed at the STC, the overall net impact of the Proposed Action on cumulative air quality in the region and locally 

would probably be neutral. The research activities to be conducted at the STC would provide a net advantage to air 

quality by harnessing non-polluting solar power, while construction of the STC would result in a temporary increase in 

some emissions of criteria air pollutants and hazardous air pollutants. 

Habitat loss: The Proposed Action in combination with other energy development projects in this area would result 

in the cumulative permanent loss of native vegetation and the wildlife that inhabit the area. However, the USFWS 

Biological Opinion File No. 1-5-94-F-283 concluded that the loss of approximately 3,000 acres of desert tortoise 

habitat to energy development in the Eldorado Valley would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. 

Other non-federal projects occurring within Clark County come under the purview of the Clark County MSHCP and 

associated incidental take permit for impacts to desert tortoise and other covered wildlife and plant species. 

Visual landscape: Construction and operation of the STC would slightly modify the overall visual impression of the 

landscape that is planned for energy development but is not yet developed. The STC would be visually compatible 

with the adjacent energy facilities. The vacant open landscape within the Eldorado Valley would change to an 

industrial dominated view as additional energy-related development occurs. This could have an adverse cumulative 

effect on people in nearby wilderness areas. However, the majority of people using mountainous areas for scenic 

view purposes are generally focused on the views provided into the mountain ranges rather than toward the Eldorado 

Valley and thus cumulative impacts to viewer sensitivity would be negligible. 

January 2009 29 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Induced development: The Proposed Action includes new development in the desert, but it does not create 

unplanned development or present the potential to open up new areas for development. It does not create improved 

access to real estate, reduce development restrictions, or substantially induce new development in unanticipated 

areas. Implementation of the Proposed Action would have no adverse cumulative impact on land use and planning. 

The project is consistent with current zoning and the Boulder City Comprehensive Master Plan, and would be 

compatible with neighboring uses. Related projects must be assessed for zoning and plan consistency, and 

mitigation measures applied where any land use impacts might be expected. With mitigation (if needed) the related 

projects would not have a substantial impact. 

Energy Demand: All projects requiring energy have incremental impacts related to energy consumption, but very 

few offer the possibility of making a positive contribution toward renewable energy and energy efficiency. The STC 

and its research activities specifically intend to advance the use and acceptance of renewable energy and to enhance 

solar energy efficiency. 

January 2009 30 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

5.0 COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES AND SHORT-TERM USES 

An irreversible commitment of resources can be defined as the loss of future options. Irreversible effects result 

primarily from consumption or destruction of a specific resource that cannot be replaced within a reasonable 

timeframe (e.g., minerals or soils). Irretrievable resource commitments involve the loss in value of an affected 

resource that cannot be restored as a result of the action (e.g., extinction of a threatened or endangered species or 

the destruction of a cultural site). 

Labor, energy, materials, and capital would be committed for construction of the STC. These resources would not be 

recovered. Short-term use of a labor force would result in long-term productivity of energy development. 

Construction would make permanent use of building materials; however, rare resources would not be consumed in 

the process. The construction materials, except to the extent they can be recycled, would be irretrievably committed. 

Approximately 10 acres of land would be occupied by the STC and related research activities for some time into the 

future until the operations are terminated. This land could be re-used for other energy development, or restored to its 

existing condition as open space and replanted with native desert flora; therefore, the commitment of land is not 

irreversible. 

The incremental loss of desert tortoise habitat and open-space and scenic values is balanced by the protections 

afforded to the long-term productivity of the site for solar energy development. Improved efficiency and increased use 

of renewable energy sources could substantially reduce the use of and reliance on imported fossil fuels in the future. 

January 2009 31 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

This page intentionally left blank. 

January 2009 32 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

6.0 REFERENCES 

Association of Engineering Geologists. 1996. Seismic Hazards in the Las Vegas Region, Field Trip Guidebook. 

Southwestern Section. 

Berry, K. H. and L. L. Nicholson. 1984. The Distribution and Density of Desert Tortoise Populations in California in 

the 1970s. Pages 26-60 In: The Status of the Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) in the United States. 

Report to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from the Desert Tortoise Council. Order No. 11310-0083-81. 

