1 |
The scope of the cumulative impact analysis in this section and in the Draft Solar PEIS |
2 |
assumes solar energy development at the level projected in the RFDS (the RFDS is presented in |
3 |
Section 2.4 of this Final Solar PEIS). Potential differences in cumulative impacts between |
4 |
alternatives are highlighted as appropriate. In applying the RFDS to all alternatives, |
5 |
the following caveats must be considered. |
6 |
|
7As discussed in Section 6.2, there is the possibility that the total level of development
8 could be curtailed under the SEZ alternative, at least in some states, because this alternative may
9not make enough lands available for ROW application. The extent to which this might occur
10cannot be quantified, at least in part because the BLM is likely to identify additional SEZs in the
11future to make more land available. Furthermore, because the RFDS is based on the state-
12specific RPSs, which are mandatory in each of the six states except Utah, it was assumed that
13development in that state that would not occur on BLM-administered lands would be made up
14for by development on non-BLM-administered lands.
15
16As discussed in Section 6.3, the no action alternative would make ample lands available
17for ROW application to support the projected RFDS development levels on BLM-administered
18lands. Although this alternative would not likely enhance the pace of utility-scale development
19over the next 20 years (see Section 6.3.1), the extent to which development would occur on
20BLM-administered lands cannot be quantified. Solar development that did not occur on BLM-
21administered lands would be assumed to be made up for by development on non-BLM-
22administered lands. This programmatic cumulative impact assessment assumes that solar
23development will occur up to the level of the total RFDS (i.e., approximately 32,000 MW on
24both BLM-administered and other lands), regardless of the portion of that development that
25occurs on BLM-administered lands.
26
27By restricting and/or prioritizing development in the SEZs under the two action
28alternatives, cumulative impacts may be more concentrated and/or severe within individual SEZs
29than described in this section. On the other hand, the concentration of development in the SEZs
30may also allow for the consolidation of related infrastructure (e.g., roads and transmission lines)
31and less total land disturbance. Cumulative impacts analyses for individual SEZs are presented in
32Chapters 8 through 13.
33
34An updated overview of ongoing and reasonably foreseeable activities in the six-state
35study area is presented in Section 6.5.1, including energy production and distribution
36(Section 6.5.1.1), and other activities such as recreation, mineral production, military operations,
37grazing and rangeland management, fire management, forestry, transportation, and industrial
38development (Section 6.5.1.2.1). An update for general trends in population growth, energy
39demand, water availability, and climate change is provided in Section 6.5.1.2.2. An updated
40discussion of cumulative impacts for the resource areas is provided in Section 6.5.2.
41
42
43 6.5.1 Overview of Activities in the Six-State Study Area
44
45Activities in the six-state study area considered in the cumulative impact analysis
46described in the Draft Solar PEIS remain valid overall, but some information has been updated
Final Solar PEIS |
6-37 |
July 2012 |
1since the Draft was issued based on the availability of newer data or in response to public
2comments on the Draft Solar PEIS. Tables presented in Draft Solar PEIS are updated in the
3following sections. For tables in the Draft that are affected, either a revised table is presented or a
4description of changes is provided. Tables with no changes are also identified.
5
6Tables 6.5-1 and 6.5-2 in the Draft Solar PEIS present the types of future actions and
7trends that have been identified in the study area as part of the cumulative impact analysis. These
8table are not repeated here. In Table 6.5-1, under Type of Action – Transportation, the following
9associated activity should be added: “Aircraft operations (i.e., commercial and general
10aviation).” No changes are required for Table 6.5-2.
11
12Updated programmatic-level actions on federal lands are presented in Table 6.5-3 of this
13Final Solar PEIS.
14 |
|
15 |
6.5.1.1 Energy Production and Distribution |
16 |
|
17 |
|
18 |
6.5.1.1.1 Oil and Gas Production |
19 |
|
20 |
|
21Table 6.5-4 has been updated to compare oil production in the study area between 2000
22and 2010 and gas production between 2000 and 2009. Table 6.5-5 has been updated from fiscal
23year (FY) 2009 to show sales of oil and gas from BLM-administered lands in the six-state study
24area for FY 2010 (BLM 2011a).
25
26
27 6.5.1.1.2 Coal Production
28
29Table 6.5-6 updates the comparison of coal production in the four producing states within
30the six-state study area from between 2002 and 2008 to between 2002 and 2010.
