- •VOLUME 1 CONTENTS
- •NOTATION
- •ENGLISH/METRIC AND METRIC/ENGLISH EQUIVALENTS
- •EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- •ES.1 Background
- •ES.2 BLM Proposed Action
- •ES.2.1 BLM Purpose and Need
- •ES.2.2 BLM Scope of Analysis
- •ES.2.3 Applications for Solar Energy Development on BLM Lands
- •ES.2.4 BLM Alternatives
- •ES.2.4.1 Program Elements Common to Both BLM Action Alternatives
- •ES.2.4.3 Solar Energy Zone Program Alternative
- •ES.2.4.4 No Action Alternative
- •ES.2.4.5 Reasonably Foreseeable Solar Energy Development
- •ES.2.4.6 Summary of Impacts of BLM’s Alternatives
- •ES.2.4.7 BLM’s Preferred Alternative
- •ES.3 DOE Proposed Action
- •ES.3.1 DOE Purpose and Need
- •ES.3.2 DOE Scope of Analysis
- •ES.3.3 DOE Alternatives
- •ES.3.3.2 No Action Alternative
- •ES.3.4 Summary of Impacts of DOE’s Alternatives
- •ES.4 Public Involvement, Consultation, and Coordination
- •ES.5 References
- •1 INTRODUCTION
- •1.1 Applicable Federal Orders and Mandates
- •1.1.1 Executive Order 13212
- •1.1.2 Energy Policy Act of 2005
- •1.1.3 Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
- •1.1.4 DOI Secretarial Order 3285A1
- •1.1.5 Executive Order 13514
- •1.1.6 DOI Secretarial Order 3297
- •1.3 BLM Requirements and Objectives for the PEIS
- •1.3.1 BLM’s Purpose and Need
- •1.3.2 BLM Decisions To Be Made
- •1.3.3 Authorization Process for Solar Energy Development on BLM Lands
- •1.3.3.1 New Applications
- •1.3.3.2 Pending Applications
- •1.3.3.3 Approved Applications
- •1.3.4 BLM Land Use Planning Process
- •1.3.5 BLM Scope of the Analysis
- •1.3.5.1 Program Analysis Versus SEZ-Specific Analysis
- •1.3.6 BLM Planning Criteria
- •1.4 DOE Requirements and Objectives for the PEIS
- •1.4.1 DOE’s Purpose and Need
- •1.4.2 DOE Decisions To Be Made
- •1.4.3 DOE Scope of the Analysis
- •1.5 Cooperating Agencies
- •1.6.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards and Other Regional and State Initiatives
- •1.6.2 Related Initiatives
- •1.6.2.1 Energy Corridor Designation
- •1.6.2.3 California Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan
- •1.6.2.4 Arizona Restoration Design Energy Project
- •1.6.2.5 Wind Energy Development PEIS
- •1.6.2.6 Geothermal PEIS
- •1.8 References
- •2.1 Introduction
- •2.2 BLM Alternatives
- •2.2.1 Program Elements Common to Both BLM Action Alternatives
- •2.2.1.1 Right-of-Way Authorization Policies
- •2.2.1.2 Monitoring, Adaptive Management, and Mitigation
- •2.2.1.3 Design Features
- •2.2.1.4 Segregation of Lands with Potential for Solar Development
- •2.2.2.1 Proposed Right-of-Way Exclusion Areas
- •2.2.2.2 Proposed Solar Energy Zones
- •2.2.2.3 Proposed Variance Areas for Utility-Scale Solar Energy Development
- •2.2.2.4 Land Use Plans To Be Amended
- •2.2.3 SEZ Program Alternative
- •2.2.3.1 Proposed Right-of-Way Exclusion Areas
- •2.2.3.2 Proposed Solar Energy Zones
- •2.2.3.3 Solar Energy Zone Policies
- •2.2.3.4 Land Use Plans To Be Amended
- •2.3 DOE Alternatives
- •2.3.1 No Action Alternative
- •2.3.2 Action Alternative—DOE’s Proposed Programmatic Environmental Guidance
- •2.3.2.1 General Mitigation Measures
- •2.3.2.2 Institutional and Public Outreach
- •2.3.2.3 Land Use
- •2.3.2.4 Water Resources and Erosion Control
- •2.3.2.5 Biological Resources
- •2.3.2.6 Air Quality
- •2.3.2.7 Cultural Resources and Native American Interactions
- •2.3.2.8 Visual Resources and Aesthetics
- •2.3.2.9 Socioeconomics
- •2.3.2.10 Environmental Justice
- •2.3.2.11 Safety and Health
- •2.4 Description of Reasonably Foreseeable Development Scenario
- •2.4.1 Comparison of RFDS with Lands Available under the Action Alternatives
- •2.5 Other Alternatives and Issues Considered
- •2.5.1 Distributed Generation
- •2.5.2 Conservation and Demand-Side Management
- •2.5.3 Analysis of Life-Cycle Impacts of Solar Energy Development