Boulder City. 1988. City of Boulder City, Nevada. City Code Title 11 Zoning and Subdivisions, Chapter 16, Section 

3. Effective March 23, 1988. 

________. 1997. City of Boulder City, Nevada. City Code Title 11 Zoning and Subdivisions, Chapter 19, Section 2. 

Effective July 16, 1997 

________. 2008. Boulder City, Nevada Data. http://www.city-data.com/city/Boulder-City-Nevada.html. Accessed 

July 8, 2008. 

Buqo, T.S, and M.E. Giampaoli. 1988. Hydrologic Study and Water Supply Evaluation, Searchlight, Nevada, Final 

Report, Las Vegas Valley Water District, Las Vegas, NV. 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1994. Environmental Assessment for Sale under P.L. 85-339, Eldorado Valley 

Act. EA Number NV-054-94-111. Las Vegas Office, Stateline Resource Area. August 22, 1994. 

________. 1998. Proposed Las Vegas Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement, 

Volume II. Las Vegas Field Office. May 1998. 

Clark County. 2001. PM-10 State Implementation Plan for Clark County. Appendix B-Emission Inventories, 

Methodology, Emission Factors, and Emission Estimates. June 2001. 

________. 2003. Construction Activities Dust Control Handbook. Department of Air Quality and Environmental 

Management. Adopted March 18, 2003. 

________. 2004. Clark County Air Quality Regulations. Section 0 – Definitions. Amended October 7, 2004. 

________. 2005. Clark County Comprehensive Plan. March 30, 2005. 

________. 2008b. Clark County Assessor’s OpenWeb Info Mapper. 

http://gisgate.co.clark.nv.us/openweb/asp/openweb.asp?getParcel=21300001002. Accessed June 4, 2008. 

________. 2008a. 8-Hour Ozone Early Progress Plan for Clark County, Nevada, Revision 1. Department of Air 

Quality and Environmental Management. April 2008. 

Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL). 1978. Construction-Site Noise Control, Cost-Benefit 

Estimation Technical Background. U.S. Army. January 1978. 

Executive Order 12898. Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations (59 FR 7629). 

January 2009 33 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2002. Flood Insurance Rate Map of Clark County, Nevada and 

Incorporated Areas. Panel 3200 of 4090. September 27, 2002. 

Hanson, Steve. 2008. Director, Boulder City Public Works Department. Personal communication with Ryan Jones, 

Ninyo & Moore. September 17, 2008. 

Harrill, J.R., J.S. Gates, and J.M. Thomas. 1988. Major Ground-Water Flow Systems in the Great Basin Region of 

Nevada, Utah and Adjacent States, Hydrological Investigations Atlas HA-694-C Scale 1:1,000,000, U.S. 

Geological Survey, Denver, CO. 

Johnston, Jeff. 1994. Class II Inventory of the Proposed Eldorado Valley Lands Act, Clark County, Nevada. BLM 

Report 5-2259(P). Mariah Associates project 840-07. 

Karl, A. 1981. The Distribution and Relative Densities of the Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) in Lincoln and Nye 

Counties, Nevada. Proceedings of the 1981 Desert Tortoise Council Symposium. pp. 76-92. 

Knight & Leavitt Associates. 2008. Records Search and Cultural Assessment of a Parcel in Eldorado Valley, Clark 

County, Nevada. June 20, 2008. 

Jerud, Jeff. 2008. Principal Traffic Engineer, Nevada Department of Transportation. Personal communication with 

Ryan Jones, Ninyo & Moore. September 23, 2008. 

Longwell, C.R., Pampeyan, E.H., Bowyer, B., and Roberts, R.J. 1965. Geology and Mineral Deposits of Clark 

County, Nevada. Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, Bulletin 62. 

Martello, Robert. 2008. Manager, Boulder City Disposal. Personal communication with Ryan Jones, Ninyo & Moore. 

September 23, 2008. 

National Weather Service. 2008. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Western Region Headquarters. 

http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/vef/climate/Las%20Vegas%20Climate%20Book.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2008. 

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. 2008. Bureau of Water Pollution Control. Commercial Septic 

Systems. http://ndep.nv.gov/BWPC. Accessed June 9, 2008. 