31 |
|
32 |
6.5.1.1.3 Nuclear Electricity Generation |
33 |
|
34 |
|
35 |
There are no updates to this section. |
36 |
|
37 |
6.5.1.1.4 Renewable Energy Development |
38 |
|
39 |
|
40 |
|
41Solar Energy. In 2009, solar energy accounted for about 1% of renewable electricity
42generation and about 0.10% of the total U.S. electricity supply (EIA 2012). As listed in
43Appendix B, as of May 31, 2012, there were 78 open pending applications for utility-scale solar
44power–generating facilities on BLM-administered public lands, with a total estimated capacity of
45approximately 33,000 MW. However, not all of the pending applications will result in ROW
46authorizations; applications are often terminated either because the developer decides to drop the
Final Solar PEIS |
6-38 |
July 2012 |
1TABLE 6.5-3 Programmatic-Level Actions on Federal Landa
|
Responsible |
|
Primary |
Description |
Agency |
Status |
Impact Location |
Oil shale and tar sands |
BLM |
Record of Decision for |
Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming |
development |
|
initial PEIS published |
|
|
|
Nov. 19, 2008; Notice |
|
|
|
of Availability of draft |
|
|
|
2012 PEIS published |
|
|
|
February 3, 2012, and |
|
|
|
Record of Decision is |
|
|
|
expected by Dec. 2012 |
|
Wind energy development |
BLM |
Notice of Availability of |
Arizona, California, Colorado, |
|
|
Record of Decision |
Idaho, Montana, Nevada, |
|
|
published Jan. 11, 2006 |
New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, |
|
|
|
Washington, and Wyoming |
West-wide energy |
DOE, BLM, FS |
Notice of Availability of |
Arizona, California, Colorado, |
corridors |
|
Final PEIS published |
Idaho, Montana, Nevada, |
|
|
Nov. 28, 2008, and |
New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, |
|
|
Record of Decision |
Washington, and Wyoming |
|
|
published Jan. 14, 2009 |
|
Vegetation management |
BLM |
Notice of Availability |
Alaska, Arizona, California, |
|
|
of Record of Decision |
Colorado, Idaho, Montana, |
|
|
published Oct. 5, 2007 |
Nebraska, New Mexico, Nevada, |
|
|
|
North Dakota, South Dakota, |
|
|
|
Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Utah, |
|
|
|
Washington, and Wyoming |
Geothermal energy |
BLM, FS |
Notice of Availability of |
Alaska, Arizona, California, |
development |
|
Final PEIS published |
Colorado, Idaho, Montana, |
|
|
Oct. 24, 2008, and |
New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, |
|
|
Record of Decision |
Utah, Washington, and Wyoming |
|
|
published Dec. 17, 2008 |
|
aUpdated programmatic-level actions are shown in bold text.
2
3
4
Final Solar PEIS |
6-39 |
July 2012 |
1TABLE 6.5-4 Trends in Oil and Gas Production in the Six-State Study Area
|
Oil Production (tbbl)a |
|
Gas Production (mcf)b |
||||
|
|
|
Percentage |
|
|
|
Percentage |
State |
2000 |
2011 |
Change |
2000 |
2010 |
Change |
|
Arizona |
59 |
37 |
–37.3 |
368 |
183 |
–50.2 |
|
California |
271,132 |
195,718 |
–27.8 |
418,865 |
286,841 |
–31.5 |
|
Colorado |
18,481 |
32,305 |
74.8 |
760,213 |
1,578,379 |
107.6 |
|
Nevada |
621 |
408 |
–34.3 |
7 |
4 |
–42.9 |
|
New Mexico |
67,198 |
70,764 |
-5.3 |
1,820,516 |
1,292,185 |
–29.0 |
|
Utah |
15,636 |
26,276 |
68.0 |
281,117 |
432,045 |
53.7 |
|
Total |
373,127 |
325,508 |
–12.8 |
3,281,086 |
3,589,637 |
9.4 |
|
atbbl = thousand barrels. To convert bbl to L, multiply by 159.
b mcf = million cubic feet. To convert cf to m3, multiply by 0.02832.
Sources: EIA (2001, 2011a,b).
