Source: https://openei.org/wiki/RAPID/Roadmap/3-FD-d_(1)
Timestamp: 2020-05-26 00:40:17
Document Index: 560324683

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 219', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 219', '§ 1502', '§ 251', '§ 1508', '§ 251', '§ 215', '§ 2806', '§ 2806', '§ 251', '§ 251', '§ 219', '§ 1502', '§ 1508', '§ 2806', '§ 2806']

RAPID/Roadmap/3-FD-d (1)
U.S. Forest Service - Transmission Right-of-Way (3-FD-d)
In the United States, a developer may need a Right-of-Way (ROW) authorization for a project on United States Forest Service (USFS)-managed public lands under Title V of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). FLPMA authorizes the USFS to grant ROW authorizations for the generation, transmission and distribution of electric energy. The USFS issues ROWs as special use authorizations. USFS regulations governing the authorization and management of special use authorizations can be found at 36 C.F.R. §§ 251.9-251.126
Transmission lines on USFS managed-land may be sited within ROW corridors. Section 503 of FLPMA requires the Secretary of Agriculture to establish ROW corridors to the extent practical and to reserve in each ROW grant the right to grant additional ROWs for compatible uses on or adjacent to the issued ROW.
Corridors are generally established through the Land Management Plan (LMP) amendment process. In addition, Section 368 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) required the Secretary Agriculture to designate transmission corridors on USFS land in 11 western states. The USFS, in conjunction with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the United States Department of Defense (DOD), prepared a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) that proposed the designation of more than 6,000 mile of Section 368 Corridors. These corridors are called West Wide energy corridors, and a Record of Decision (ROD) was signed on January 14, 2009 that incorporated the proposed corridors into the applicable LMPs.
The 2009 ROD established Interagency Operating Procedures (IOPs) for ROW applications within the energy transmission corridors established in the 11 contiguous western states. IOPs are required for project applications within Section 368 Corridors. The IOPs can be found in the West Wide PEIS ROD in Appendix B. IOPs contain requirements related to consultation with other agencies as well as planning, construction, operation, and decommissioning of a project. Many of the IOPs require specific actions or plans. For example, IOPs may require decommissioning activities conform to agency standards found in an agency guidebook; require that particular pieces of equipment, such as gravel work pads, be removed, or; require the developer to submit a decommissioning plan. Some IOPs may require action before the application is filed, while others are a required component of the Plan of Development (POD) or the ROW grant as stipulations. Developers should consult the IOPs when considering a project within a Section 368 Corridor. The IOPs do not change any of the requirements found in USFS special use authorization regulations.
It should also be noted that the USFS will only issue a special use authorization if the use is consistent with the mission of the Forest Service and if the use cannot reasonably be accommodated on non-National Forest Service lands.
U.S. Forest Service - Transmission Right-of-Way Process
3-FD-d.1 – Contact USFS to Initiate Process
36 C.F.R. § 251.54(a) requires the developer to contact the USFS officer with jurisdiction over the proposed site as early as possible in advance of the proposed use.
3-FD-d.2 to 3-FD-d.3 – Conduct Pre-Proposal Meeting
In addition, the USFS officer advises the developer regarding additional permits and consultations that may be required. Many of these requirements are discussed in the site evaluation section of this roadmap. See On-Site Evaluation Process: 10.
3-FD-d.4 to 3-FD-d.6 – Request Planning Permit, if Necessary
The developer may request planning permits for major developments. Planning permits may be valid for a term of up to ten years. In some cases, a planning permit may be required. Once the on-the-ground investigation and master development plan are complete, the developer submits an application for a special use authorization. The planning permit request must still pass the initial and secondary screening process, but issuance of the permit is categorically excluded from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. See Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, chapter 10, section 12.1.5.
If a planning permit is not requested or required, the developer should submit a proposal to the USFS. 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(b) requires the developer to file a proposal for a special use authorization orally or in writing with the appropriate District Ranger or Forest Supervisor. In addition to basic information identifying the developer, the proposal must include:
Sufficient evidence that the developer has or will have, prior to commencement of construction, the technical and financial capability to construct, operate, maintain, and terminate the proposed use ( 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(d)(3));
Except for requests for a planning permit for a major development, a description of the project, including maps and appropriate resource information, in sufficient detail to enable the Authorized Officer (AO) to determine the feasibility of the proposed use or activity; any benefits to be provided to the public; safety issues associated with the proposal; the lands to be occupied or used; the terms and conditions to be included in the authorization; and the proposal's compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and orders ( 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(d)(4)).