Nevada Power Company. 2008. Nevada Power Facts. www.nevadapower.com. Accessed June 11, 2008. 

Ninyo & Moore. 2008. Percolation Test Results for the UNLV Solar Technology Center. May 7, 2008. 

Potrovitza, Nicholas. 2008. Director of Research, Acciona Energy. Personal communication with Mary Peters, MBP 

Consulting, LLC. June 17, 2008. 

Public Law 108-447. 2004. Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005. 118 Stat. 2809. December 8, 2004. 

Rush, F.E., and C.J. Huxel, Jr. 1966. Ground-Water Appraisal of the Eldorado - Pahute Valley Area, Nevada and 

California. Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources - Reconnaissance Series 

Report 36. State of Nevada. Carson City, NV. 

Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA). 2008. Southern Nevada Water Authority 2008 Water Resource Plan. 

U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. DP-1 Profile of General Demographic Characteristics. Boulder City, Nevada. 

January 2009 34 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

________. 2006. Poverty Thresholds. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/threshld/thresh06.html. Accessed 

July 8, 2008. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2008. Natural Resource Conservation Service, Nevada Online Soil Survey 

Manuscripts. http://soils.usda.gov/survey/online_surveys/nevada. Assessed June 2008. 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1996. Final Environmental Impact Statement of the Nevada Test Site and OffSite Locations in the State of Nevada. DOE/EIS-0243. August 1996. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1974. Information Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect 

Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. USEPA/ONAC 550/9-74-004. March 1974. 

_________. 2008. EPA Region 9 Air Program. Air Quality Maps. 

http://www.epa.gov/region09/air/maps/maps_top.html. Accessed June 16, 2008. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992. Procedures for Endangered Species Act Compliance for the Mojave 

Desert Tortoise. Procedures Manual. October 1992. 

University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV). 2006. Risk Management and Safety. http://rms.unlv.edu. Accessed 

September 17, 2008. 

________. 2008. University of Nevada, Las Vegas Research Foundation. http://research.unlv.edu/foundation.html. 

Accessed June 25, 2008. 

January 2009 35 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

This page intentionally left blank. 

January 2009 36 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 

Appendix A 

Scoping Letter and Distribution List 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 

This page intentionally left blank.
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 A-1 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 A-2 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 A-3 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 A-4 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 A-5 

SCOPING LETTER DISTRIBUTION LIST 

The U.S. Department of Energy notified federal, state, and local agencies, tribal government representatives, elected 

officials, businesses, organizations, and special interest groups of the Proposed Action. The list of recipients that 

were notified by postcard of the availability of the scoping letter and attachments is presented below. 

FEDERAL AGENCIES

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

321 North Mall Drive, L101 

St. George, UT 84790 

Ms. Leilani Takano 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive 

Las Vegas, NV 89130 

Environmental Review 

EPA Region IX 

75 Hawthorne Street 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

 

Mary Jo Rugwell 

Field Manager, BLM 

4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive 

Las Vegas, NV 89130 

Ms. Kim Liebhauser 

Supervisory Realty Specialist, BLM 

4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive 

Las Vegas, NV 89130 

 

NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBAL REPRESENTATIVES

Ms. Lora Tom 

Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah Tribal Council 

440 North Paiute Drive 

Cedar City, UT 84720-2613 

Chairperson 

Moapa Band of Paiutes 

P.O. Box 340 

Moapa, NV 89025 

Mr. Richard Arnold 

Las Vegas Indian Center 

2300 West Bonanza Road 

Las Vegas, NV 89106 

 

Chairperson 

Pahrump Paiute Tribe 

P.O. Box 4311 

Pahrump, NV 89041 

Mr. Daniel Eddy, Jr. 