2
3
4TABLE 6.5-5 Oil and Gas Activities on Public Lands of the United States in
5FY 2010
|
Producible |
|
Acresa in |
Oil Sales |
Gas Sales |
|
and Service |
Producing |
Producing |
Volume |
Volume |
State |
Holes |
Leases |
Status |
(bbl)b |
(mcf)c |
Arizona |
2 |
0 |
0 |
31,560 |
119,885 |
California |
7,845 |
322 |
81,315 |
3,576,882 |
8,419,421 |
Colorado |
6,482 |
2,174 |
1,467,839 |
3,968,467 |
311,724,278 |
Nevada |
93 |
26 |
23,637 |
415,426 |
–d |
New Mexico |
34,018 |
6,556 |
3,688,759 |
31,056,750 |
594,608,604 |
Utah |
7,542 |
1,460 |
1,107,185 |
17,229,310 |
275,515,303 |
Total |
55,980 |
10,538 |
6,368,735 |
56,278,395 |
1,190,387,491 |
aTo convert acres to km2, multiply by 0.004047.
bbbl = barrels. To convert bbl to L, multiply by 159.
cmcf = million cubic feet. To convert cf to m3, multiply by 0.02832.
d A dash indicates no activity.
Source: BLM (2011a).
6
7
Final Solar PEIS |
6-40 |
July 2012 |
1 |
TABLE 6.5-6 Coal Production in the Producing States within the Six-State |
|||
2 |
Study Area in 2002 and 2010a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State |
2002 |
2010 |
Percentage Change |
|
(thousand short tons) |
(thousand short tons) |
from 2002 to 2010 |
|
|
Arizona |
12,804 |
7,752 |
–39.4 |
|
Colorado |
35,103 |
25,163 |
–28.3 |
|
New Mexico |
28,916 |
20,991 |
–27.4 |
|
Utah |
25,304 |
19,351 |
–23.5 |
|
Total |
102,127 |
73,257 |
–28.3 |
a To convert short tons to metric tons (MT), multiply by 0.9072.
Sources: EIA (2003, 2011c).
3
4
5project or because the BLM determines that the application is not viable. In fact, several of the
6applications pending as of October 2011 have been closed (see Appendix B). The RFDS
7assumed for this PEIS estimates that solar development on BLM-administered lands over the
820-year study period will be only about 75% of that represented by the active BLM applications,
9or 24,000 MW. An additional 8,000 MW is projected to be developed on non-BLM lands in the
10study area.
11
12
13Wind Energy. In 2009, wind energy accounted for about 9% of the renewable electricity
14generation and 0.76% of the total U.S. electrical supply (EIA 2012).
15
16
17Geothermal Energy. Geothermal energy resources are the steam and hot water generated
18by heat from within the earth. In 2009, they accounted for about 5% of the renewable electricity
19generation and 0.4% of the total U.S. electricity supply (EIA 2012). Table 6.5-7 has been
20updated to compare the number and acreage of geothermal leases in FY 2002. The number of
21leases issued by the BLM in the study area nearly tripled between FY 2002 (255) and FY 2010
22(702).
23
24
25Hydroelectric Power. In 2009, hydroelectric power generation accounted for about 2.8%
26of the total U.S. electricity supply (EIA 2012).
27
28
29Biomass Resources. In 2009, biomass resources accounted for about 50% of renewable
30electricity generation and about 4.1% of the total U.S. electricity supply (EIA 2012).
31
32
33
Final Solar PEIS |
6-41 |
July 2012 |
1TABLE 6.5-7 Competitive and Noncompetitive Geothermal Leases on BLM
2Public Lands in FY 2002 and FY 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FY 2010 |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
FY 2002 |
|
Competitived |
|
|
Noncompetitive |
|
|||
|
|
|
State |
Acresa,b |
Leasesc |
Acres |
Leases |
Acres |
Leases |
||||
|
|
Arizona |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
|
|
2,084 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
California |
100,766 |
72 |
|
90,003 |
72 |
|
|
21,573 |
20 |
|
|
|
|
Nevada |
236,601 |
171 |
|
697,094 |
276 |
|
|
477,035 |
270 |
|
|
|
|
New Mexico |
4,581c |
4e |
2,941 |
3 |
|
|
640 |
1 |
|
||
|
|
Utah |
6,906 |
8 |
|
160,461 |
58 |
|
|
1,744 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
348,854 |
255 |
|
950,499 |
409 |
|
|
503,076 |
293 |
|
|
|
|
a |
Number represents acreage for both competitive and noncompetitive leases. |
|
|
||||||||
|
|
b |
To convert acres to km2, multiply by 0.004047. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
c |
Number represents total for both competitive and noncompetitive leases. |
|
|
||||||||
|
|
d |
Includes both Energy Policy Act of 2005 leases and pre-act leases. |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
e |
There were only competitive geothermal leases in New Mexico in FY 2002. |
|
|
||||||||
3 |
|
Sources: BLM (2003, 2011b). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
6.5.1.1.5 Transmission and Distribution Systems |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
Table 6.5-8 has been updated from FY 2009 data to show that in FY 2010, the BLM had |
||||||||||||
8 |
a total of 63,694 existing ROWs for oil and gas pipelines and electricity transmission lines in the |
||||||||||||
9six-state study area (BLM 2011b). This represents a 20.8% increase over the number of ROWs
10(52,724) in existence in FY 2002.The largest increase in ROWs issued between FY 2002 and
11FY 2010 occurred in California (up 27.0%), Utah (up 25.5%), and New Mexico (up 23.9%). The
12BLM processed 2,736 ROW applications and issued or amended 1,723 ROWs in FY 2010
13(BLM 2011d).