- •2.5.4 Analysis of Development on Other Federal, State, or Private Lands
- •2.5.5 Restricting Development to Previously Disturbed Lands
- •2.5.6 Restricting Development to Populated Areas
- •2.5.7 Restricting Development to the Fast-Track Project Applications
- •2.5.8 Analysis of Development on the Maximum Amount of Public Lands Allowable
- •2.5.9 Changes to BLM’s Proposed Solar Energy Zones
- •2.5.10 Other Suggested Alternatives
- •2.5.11 DOE Environmental Requirements
- •2.6 References
- •3.1 Technologies
- •3.2 Development Process Overview for All Technologies
- •3.2.1 Site Characterization
- •3.2.2 Site Preparation and Construction
- •3.2.3 Operations
- •3.2.4 Decommissioning and Reclamation
- •3.2.5 Transmission Facilities
- •3.4 Transportation Considerations
- •3.6 Health and Safety Aspects of Solar Energy Projects
- •3.7 Existing Agency Processes and Guidance
- •3.8 References
- •4 UPDATE TO AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
- •4.1 Introduction
- •4.2 Lands and Realty
- •4.4 Rangeland Resources
- •4.4.1 Livestock Grazing
- •4.4.2 Wild Horses and Burros
- •4.4.3 Wildland Fire
- •4.5 Recreation
- •4.6 Military and Civilian Aviation
- •4.7 Geologic Setting and Soil Resources
- •4.7.1 Geologic Setting
- •4.7.2 Geologic Hazards
- •4.7.3 Soil Resources
- •4.8 Minerals
- •4.9 Water Resources
- •4.9.1 Surface Water Resources
- •4.9.2 Groundwater Resources
- •4.9.3 Water Rights, Supply, and Use
- •4.10 Ecological Resources
- •4.10.1 Vegetation
- •4.10.2 Wildlife
- •4.10.3 Aquatic Biota
- •4.10.3.1 Pacific Northwest Hydrologic Region
- •4.10.3.2 Lower Colorado, Rio Grande, and Great Basin Hydrologic Regions
- •4.10.3.3 California Hydrologic Region
- •4.10.3.4 Upper Colorado River Hydrologic Region
- •4.10.3.5 Missouri River Basin Hydrologic Region
- •4.10.4 Special Status Species
- •4.11 Air Quality and Climate
- •4.11.3 Update to Section 4.11.2.4 of the Draft Solar PEIS: Visibility Protection
- •4.11.4 Update to Section 4.11.2.5 of the Draft Solar PEIS: General Conformity
- •4.11.5 Addition of New Section 4.11.4: Toxic Dust and Snowmelt
- •4.12 Visual Resources
- •4.13 Acoustic Environment
- •4.14 Paleontological Resources
- •4.15 Cultural Resources
- •4.16 Native American Concerns
- •4.17 Socioeconomics
- •4.18 Environmental Justice
- •4.19 References
- •4.20 Errata to Chapter 4 of the Draft Solar PEIS
- •5.1 Introduction
- •5.2 Lands and Realty
- •5.4 Rangeland Resources
- •5.4.1 Livestock Grazing
- •5.4.2 Wild Horses and Burros
- •5.4.3 Wildland Fire
- •5.5 Recreation
- •5.6 Military and Civilian Aviation
- •5.7 Geologic Setting and Soil Resources
- •5.8 Minerals
- •5.9 Water Resources
- •5.10 Ecological Resources
- •5.10.1 Vegetation
- •5.10.2 Wildlife
- •5.10.3 Aquatic Biota and Habitats
- •5.10.3.1 Common Impacts
- •5.10.3.2 Technology-Specific Impacts
- •5.10.4 Special Status Species
- •5.11 Air Quality and Climate
- •5.11.1 Common Impacts
- •5.11.1.1 Construction: Update to Section 5.11.1.2 of the Draft Solar PEIS
- •5.11.1.2 Operations: Update to Section 5.11.1.3 of the Draft Solar PEIS
- •5.12 Visual Resources
- •5.13 Acoustic Environment
- •5.13.1 Common Impacts
- •5.13.1.1 Construction: Update to Section 5.13.1.2 of the Draft Solar PEIS
- •5.13.1.2 Operations: Update to Section 5.13.1.3 of the Draft Solar PEIS
- •5.14 Paleontological Resources
- •5.15 Cultural Resources
- •5.15.1 Common Impacts
- •5.16 Native American Concerns
- •5.17 Socioeconomics
- •5.18 Environmental Justice
- •5.19 Transportation
- •5.20 Hazardous Materials and Waste
- •5.21 Health and Safety
- •5.22 References
- •5.23 Errata to Chapter 5 of the Draft Solar PEIS
- •6 ANALYSIS OF BLM’S SOLAR ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
- •6.1.2 Minimize Environmental Impacts
- •6.1.3 Minimize Social and Economic Impacts
- •6.1.4 Provide Flexibility to Solar Industry
- •6.1.5 Optimize Existing Transmission Infrastructure and Corridors