Colorado River Indian Tribes 

Route 1, Box 23-B 

Parker, AZ 85344 

Mr. Thomas Siyuja 

Havasupai Tribal Council 

P.O. Box 10 

Supai, AZ 86435 

 

Ms. Nora McDowell 

Fort Mojave Tribal Council 

500 Merriman Avenue 

Needles, CA 92362 

Chairperson 

Las Vegas Paiute Tribal Council 

One Paiute Drive 

Las Vegas, NV 89106 

Mr. Charlie Vaughn 

Hualapai Tribal Council 

P.O. Box 179 

Peach Springs, AZ 86434 

 

Mr. Charles F. Wood 

Chemehuevi Tribal Council 

P.O. Box 1976 

Havasu Lake, CA 92362 

 

 

NEVADA STATE AGENCIES

Mr. Ronald James 

State Historic Preservation Office 

100 N. Stewart Street 

Carson City, NV 89701 

Mr. John Jones 

Division of Forestry 

4747 W. Vegas Drive 

Las Vegas, NV 89158 

Mr. Rudy Malfabon 

Department of Transportation 

123 Washington Avenue 

Las Vegas, NV 89101 

 

Bureau of Water Pollution Control 

Division of Environmental Protection 

2030 E. Flamingo Road, #230 

Las Vegas, NV 89119 

Mr. Brad Hardenbrook 

Department of Wildlife 

4747 W. Vegas Drive 

Las Vegas, NV 89108 

 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 A-6 

CLARK COUNTY AGENCIES AND ELECTED OFFICIALS

Mr. Gale Fraser 

Regional Flood Control District 

600 S. Grand Central Parkway 

Las Vegas, NV 89155 

Ms. Marci Henson 

Desert Conservation Program 

500 S. Grand Central Parkway 

Las Vegas, NV 89155 

Mr. Richard Mendes 

Water Reclamation District 

5857 E. Flamingo Road 

Las Vegas, NV 89122 

 

Mr. Lewis Wallenmeyer 

Department of Air Quality and Environmental 

Management 

500 S. Grand Central Parkway 

Las Vegas, NV 89155 

Mr. Bruce Woodbury 

Board of Commissioners 

500 S. Grand Central Parkway 

Las Vegas, NV 89155 

 

CITY AGENCIES AND ELECTED OFFICIALS

Mr. Roger Tobler 

Mayor 

City of Boulder City 

P.O. Box 61350 

Boulder City, NV 89006-1350 

Ms. Vicki Mayes 

City Manager 

City of Boulder City 

P.O. Box 61350 

Boulder City, NV 89006-1350 

Ms. Pamella Maimstrom 

City Clerk 

City of Boulder City 

P.O. Box 61350 

Boulder City, NV 89006-1350 

 

Mr. Skip Spilman 

Conservation Specialist 

City of Boulder City 

P.O. Box 61350 

Boulder City, NV 89006-1350 

Mr. Scott Hansen 

Public Works Department 

City of Boulder City 

P.O. Box 61350 

Boulder City, NV 89006-1350 

Mr. Dave Olsen 

City Attorney 

City of Boulder City 

P.O. Box 61350 

Boulder City, NV 89006-1350 

 

Ms. Andrea Anderson 

Council Member 

City of Boulder City 

P.O. Box 61350 

Boulder City, NV 89006-1350 

Mr. Travis Chandler 

Council Member 

City of Boulder City 

P.O. Box 61350 

Boulder City, NV 89006-1350 

Mr. Mike Pacini 

Council Member 

City of Boulder City 

P.O. Box 61350 

Boulder City, NV 89006-1350 

 

Ms. Linda Strickland 

Council Member 

City of Boulder City 

P.O. Box 61350 

Boulder City, NV 89006-1350 

 

 

U.S. CONGRESSIONAL OFFICIALS

Honorable Harry Reid 

U.S. Senator 

333 S. Las Vegas Blvd., #8016 

Las Vegas, NV 89101 

Honorable John Ensign 

U.S. Senator 

333 S. Las Vegas Blvd., #8203 

Las Vegas, NV 89101 

Honorable Jon Porter 

U.S. Representative 

2470 St. Rose Pkwy, Ste. 204 

Henderson, NV 89074 

 

BUSINESS, ORGANIZATIONS, AND SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS

Mr. Robert Boehm 

UNLV Mechanical Engineering Department 

4501 Maryland Parkway 

Las Vegas, NV 89154 

Supervisor, Right-of-Way 

Nevada Power 

6226 W. Sahara Avenue 

Las Vegas, NV 89146 

Supervisor, Right-of-Way 

Southwest Gas Corporation 

4300 West Tropicana Ave. 

Las Vegas, NV 89193 

 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 A-7 

Mr. Earl Hodge 

2836 Belmont Drive 

Henderson, NV 89074 

Mr. Gilbert Cohen 

Nevada Solar One 

8275 S. Eastern Avenue, Suite 200 

Las Vegas, NV 89123 

Archeo Nevada Society 

9921 West Charleston Blvd., #5 

Las Vegas, NV 89117 

 