14
15
16 Transmission Line Projects
17
18Transmission projects, including the expansion projects listed in the TEPPC study, are
19updated in Table 6.5-9; this table is not exhaustive. Other projects in the western states can be
20found in the WestConnect 2012 Final annual 10-Year Transmission Plan and Appendices
21(WestConnect 2012).
22
23
24
Final Solar PEIS |
6-42 |
July 2012 |
1TABLE 6.5-8 Number of Existing Oil and Gas Pipeline and Transmission Line
2ROWs on BLM Public Lands in FY 2002 and FY 2010
|
|
|
|
|
Total ROWs in FY 2010 |
Percentage Increase |
|||
|
|
|
|
Total ROWs |
MLAa |
FLPMAb |
|
from |
|
|
|
|
State |
in FY 2002 |
Total |
FY 2002 to FY 2010 |
|||
|
|
Arizona |
4,503 |
288 |
4,447 |
4,735 |
5.2 |
|
|
|
|
California |
5,700 |
271 |
6,968 |
7,239 |
27.0 |
|
|
|
|
Colorado |
5,836 |
1,412 |
5,326 |
6,738 |
15.5 |
|
|
|
|
Nevada |
7,062 |
175 |
8,026 |
8,201 |
16.1 |
|
|
|
|
New Mexico |
24,809 |
20,928 |
9,813 |
30,741 |
23.9 |
|
|
|
|
Utah |
4,814 |
1,221 |
4,819 |
6,040 |
25.5 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
52,724 |
24,295 |
39,399 |
63,694 |
20.8 |
|
|
|
|
a |
MLA = Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
b |
FLPMA = Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. |
|
|
||||
3 |
|
Sources: BLM (2003, 2011b). |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
Natural Gas Pipeline Projects |
|
|
|
|
||||
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
The following text updates the Rockies Express-West Pipeline project, one of six planned |
||||||||
8 |
expansion projections on the interstate natural gas pipeline system in the Western Region |
||||||||
9 |
described in the Draft Solar PEIS (text added since the Draft Solar PEIS shown in bold). |
||||||||
10 |
• Rockies Express-West Pipeline. In April 2007, the Federal Energy Regulatory |
||||||||
11 |
|||||||||
12 |
|
|
Commission (FERC) approved the Rockies Express-West interstate pipeline |
||||||
13 |
|
|
project to transport more than 1.5 billion ft3 (42.5 million m3) per day of |
||||||
14 |
|
|
Rocky Mountain natural gas to supply states east of the Rockies. Two related |
||||||
15 |
|
|
components, proposed by TransColorado Gas Transmission Co. and Questar |
||||||
16 |
|
|
Overthrust Pipeline Co., were also approved. Together, these projects will |
||||||
17 |
|
|
consist of approximately 800 mi (1,287 km) of new pipeline and more than |
||||||
18 |
|
|
237,000 horsepower (hp) of compression, meter stations, and other related |
||||||
19 |
|
|
facilities. The pipeline system will span portions of Colorado, Wyoming, |
||||||
20 |
|
|
Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, and New Mexico (FERC 2008). The first |
||||||
21 |
|
|
segment—a 136-mi (218-km), 36-in. (0.91-m) diameter pipeline that |
||||||
22 |
|
|
extends from Meeker Hub in Rio Blanco County, Colorado, to |
||||||
23 |
|
|
Wamsutter in Sweetwater County, Wyoming—has been completed and |
||||||
24 |
|
|