- •6.1.6 Standardize and Streamline the Authorization Process
- •6.1.7 Meet Projected Demand for Solar Energy Development
- •6.2 Impacts of the SEZ Program Alternative
- •6.2.2 Minimize Environmental Impacts
- •6.2.3 Minimize Social and Economic Impacts
- •6.2.4 Provide Flexibility to Solar Industry
- •6.2.5 Optimize Existing Transmission Infrastructure and Corridors
- •6.2.6 Standardize and Streamline the Authorization Process
- •6.2.7 Meet Projected Demand for Solar Energy Development
- •6.3 Impacts of the No Action Alternative
- •6.3.2 Minimize Environmental Impacts
- •6.3.3 Minimize Social and Economic Impacts
- •6.3.4 Provide Flexibility to Solar Industry
- •6.3.5 Optimize Existing Transmission Infrastructure and Corridors
- •6.3.6 Standardize and Streamline the Authorization Process
- •6.3.7 Meet Projected Demand for Solar Energy Development
- •6.5 Cumulative Impacts
- •6.5.1 Overview of Activities in the Six-State Study Area
- •6.5.1.1 Energy Production and Distribution
- •6.5.1.2 Other Activities and Trends
- •6.5.2 Cumulative Impact Assessment for Solar Energy Development
- •6.5.2.1 Lands and Realty
- •6.5.2.2 Specially Designated Areas and Lands with Wilderness Characteristics
- •6.5.2.3 Rangeland Resources
- •6.5.2.4 Recreation
- •6.5.2.5 Military and Civilian Aviation
- •6.5.2.6 Geologic Setting and Soil Resources
- •6.5.2.7 Mineral Resources
- •6.5.2.8 Water Resources
- •6.5.2.9 Ecological Resources
- •6.5.2.10 Air Quality and Climate
- •6.5.2.11 Visual Resources
- •6.5.2.12 Acoustic Environment
- •6.5.2.13 Paleontological Resources
- •6.5.2.14 Cultural Resources
- •6.5.2.15 Native American Concerns
- •6.5.2.16 Socioeconomics
- •6.5.2.17 Environmental Justice
- •6.5.2.18 Transportation
- •6.6 Other NEPA Considerations
- •6.6.1 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
- •6.6.2 Short-Term Use of the Environment and Long-Term Productivity
- •6.6.3 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources
- •6.6.4 Mitigation of Adverse Effects
- •6.7 References
- •7 ANALYSIS OF DOE’S ALTERNATIVES
- •7.1 Impacts of DOE’s Proposed Action
- •7.2 Impacts of the No Action Alternative
- •7.3 Cumulative Impacts
- •7.4 Other NEPA Considerations
- •7.4.1 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
- •7.4.2 Short-Term Use of the Environment and Long-Term Productivity
- •7.4.3 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources
- •7.4.4 Mitigation of Adverse Effects
- •14.1 Public Scoping and Public Outreach
- •14.2 Government-to-Government Consultation
- •14.3 Coordination of BLM State and Field Offices
- •14.4 Agency Cooperation, Consultation, and Coordination
- •14.5 References
- •15 LIST OF PREPARERS
- •16 GLOSSARY
- •FIGURE ES.2-1 Areas Proposed for Exclusion Since Publication of the Supplement to the Draft Solar PEIS Based on Continued Consultation with Cooperating Agencies and Tribes
- •FIGURE ES.2-4 BLM-Administered Lands in Colorado Available for Application for Solar Energy ROW Authorizations under the BLM Alternatives Considered in This PEIS
- •FIGURE 1.2-2 Solar Direct Normal Insolation Levels in the Southwestern United States
- •FIGURE 2.2-3 BLM-Administered Lands in Colorado Available for Application for Solar Energy ROW Authorizations under the BLM Alternatives Considered in This PEIS
- •FIGURE 2.2-7 Areas Proposed for Exclusion Since Publication of the Supplement to the Draft Solar PEIS Based on Continued Consultation with Cooperating Agencies and Tribes
- •TABLE ES.2-3 Proposed SEZs and Approximate Acreage by State
- •TABLE ES.2-5 Summary-Level Assessment of Potential Environmental Impacts of Utility-Scale Solar Energy Development by Alternative
- •TABLE ES.2-6 Comparison of BLM’s Alternatives with Respect to Objectives for the Agency’s Action
- •TABLE 2.2-3 Proposed SEZs and Approximate Acreage by State