Any other information and data requested in writing by the AO that are needed to determine the feasibility of the proposed use; the proposal's compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and orders; the proposal's compliance with requirements for clearances, certificates, permits, or licenses; and suitable terms and conditions to be included in the authorization ( 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(d)(5)).
See Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, chapter 10, section 12.11a.
If the developer is a private or public corporation, the AO may also request information regarding the corporation’s organization, makeup and standing. See Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, chapter 10, section 12.11(a)(2)(b) and (d); 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(d)(2)(ii)(B), (D)(1)-(5).
3-FD-d.7 to 3-FD-d.9 – Initiate Initial Screening of Proposal
After the proposal is filed, the AO conducts an initial screening to determine whether the proposed action is consistent with existing laws, regulations, and applicable LMPs. In order to pass the initial screening process, the proposal must meet nine criteria:
The proposed use is consistent or can be made consistent with standards and guidelines in the applicable forest land and resource management plan prepared under the National Forest Management Act and 36 C.F.R. § 219;
The proposed use will not unreasonably conflict or interfere with administrative use by the USFS, other scheduled or authorized existing uses of the National Forest System, or use of adjacent non-National Forest System lands;
The developer does not have any delinquent debt owed to the USFS under terms and conditions of a prior or existing authorization, unless such debt results from a decision on an administrative appeal or from a fee review and the proponent is current with the payment schedule;
See 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(e)(1). For explanations and examples regarding the above criteria, see Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, capter 10, section 12.21.
If the proposal fails one or more of the initial screening criteria, the AO returns the proposal to the developer along with a written explanation (or oral explanation, if the proposal was filed orally) of the denial. If the proposal is denied after the initial screening, it will not receive further evaluation. See 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(e)(2).
If the proposal passes the initial screening, the AO notifies the developer that the proposal is subject to second level screening. At this point, the AO provides the developer with additional information required to continue the approval process. At a minimum, the AO provides the developer with guidance and information regarding the following:
Developer qualifications;
Identification of on-the-ground investigations which will require temporary use permits
See 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(e)(2); Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, chapter 10, section 12.3.
3-FD-d.10 to 3-FD-d.15 – Initiate Second Level Screening of Proposal
A project proposal may pass the initial screening without this information, but it is required in order to pass the second level screening. Therefore, the AO may request the additional necessary information in order to complete the analysis.
See 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(e)(5); Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, chapter 10, section 12.31(b).
36 C.F.R. § 251.54(e)(5) requires the AO to reject a proposal after the second level screening if:
See 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(e)(5); Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, chapter 10, section 12.32.
If the proposal passes the initial and second level screening, the AO notifies the developer that the USFS will accept a written application. The AO provides the developer with additional guidance and information regarding the application process, including the USFS procedures for processing the application and estimated time requirements. Once an application is accepted, NEPA is triggered. See 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(g)(1).
If the proposal fails to pass the second level screening, the AO returns the proposal to the developer along with a written explanation for the denial. Unlike proposals that fail to pass the initial screening, the AO may reconsider proposals that failed to pass the second level screening. The proposal must be corrected and resubmitted to the AO before it may be reconsidered. See 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(g)(1); Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, chapter 10, section 12.4.
3-FD-d.16 to 3-FD-d.18 – Application for Transportation and Utility Systems with Facilities on Federal Lands (Form SF299)
After the pre-application process has been completed, the developer should complete Form SF299, also known as the Application for Transportation and Utility Systems with Facilities on Federal Lands. The AO reviews the proposed use for the requested site, including effects on the environment, based on the application. The AO may require additional information in the application, in addition to the information provided in the proposal, in order to obtain a full description of the project’s proposed use and its effects. The information in the application should form the basis of the NEPA review. See 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(g)(2)(i).