went into service in February. That portion of the line added |
||||||
25 |
|
|
750 million ft3/day (21.2 million m3) of firm capacity to the region. |
||||||
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27An additional project, not included in the Draft Solar PEIS is the Calnev Pipeline
28Expansion Project. Calnev Pipe Line, LLC (Calnev), operating partnership for Kinder Morgan
29Energy Partners, LP, proposes to expand its refined petroleum products pipeline, the Calnev
Final Solar PEIS |
6-43 |
July 2012 |
1TABLE 6.5-9 Planned Transmission Projects, Including Expansions, in the Six-State Study Area
|
|
|
|
Planned |
|
|
|
|
|
In-service |
|
|
Project Name |
Description |
Applicant/Sponsor |
Date |
Comments |
|
Chinook Project |
500-kV HVDC from |
TransCanada |
2020 |
2008 TEPPC study |
|
Montana–Las |
Montana to Las Vegas, |
|
|
requested |
|
Vegas HVDC |
Nevada, following the |
|
|
|
|
Linea |
SWIP corridor from |
|
|
|
|
|
Borah, Idaho |
|
|
|
|
TransWest Express |
±600-kV HVDC from |
National Grid, APS, |
2015 |
Initial feasibility |
|
Project |
Powder River Basin, |
PacifiCorp, Western, |
|
studies completed; |
|
|
Wyoming, through Utah |
BLM, and WIA |
|
2008 TEPPC study |
|
|
to Las Vegas, Nevada |
|
|
requested; NOI, |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan. 4, 2011b |
|
Zephyr Project |
New 500-kV DC line |
TransCanada |
2016 |
2011 TEPPC study |
|
(formerly Northern |
from Medicine Bow area |
|
|
requested; |
|
Lights Inland |
in Wyoming, through |
|
|
preliminary |
|
Project)a |
Midpoint, Idaho, |
|
|
application filed with |
|
|
southward down the |
|
|
BLM |
|
|
eastern side of Nevada to |
|
|
|
|
|
the Las Vegas area |
|
|
|
|
SWIP |
New 500-kV line from |
LS Power and NV |
|
ROW approved in |
|
|
Twin Falls, Idaho, to |
Energy |
|
1998; EA, Aug. |
|
|
Las Vegas, Nevada |
|
|
2007; Final EIS for |
|
|
|
|
|
South Portion, |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan. 2010c |
|
Gateway South |
500-kV AC double- |
PacifiCorp, National |
|
Initial feasibility |
|
|
circuit from Aeolus, |
Grid, APS, WIA, and |
|
studies completed; |
|
|
Wyoming, to Mona, Utah |
BLMd |
|
TEPCC study |
|
|
|
|
|
requested; NOI, |
|
|
|
|
|
April 1, 2011; ROD |
|
|
|
|
|
expected in 2015 |
|
Wyoming– |
345-kV line connecting |
Trans-Elect, Inc., |
2014 |
Phase II status |
|
Colorado Intertie |
northeastern Wyoming to |
Western, and WIA |
|
(WECC path rating |
|
Project |
the Denver, Colorado, |
|
|
process); TOT 3 |
|
|
area |
|
|
(WECC Path 36) |
|
|
|
|
|
rating increase to |
|
|
|
|
|
900 kV in 2007 |
|
Populus–Terminal |
345-kV double-circuit |
PacifiCorp |
2010 |
Completed Nov. |
|
Project |
from new substation in |
|
|
2010e |
|
|
Idaho looping in various |
|
|
|
|
|
lines with connections at |
|
|
|
|
|
terminal substations in |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Utah |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Final Solar PEIS |
|
6-44 |
|
July 2012 |
TABLE 6.5-9 (Cont.)