- •TABLE 4.15-3 ACECs Designated for Protection of Cultural Resource Values That Are near BLM-Administered Lands Available for Application through the Variance Process
- •TABLE 6.1-2 Summary-Level Assessment of Potential Environmental Impacts of Utility-Scale Solar Energy Development by Alternative
- •TABLE 6.4-1 Comparison of BLM’s Alternatives with Respect to Objectives for the Agencies’ Action
- •TABLE 6.5-10 Recreational Visits for the BLM and NPS in FY 2000 and FY 2010 and for USFS in FY 2000 and FY 2010
1or private lands. Similarly, Western may be involved in associated transmission development
2on lands administered by any of these entities.
3
4The scope of the impact analysis includes an assessment of the environmental, social,
5and economic impacts of utility-scale solar facilities and required transmission connections from
6these facilities to the existing electricity transmission grid. As discussed in Section 1.2, viable
7solar technologies to be deployed over the next 20 years include parabolic trough, power tower,
8dish engine systems, and PV. These technologies are discussed in greater detail in Section 3.1.
10
11 1.5 COOPERATING AGENCIES
12
13The BLM and DOE are lead agencies jointly preparing this PEIS. Because the scope
14of the Solar PEIS is of interest to numerous federal, state, tribal, and local agencies, several
15agencies expressed an interest in participating as cooperating agencies. The entities listed below
16are cooperating in the preparation of this PEIS, and Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs)
17between these agencies and the DOE and/or the BLM have been established, as appropriate.
18The cooperating agencies were given the opportunity to review the Draft Solar PEIS and the
19Final Solar PEIS prior to their publication.
20
21The following agencies are participating as cooperating agencies in the preparation of
22this PEIS:
23 |
|
|
|
24 |
• U.S. Department of Defense (DoD); |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
26 |
• U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR); |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
28 |
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
30 |
• U.S. National Park Service (NPS); |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
32 |
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 9; |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
34 |
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), South Pacific Division; |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
36 |
• State of Arizona Game and Fish Department (AZGFD); |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
38 |
• State of California, California Energy Commission (CEC); |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
40 |
• State of California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC); |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
42 |
• State of Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW); |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
44 |
• N-4 Grazing Board, Nevada; |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
46 |
• State of Utah Public Lands Policy Coordination Office; |
|
|
|
Final Solar PEIS |
1-22 |
July 2012 |
1 |
• Clark County (Nevada), including Clark County Department of Aviation; |
|
2 |
|
|
3 |
• Doña Ana County (New Mexico); |
|
4 |
|
|
5 |
• |
Esmeralda County (Nevada); |
6 |
|
|
7 |
• |
Eureka County (Nevada); |
8 |
|
|
9 |
• |
Lincoln County (Nevada); |
10 |
|
|
11 |
• Nye County (Nevada); and |
|
12 |
|
|
13 |
• |
Saguache County (Colorado). |
14 |
|
|
15In addition, the State of California has established an Interagency Working Group on
16the Solar PEIS as a means of facilitating and coordinating federal, state, and county agency
17participation in the PEIS process for the state. The CEC is coordinating this working group.