3-FD-d.19 – Consult with DOE
The USFS is required to consult with the United States Department of Energy (DOE) when it accepts a special use authorization request for transmission lines with a capacity of 66kV or higher. A copy of the application and related documents describing the request must be forwarded to the Secretary of Energy. See Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, chapter 10, section 11.11.
3-FD-d.20 – Establish Cost Recovery Agreement
36 C.F.R. § 251.58 and Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, Chapter 20, govern USFS cost recovery and processing fees. The USFS may recover necessary processing fees for special use applications. 36 C.F.R. § 251.58 contains a processing schedule, with six processing categories based on the estimated number of hours required to process the special use authorization application. Applications that require over 50 hours of processing time are placed in processing category 6. Large transmission projects that require a NEPA analysis will almost always be placed in category 6.
The USFS estimates the agency’s processing cost for category 6 applications based on the complexity of the project, the amount of information required to assess the application, and the degree to which that information can be provided by the developer. See 36 C.F.R. § 251.58(c)(1). When processing category 6 applications the USFS agent must determine the issues to be addressed and develop preliminary work and financial plans for estimating recoverable costs.
For category 6 applications, the USFS and developer may enter into a category 6 major cost recovery agreement. Developers who enter into a category 6 major cost recovery agreement may qualify for a reduction in processing fees, in accordance with 36 C.F.R. § 251.58(c)(1)(ii). Section 23.41 of Chapter 20 of the Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook states that the developer may request a reduction in processing fees based on its written analysis of:
The monetary value of the rights or privileges to be granted;
That portion of the costs incurred for the benefit of the general public interest;
Any public service to be provided;
The efficiency of the USFS processing or monitoring; and
Other factors relevant to determining the reasonableness of the costs.
The USFS determines whether the processing fees should be reduced based on the developer’s analysis and notifies the developer of its decision in writing.
Processing fees must be paid in full before the USFS will process the application, unless a category 6 major cost recovery agreement provides for periodic payments. See Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook, Chapter 20, Section 26(3)(a). If the estimated cost of the category 6 application is lower than the full reasonable cost, the developer is responsible for the difference. Likewise, if the payment exceeds the full reasonable cost, the developer will receive a refund. See 36 C.F.R. § 251.58(c)(5)(iii) and (6)(iii).
3-FD-d.21 to 3-FD-d.22 – Does the Special Use Authorization Conform to the Land Management Plan?
36 C.F.R. § 219.15(d) requires all projects and activities approved on USFS-managed land to be consistent with the applicable LMP. As stated above, the AO will assess whether the proposed use is consistent, or can be made consistent, with the applicable LMP during the initial assessment. If necessary, the developer may petition the USFS to amend the LMP to include the proposed use. For more information regarding the USFS Land Use Amendment Process, see Land Use Plan Amendment Process:
1-(FD)-d.
3-FD-d.23 to 3-FD-d.24 – Has NEPA Been Completed for the Special Use Authorization?
NEPA requires federal agencies to consider the potential environmental consequences of their proposed actions and any reasonable alternatives before undertaking a major federal action. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required when a major federal action significantly affects the quality of the human environment. See 40 C.F.R. § 1502.3. If the effects of the action are not significant an Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) may be sufficient.
Chapter 10, section 12.52 of the Forest Service Handbook 2709.11 – Special Uses Handbook states that “[a]n environmental analysis must be conducted pursuant to NPEA to determine the effect the proposed use may have on the natural and human environment ( 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(g)(2)).” The developer is responsible for NEPA related costs, and the NEPA process must be completed before a special use authorization can be issued.
The USFS has already conducted a thorough environmental review of Section 368 Corridors during the West Wide PEIS process. A site-specific environmental review is still required for special use authorizations within Section 368 Corridors, but it is designed to tier with the West Wide PEIS. Tiering is defined as “using the coverage of general matters in broader NEPA documents in subsequent, narrower NEPA documents.” See 40 C.F.R. § 1508.28. Tiering allows the site-specific review to incorporate analyses of significant impacts by reference, thereby reducing redundancy and allowing the site-specific review to focus on issues not already addressed. If all of the relevant impacts have been analyzed in the West Wide PEIS, or if the impacts are not significant, an EA/FONSI will be sufficient. Otherwise, an EIS may be required. An EA/FONSI is preferred, because it is faster and cheaper than preparing an EIS.