|
|
|
Planned |
|
|
|
|
In-service |
|
Project Name |
Description |
Applicant/Sponsor |
Date |
Comments |
Midpoint–White |
500-kV line, 275 mif |
LS Power and Great |
2014g |
2008 TEPPC study |
Pine Project (SWIP |
from Midpoint, Idaho, to |
Basin Transmission, |
|
requested |
North) |
White Pine, Nevada |
LLC |
|
|
Wyoming– |
345-kV line from |
TransElect, WIA, and |
2012 |
|
Colorado Intertie |
northeastern Wyoming to |
Western |
|
|
Project |
Denver, Colorado, area |
|
|
|
|
(Pawnee) |
|
|
|
Powder River– |
|
North American Power |
2003 |
Project dropped |
Denver Project |
|
Group |
|
because of |
|
|
|
|
inactivityh |
High Plains |
500-kV AC (double- |
Colorado Springs |
2019 |
Feasibility study |
Express |
circuit) high-voltage |
Utilities, Platte River |
|
completed; Stage 3 |
|
backbone transmission |
Power Authority, |
|
MOU executedi |
|
path from Wyoming, |
PNM, SRP, |
|
|
|
across eastern Colorado |
TransElect, TSG&T, |
|
|
|
and New Mexico to |
Western, Xcel Energy, |
|
|
|
connect with facilities in |
WIA, New Mexico |
|
|
|
Arizona |
Renewable |
|
|
|
|
Transmission |
|
|
|
|
Authority, and |
|
|
|
|
Colorado Clean |
|
|
|
|
Energy Authority |
|
|
Eastern Plains |
500-kV line running |
TSG&T and Xcel |
2012–2013 |
|
Project |
south to north in the |
|
|
|
|
eastern plains region of |
|
|
|
|
Colorado |
|
|
|
Devers–Palo Verde |
Single-circuit, 500-kV |
SCE |
Project No. 2 |
AC line following the |
|
|
route of Devers–Palo |
|
|
Verde #1, from Devers, |
|
|
California, west to |
|
|
Colorado River |
|
|
Substation (midpoint) |
|
|
west of the City of |
|
|
Blythe, California, and |
|
|
from Devers to Valley |
|
|
substations in California, |
|
|
along the existing |
|
|
Devers–Valley #1 ROW |
|
2013 ROD July 13, 2011j; authorization to begin construction Sept. 20, 2011k; the Arizona portion of the project was canceled
Final Solar PEIS |
6-45 |
July 2012 |
TABLE 6.5-9 (Cont.)
|
|
|
Planned |
|
|
|
|
In-service |
|
Project Name |
Description |
Applicant/Sponsor |
Date |
Comments |
SunZia Project |
Two 500-kV AC (or one |
Southwestern Power |
2016 |
DEIS May 2012l |
|
AC and one DC)l from |
Group II, LLC |
|
|
|
southern New Mexico to |
|
|
|
|
southern Arizona |
|
|
|
Sonora–Arizona |
500-kV line from Palo |
PNM |
2004 |
|
Interconnection |
Verde, Arizona, to Santa |
|
|
|
Project |
Ana, Mexico; other |
|
|
|
|
sources report two |
|
|
|
|
345-kV circuits, |
|
|
|
|
approximately 300 mia |
|
|
|
|
long |
|
|
|
Palo Verde–Yuma |
500-kV, 115-mi line |
APS |
2014 |
Arizona Corporation |
West Project |
|
|
|
Commission granted |
|
|
|
|
APS a Certificate of |
|
|
|
|
Environmental |
|
|
|
|
Compatibility on |
|
|
|
|
Jan. 15, 2008m |
Canada–Northern |
500-kV line from British |
PG&E |
2015 |
|
California |
Columbia to Round |
|
|
|
Transmission |
Butte/Grizzly, Oregon, |
|
|
|
Project, Phase 1 |
and ±500-kV HVDC |
|
|
|
|
from Round |
|
|
|
|
Butte/Grizzly, Oregon, to |
|
|
|
|
Tesla/Tracy, California |
|
|
|
Interconnection to |
500/230-kV transformer |
Avista Corp. |
2015 |
|
California– |
at Devils Gap Substation |
|
|
|
Northern |
in Spokane, Washington, |
|
|
|
California |
area and possible phase |
|
|
|
Transmission |
shifters |
|
|
|
Project |
|
|
|
|
Central California |
500-kV double-circuit |
PG&E |
|
|
Clean Energy |
from Midway to Fresno, |
|
|
|
Transmission |
California |
|
|
|
Project |
|
|
|
|
Lake Elsinore |
500-kV line Talega |
Nevada Hydro |
2012 |
|
Advance Pumped |
Escondido/Valley |
Company, Inc., and the |
|
|
Storage Project and |
Serrano, California |
Lake Elsinore Valley |
|
|
Interconnection |
|
Municipal Water |
|
|
|
|
District |
|
|
Final Solar PEIS |
6-46 |
July 2012 |
TABLE 6.5-9 (Cont.)