18Members of the California Interagency Working Group include some federal agencies that are
19participating as cooperators as well as several State of California agencies (including the Native
20American Heritage Commission, Office of Planning and Research, Department of Parks and
21Recreation, State Lands Commission, and Department of Fish and Game), and Inyo and
22San Bernardino Counties.
23
24
251.6 RELATIONSHIP OF THE BLM’S PROPOSED PROGRAM AND DOE’S
26PROPOSED STRATEGY TO OTHER PROGRAMS, POLICIES, AND PLANS
29 1.6.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards and Other Regional and State Initiatives
30
31Some interstate and state initiatives have been created whose mission is to facilitate
32renewable energy development. This is partially in response to the passage of Renewable
33Portfolio Standards (RPSs) requiring that a certain percentage of a state’s electricity capacity
34requirements be supplied from renewable sources (e.g., solar, wind, geothermal, or biomass) by
35a given year. The six states in the PEIS study area all have RPSs; Table 1.6-1 gives the specific
36requirements for each state along with information about other state initiatives.
37
38The Western Governors’ Association (WGA) and DOE launched the Western Renewable
39Energy Zones (WREZ) initiative in May 2008, with DOE providing substantial funding. The
40WREZ initiative, which encompasses the Western Interconnection region, seeks to identify
41those areas in the West with vast renewable resources to expedite the development and delivery
Final Solar PEIS |
1-23 |
July 2012 |
1TABLE 1.6-1 RPS Requirements and Other State Initiatives in the Six-State Study Areaa
|
RPS |
|
State |
Requirements |
Other State Renewable Energy Initiatives |
Arizona |
15% by 2025 |
Arizona Renewable Resource and Transmission Identification |
|
|
Subcommittee (ARRTIS 2009). |
California |
20% by 2013, |
Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative (RETI) (CEC 2010). |
|
25% by 2016, |
|
|
and 33% by 2020 |
Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) to prioritize and |
|
|
streamline renewable energy projects in the Mojave and Colorado Desert |
|
|
Regions on the basis of renewable energy potential and plant and animal |
|
|
habitat protection. |
Colorado |
30% by 2020 |
Colorado’s Renewable Energy Development Infrastructure (Colorado |
|
|
Governor’s Energy Office 2007, 2009, 2010). |
Nevada |
25% by 2025b |
Renewable Energy Transmission Access Advisory Committee (RETAAC) |
|
|
(State of Nevada 2007, 2009) and Nevada Energy Assistance Corporation |
|
|
(NEAC 2012). |
New Mexico |
20% by 2020c |
New Mexico’s Renewable Energy Transmission Authority (RETA 2010). |
Utah |
20% by 2025d |
Utah Renewable Energy Zone Task Force (Berry et al. 2009; State of |
|
|
Utah 2010). |
aThe RPS requirements are current as of June 2012 and were obtained from the Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (North Carolina Solar Center and Interstate Renewable Energy Council [2012]).
bIncludes a solar set-aside requiring that 5% of the investor-owned utilities’ portfolios be from solar energy through 2015, and 6% per year beginning in 2016.
cIncludes a solar set-aside requiring that 20% of the investor-owned utilities’ portfolios be from solar energy by 2020.
dUtah’s RPS is a voluntary standard.
2
3
4 of renewable energy to where it is needed.10 The scope of the WREZ initiative includes solar,
5wind, biomass, geothermal, and hydropower resources. The initiative is intended to facilitate the
6construction of renewable energy facilities and the expansion of the electricity transmission
7 system needed to deliver the energy to load centers across the Western Interconnection (WGA 8 and DOE 2009).
9
10The Western Interconnection is the name of the electricity grid, overseen by the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC), that serves the states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming; part of west Texas; the Canadian provinces of
Alberta and British Columbia; and a small portion of northern Mexico in Baja California.
Final Solar PEIS |
1-24 |
July 2012 |