For more information on the USFS NEPA process, see USFS NEPA Process:
9-(FD)-g.
3-FD-d.25 to 3-FD-d.26 – Process Application
Once the USFS receives form SF-299, the AO reviews the application and evaluates the requested use for the requested site. See 36 C.F.R. § 251.54(g)(2). The application should be processed concurrently with the NEPA review. Authorizations may not be issued until all pre-requisites have been met and the administrative appeal period has expired.
3-FD-d.27 to 3-FD-d.29 – Return Application with Written Decision Explaining Denial
If the application is denied, the AO returns the application to the developer with a written explanation of the denial. The developer may appeal the decision under 36 C.F.R. § 215.
3-FD-d.30 to 3-FD-d.34 – Notify Developer of Approval
If the USFS approves the special use authorization, it notifies the developer in writing. The USFS meets with the developer to discuss the terms and administration of the authorization. All of the terms and conditions included in the authorization are mandatory. In addition, the USFS provides the developer with the anticipated schedule of authorization. For power lines, the USFS issues the special use authorization for electric transmission lines using form FS-2700-31 for a term not to exceed 50 years. All special use authorizations must:
In addition, the AO may include any terms necessary to:
Protect federal property and economic interests;
Manage efficiently the lands subject to the use and adjacent thereto;
Protect other lawful users of the lands adjacent to or occupied by such use;
Protect lives and property;
Protect the interests of individuals living in the general area of the use who rely on the fish, wildlife, and other biotic resources of the area for subsistence purposes;
Require siting to cause the least damage to the environment, taking into consideration feasibility and other relevant factors; and
Otherwise protect the public interest.
Other terms that should be addressed include, but are not limited to:
Preconstruction Approvals - The USFS must approve the location, design and plans of all development within the authorized area prior to construction.
Rent – The USFS uses the BLM’s linear rental fee schedule for transmission special use authorizations across National Forest System land in accordance with Section 367 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The BLM uses a per acre rental schedule to determine rental fees for linear rights of way. The annual per acre rent is determined by multiplying the per acre zone value by the encumbrance factor by the rate of return by the annual adjustment factor. The per acre rental values are adjusted every year and the schedule is revised every ten years. See 43 C.F.R. § 2806.20 and 43 C.F.R. § 2806.22. Rental schedules can be obtained from BLM state or field offices.
Insurance – The developer must furnish proof of the insurance to the AO prior to the issuance of the electric power line special use authorization. The authorization may be conditioned upon a review of the policy and the United States must be named as an additional insured.
Bonding – 36 C.F.R. § 251.56(e) permits the AO to require the developer to furnish a bond to secure obligations required by the terms and conditions of the special use authorization. The AO may increase or decrease the bond as necessary.
Resource Protection – the special use authorization may include terms that address compliance with environmental laws, water pollution, esthetics, vandalism, pesticide use, archeological and paleontological discoveries, Native American graves protection and repatriation, protection of habitat and hazardous materials.
Interagency Operating Procedures – as stated above, many IOPs require the inclusion of specific stipulations in the special use authorization. These stipulations will generally relate to the construction, operation or decommissioning of a project. Developers siting projects within Section 368 Corridors should review the IOPs found in the West Wide PEIS. Other terms and conditions will be required, many of which will be tailored to the specific project. Failure to comply with any of the terms, conditions or stipulations may result in suspension or cancellation of the special use authorization.
Other terms and conditions may be required, some of which may be tailored to the specific project. See form FS-2700-31 for a full list of standard electric transmission line easement terms and conditions.
36 C.F.R. § 251.9-251.126
36 C.F.R. § 219.15(d)
40 C.F.R. § 1502.3
40 C.F.R. § 1508.28
43 C.F.R. § 2806.20
43 C.F.R. § 2806.22
USFS Electric Transmission Line Easement Form FS-2700-31
USFS West Wide PEIS ROD
Retrieved from "https://openei.org/w/index.php?title=RAPID/Roadmap/3-FD-d_(1)&oldid=972999"
This page was last modified on 13 December 2019, at 14:14.