|
|
|
Planned |
|
|
|
|
In-service |
|
Project Name |
Description |
Applicant/Sponsor |
Date |
Comments |
San Francisco Bay |
500/230-kV substation |
PG&E |
2013 |
|
Area Bulk |
and 500-kV and 230-kV |
|
|
|
Transmission |
lines with configuration |
|
|
|
Reinforcement |
changes |
|
|
|
Project |
|
|
|
|
Southern Navajo |
Increase rating to |
APS |
2010 |
|
Path 51 |
3,200 MW (upgrade of |
|
|
|
|
four existing series |
|
|
|
|
capacitors) |
|
|
|
TOT 3 (WECC |
230-kV line |
Western |
2019 |
WECC Phase II |
Path 36) Upgrade |
|
|
|
status |
Project (Miracle |
|
|
|
|
Mile) |
|
|
|
|
Navajo |
500-kV line from Four |
Dine Power Authority |
2010 |
Pending ROD; |
Transmission |
Corners, New Mexico, to |
|
|
access across Indian |
Project–Segment 1 |
a point south of Navajo, |
|
|
reservation is on |
|
Arizona, on Navajo– |
|
|
hold |
|
Moenkopi line and |
|
|
|
|
500-kV line from |
|
|
|
|
Moenkopi to |
|
|
|
|
Mead/Marketplace area, |
|
|
|
|
Nevada |
|
|
|
Sigurd to Red |
345-kV, 164-mi line from |
Rocky Mountain |
2015 |
Scoping meetings |
Butte to Crystal |
Sigurd to Red Butte in |
Power |
|
were held in Oct. |
(Segment G) |
southwest Utah and from |
|
|
2009; Draft EIS, |
Project (part of the |
Red Butte to the existing |
|
|
May 27, 2011n; Final |
Gateway South |
substation at Crystal |
|
|
EIS expected in 2012 |
Project, running |
|
|
|
|
from Wyoming to |
|
|
|
|
the desert |
|
|
|
|
Southwest) |
|
|
|
|
ON Line Project, |
500-kV east of the Dry |
NV Energy |
2013 |
Under construction |
formerly Ely |
Lake Valley North SEZ |
LS Power |
|
|
Energy Center |
|
|
|
|
Project (SWIP |
|
|
|
|
South) |
|
|
|
|
Final Solar PEIS |
6-47 |
July 2012 |
TABLE 6.5-9 (Cont.)
|
|
|
Planned |
|
|
|
|
In-service |
|
Project Name |
Description |
Applicant/Sponsor |
Date |
Comments |
Sunrise Powerlink |
New line about 123 mi |
SDG&E |
2012 |
Under construction |
Project |
from the Imperial Valley |
|
|
|
|
Substation in Imperial |
|
|
|
|
County to the western |
|
|
|
|
part of San Diego County |
|
|
|
|
(in Imperial County the |
|
|
|
|
line is a 500-kV line |
|
|
|
|
extending to a new |
|
|
|
|
Suncrest Substation south |
|
|
|
|
of I-8; from there, the |
|
|
|
|
line proceeds as a 230-kV |
|
|
|
|
line to the Sycamore |
|
|
|
|
Canyon Substation on |
|
|
|
|
Marine Corps Air Station |
|
|
|
|
Miramar) |
|
|
|
Path 27 Upgrade |
Intermountain DC line |
Los Angeles |
2009 |
|
|
(Utah) |
Department of Water |
|
|
|
|
& Power |
|
|
Southline |
345-kV double circuit, |
Southline |
2015 |
NOI April 4, 2012p |
Transmission |
350 mi from Afton, New |
Transmission LLC, |
|
|
Projecto |
Mexico, to Tucson, |
BLM, Western |
|
|
|
Arizona |
|
|
|
Energia Sierra |
230-kV double circuit or |
Sempra Generation, |
2014 |
DEIS Aug. 2010 |
Juarez |
500-kV single circuit, |
DOE |
|
|
Transmission |
1.65 mi (0.65 mi in the |
|
|
|
Projectq |
United States) across the |
|
|
|
|
United States–Mexico |
|
|
|
|
border near Jacumba, |
|
|
|
|
California |
|
|
|
Barren Ridge |
230-kV double-circuit, |
Los Angeles |
2016 |
DEIS Aug. 2011 |
Renewable |
75 mi from Barren Ridge |
Department of Water |
|
|
Transmission |
Switching Station to |
and Power , Forest |
|
|
Projectr |
Haskell Canyon and |
Service, BLM |
|
|
additional 12 mi to the Castaic Power Plant
Final Solar PEIS |
6-48 |
July 2012 |
TABLE 6.5-9 (Cont.)