Executive Director 

Nevada Conservation League 

7473 W. Lake Mead Blvd., Suite 100 

Las Vegas, NV 89128 

Southern Nevada Project Director 

The Nature Conservancy 

1771 E. Flamingo Road, Suite 104A 

Las Vegas, NV 89119 

Desert Tortoise Council 

P.O. Box 3273 

Beaumont, CA 92223-1202 

 

Southern Nevada Environmental Forum 

705 Mallard Avenue 

Las Vegas, NV 89107 

Southern Nevada Field Office 

Sierra Club 

732 S. 6th Street 

Las Vegas, NV 89101 

Regional Coordinator 

The Wilderness Society Ca/NV 

655 Montgomery Street, #1000 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

 

Southern Nevada Off-Road Enthusiasts 

P.O. Box 270516 

Las Vegas, NV 89127-4516 

Nevada Conservation Forum 

Desert Research Institute 

2215 Raggio Parkway 

Reno, NV 89512 

 

LIBRARIES

Boulder City Library 

701 Adams Blvd. 

Boulder City, NV 89005 

Clark County Library 

1401 Flamingo Road 

Las Vegas, NV 89109 

Las Vegas Public Library 

833 N. Las Vegas Blvd. 

Las Vegas, NV 89101 

 

James R. Dickinson Library 

UNLV 

4505 S. Maryland Parkway 

Las Vegas, NV 89154 

 

NEVADA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AGENCIES

Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Department of Wildlife, Director’s Office 

Division of Emergency Management Department of Wildlife, Las Vegas 

Commission on Economic Development Division of Water Resources 

Fire Marshal Natural Heritage Program 

State Health Division National Nuclear Security Administration 

Hawthorne Army Depot Agency for Nuclear Programs 

Indian Commission Division of State Parks 

Division of State Lands Congressman Porter 

Naval Air Station Fallon Public Utilities Commission 

Commission on Minerals State Energy Office 

Division of Conservation Districts State Historic Preservation Office 

Division of Environmental Protection Burea of Mines 

Department of Transportation 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 A-8 

This page intentionally left blank. 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 

Appendix B 

Scoping Response Letters
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 

This page intentionally left blank.
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-1 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-2 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-3 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-4 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-5 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-6 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-7 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-8 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-9 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-10 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-11 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-12 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-13 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 B-14 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 

Appendix C 

Draft EA Comment Letters and Responses
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 

This page intentionally left blank.
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 C-1 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 C-2 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 C-3 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 C-4 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 C-5 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 C-6 

Comments and Responses on the Draft Environmental Assessment 

Solar Technology Center 

NO. COMMENT RESPONSE 

Nevada Department of Wildlife 

1 “Thank you for incorporating 

considerations and provisions 

regarding wildlife resources . . . the 

Department does not anticipate any 

additional consideration for wildlife 

resources.” 

Comment acknowledged. 

Nevada State Historic Preservation Office 

1 “The SHPO concurs with your 

determination that no additional 

inventories are necessary to identify 

historic properties . . . that could be 

affected by the undertaking.” 

Comment acknowledged. 

2 “The SHPO could find no evidence 

that the Department of Energy has 

consulted with affected Native 

America tribal representatives . . .” 

DOE provided evidence of their consultation with tribal representatives 

to the SHPO. No responses were received from any tribal 

representative. Section 3.4.2 of the Final EA was updated to describe 

this consultation process. 

Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management 

1 “. . . air quality regulations require a 

dust control permit before any 

construction activities can begin . . .” 

It was written in Section 3.2.2 on page 12 that the STC must obtain a 

dust control permit from the Department of Air Quality and 

Environmental Management (DAQEM) and submit a dust mitigation 

plan specifying the control measures that would be implemented 

during construction. The requirement for the UNLV Research 

Foundation to obtain such a permit was listed as an environmental 

protection measure in Section 2.1.5 on page 7. The comment was 

adequately addressed in the Draft EA and no revisions were made in 

the Final EA. 