|
|
|
Planned |
|
|
|
|
In-service |
|
Project Name |
Description |
Applicant/Sponsor |
Date |
Comments |
Hidden Hills |
230-kV single circuit, |
Valley Electric |
2015 |
NOI Oct. 11, 2011 |
Transmission |
9.7 mi from Hidden Hills |
Association, BLM |
|
|
projects |
Solar Electric Generating |
|
|
|
|
Facility to the Bright |
|
|
|
|
Source Energy (BSE) |
|
|
|
|
Tap Substation, 53.7 mi |
|
|
|
|
of new 500-kV single- |
|
|
|
|
circuit transmission line |
|
|
|
|
from the BSE Tap |
|
|
|
|
Substation to the existing |
|
|
|
|
Eldorado Substation; a |
|
|
|
|
230-kV transmission line |
|
|
|
|
from the Tap Substation |
|
|
|
|
to Pahrump |
|
|
|
Bordertown to |
120 kV, 10.2 mi along |
NV Energy, USFS, |
|
NOI Nov. 21, 2011 |
California |
the Nevada–California |
BLM |
|
|
Transmission Line |
state line, 15 mi west of |
|
|
|
Projectt |
Reno Nevada |
|
|
|
Sun Valley to |
500-kV single circuit and |
APS, BLM |
2016 |
NOI April 11, 2011 |
Morgan |
230-kV single circuit, |
|
|
|
Transmission Line |
38 mi from the Buckeye, |
|
|
|
Projectu |
Arizona, to Peoria, |
|
|
|
|
Arizona |
|
|
|
Central New |
345 kV from Guadalupe, |
Public Service |
|
|
Mexico Collector |
New Mexico, to Belen, |
Company of New |
|
|
Expansion Project |
New Mexico |
Mexico |
|
|
Indian Hills– |
500-kV line |
Los Angeles |
2010 |
|
Upland Project |
|
Department of Water |
|
|
|
|
& Power; Imperial |
|
|
|
|
Irrigation District |
|
|
Abbreviations: AC = alternating current; APS = Arizona Public Service; DC = direct current; BLM = Bureau of Land Management; EIS = environmental impact statement; HVDC = high-voltage direct current; I-8 = Interstate-8; MOU = Memorandum of Understanding; NOI = Notice of Intent; PNM = Public Service Company of New Mexico; ROD = Record of Decision; ROW = right-of-way; SDG&E = San Diego Gas & Electric; SEC = Southern California Edison; SRP = Salt River Project; SWIP = Southwest Intertie Project; TEPCC = Transmission Expansion Planning Policy Committee; TOT = time of transmission; TSG&T = Tri-State Generation & Transmission Association; WECC = Western Electricity Coordinating Council; Western = Western Area Power Administration; WIA = Wyoming Infrastructure Authority.
Foonotes on next page.
1
2
Final Solar PEIS |
6-49 |
July 2012 |
TABLE 6.5-9 (Cont.)
aTransCanada (2011).
bBLM (2011c).
cWestern (2010).
dBLM (2012a).
ePacifiCorp (2011).
fTo convert mi to km, multiply by 1.609.
gWECC (2011).
hWECC (2009).
iWIA (2012).
jBLM (2011d).
kCPUC (2011).
lBLM (2012g).
m APS (2012).
nBLM (2012b).
oSouthline Transmission (2012).
pBLM (2012c).
qDOE (2010).
rLADWP (2011).
sBLM (2012d).
t USFS (2012).
uBLM (2012e).
Sources: TEPPC (2008); WECC (2012).
1
2
3 Pipeline System. The existing system extends from the North Colton Terminal in Colton,
4San Bernardino County, California to the North Las Vegas Terminal, in Las Vegas, Clark
5County, Nevada. The Calnev Pipeline Expansion Project would involve the construction,
6operation, and maintenance of 233 mi (377 km) of new 16-in. (0.41-m) diameter pipeline from
7the North Colton Terminal to the Bracken Junction near the McCarran International Airport in
8 Las Vegas, Nevada, which would parallel the existing system for most of the route. In addition to
9the new pipeline, the Proposed Project would include a new pump station, electrical substation,
10and ancillary facilities near Baker, California; a new 3-mi (5-km) lateral from the Bracken
11Junction to McCarran International Airport; and new or modified connections to new or
12modified laterals, valves, and ancillary modifications. This would increase the existing Calnev
13system capacity from 156,000 barrels (24,800 m3) to approximately 200,000 barrels (31,800 m3)
14of petroleum products per day (BLM 2012f).
15
Final Solar PEIS |
6-50 |
July 2012 |