2 “. . . standby generators . . . with a 

rating greater than 35 horsepower or 

26 kilowatts require a stationary 

source permit.” 

It was written in Section 2.1.1 on page 7 that a temporary dieselfueled generator (approximately 20 kilowatts) would be used until 

power is produced at the site. As written in Section 3.2.2 on page 12, 

this generator would qualify as a categorically-exempt emission 

source and would not require an air permit from the DAQEM to 

operate. The comment was adequately addressed in the Draft EA 

and no revisions were made in the Final EA. 

3 “The EA refers to ‘hydrographic 

basin’; please change this to the 

correct term for the state of Nevada, 

‘hydrographic area’ (HA)”. 

The geographic area designations for air quality are based on the 

Nevada Division of Water Resources’ map titled Water Resources and 

Inter-basin Flows dated September 1971. These geographic areas 

are watersheds or hydrographic basins. The word “basin” has been 

replaced with “area” in Section 3.2.1 on page 11 to be consistent with 

the terminology in the footnotes in 40 CFR § 81.329. 

4 “Section 176(c)(1) of the Clean Air 

Act requires federal agencies to 

conform to applicable state 

implementation plans . . .” 

An analysis of conformance in accordance with Section 176(c)(1) of 

the Clean Air Act was written in Section 3.2.2 on page 12. The 

comment was adequately addressed in the Draft EA and no revisions 

were made in the Final EA. 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 C-7 

NO. COMMENT RESPONSE 

5 “. . . HA 167 . . . is designated 

‘Unclassified, Nonattainment’ for the 

8-hour ozone . . . standard.” 

According to 40 CFR § 81.329 (revised July 1, 2007), hydrographic 

area 167 is designated “Nonattainment” for the 8-hour ozone 

standard. No revisions were made in the Final EA. 

6 “. . . Eldorado Valley is designated a 

‘Management Area’ . . . a 

preemptive measure that addresses 

areas with a high probability of 

causing a nonattainment area 

designation . . .” 

The designation of the Eldorado Valley as a “management area” by 

Clark County was written in Section 3.2.1 on page 11. The comment 

was adequately addressed in the Draft EA and no revisions were 

made in the Final EA. 

7 “The proposed project . . . falls 

under the purview of Section 7 of the 

Endangered Species Act . . .It 

should therefore undergo 

consultation with the U.S. Fish & 

Wildlife Service and be evaluated for 

Section 7 mitigation fees rather than 

Section 10 land disturbance fees . . “ 

The section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit authorizes the incidental 

take of the desert tortoise for private actions on non-federal lands, 

including the parcel leased for the STC by the UNLV Research 

Foundation from the City of Boulder City. That permit does not 

provide Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliance for federal 

agencies that authorize, fund, or carry out actions on private land, 

rather that ESA compliance is provided through the section 7 

consultation process. It was written in Section 3.3.2 on page 16 that 

DOE is consulting with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to 

Section 7 of the ESA for its proposed funding for a private action on 

non-federal land. DOE proposes to minimize and mitigate the effects 

of the federal action (i.e., funding the STC) on the desert tortoise by 

requiring the UNLV Research Foundation to comply with the terms 

and conditions of the section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit for 

private actions on non-federal land and anticipate the Service will 

concur. 

8 “The draft EA should include the 

calculations used to arrive at its 

estimate of 85,617 acres for the 

easement . . .” 

The number of acres for the conservation easement that Boulder City 

was to grant to Clark County was quoted from the Environmental 

Assessment for Sale under P.L. 85-339, Eldorado Valley Act, BLM EA 

Number NV-054-94-111, dated August 22, 1994. The text will be 

changed to “approximately 85,000” to match the language in the grant. 

9 “On Figure 4, the boundaries 

displayed for Boulder City and the 

Desert Conservation Area are 

confusing. A map showing the 

correct boundaries is enclosed.” 

The intent of Figure 4 is to show the land use surrounding the STC 

parcel and not to depict the entire boundary of Boulder City or the 

conservation easement area, which are well outside the project area. 

No revisions were made in the Final EA. 
Final Environmental Assessment Solar Technology Center 

January 2009 C-8 

This page intentionally left blank.