[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 245 (Thursday, December 21, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66253-66254]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31070]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Land Use
Authorization for Lakewood Raw Water Pipeline; Roosevelt National
Forest, Boulder County, CO
AGENCY: Forest Service, Department of Agriculture.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests and Pawnee National
Grassland is proposing to issue an easement to the City of Boulder
Colorado to cross 5 miles of National Forest System lands with a
replacement pipeline. The easement would allow the City to replace,
maintain and operate Lakewood Pipeline. The pipeline is a raw water
transmission line used to transport municipal water nine miles from
Lakewood Reservoir to Betasso Water Treatment Plant. The City proposes
to install the replacement pipeline in the vicinity of the 1906
pipeline, with some specific deviations to avoid potentially adverse
impacts to environmentally sensitive areas. The proposal is for a 27-
to 33-inch inside-diameter steel pipeline to be buried with a minimum
of 4 feet of cover.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received
in writing by January 20, 1996. The Draft Environmental Impact
Statement will be published mid-February, 1996 for a 45-day comment
period. The final Environmental Impact Statement will be issued at the
end of June 1996.
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: The Regional Forester, Region 2 Rocky Mountain
Region, will be the responsible official and will decide whether to
grant an easement for a pipeline on National Forest System lands and at
what location.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Submit written comments, suggestions
and questions to: Jean Thomas, Project Coordinator; Arapaho and
Roosevelt National Forests; 240 West Prospect; Fort Collins Colorado
80526; 970-498-1267.
[[Page 66254]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The City of Boulder is proposing to maintain
the historical water delivery function of the Lakewood Pipeline
facility. Continued operation to serve this function will require
reconstruction of the facility. The City's proposal consists of
installing the replacement pipeline in the vicinity of the 1906
pipeline, with some specific deviations to avoid potentially adverse
impacts to environmentally sensitive areas. The City will restore, to
the extent reasonably possible, the contours and vegetation on National
Forest System lands, estimated to be 18 acres, and the private lands,
estimated to be 25 acres, along the Pipeline corridor. The City will
require access to the pipeline for repair and maintenance.
The existing Lakewood Pipeline must be replaced because air
entrainment, caused by the current pipeline, reduces the Betasso Water
Treatment Plant's capability to remove drinking water contaminants. New
stricter drinking water standards have been adopted by the EPA. The
City will not meet the new standards based on water tests performed
under current operating conditions. Also, the pipeline interior lining
is deteriorating and collecting in the pipeline low points, restricting
the flow in the pipeline. This has reduced the pipeline's capacity from
the historical rate of 20 million gallons per day (mgd) to 14 mgd.
The Forest Service is considering analyzing five alternatives in
the Lakewood Raw Water Pipeline Environmental Impact Statement. (1) A
No Action Alternative, where the Forest Service would not authorize the
use of National Forest System lands for the pipeline. The City would
not be required to remove the existing pipeline because removal would
create undesirable environmental impacts. (2) A Cleaning and Relining
Alternative which entails refurbishing the existing pipeline, and
reducing air entrainment to Betasso Water Treatment Plant through the
use of vacuum deaeration equipment. (3) Sugarloaf Road or a Pump-Driven
Replacement Pipeline alternative. The objective of the Sugarloaf Road
Alternative is to confine pipeline construction to established road
corridors, thereby avoiding the potential environmental effects from
construction disturbance along the existing pipeline and North Boulder
Creek, but would require pumping. (4) The Existing Pipeline Alignment
is the City of Boulder's proposed action. This alternative closely
follows the existing and 1906 Lakewood Pipeline alignment along North
Boulder Creek. (5) Peewink Alignment--Gravity-Fed Replacment Pipeline.
This alternative seeks to address concerns regarding impacts to the
North Boulder Creek riparian zone and to reduce pumping and traffic
concerns associated with the Sugarloaf Road alternative.
Lakewood Pipeline reconstruction has been considered since 1988.
Over the years both the City of Boulder and the Forest Service have
asked the public to express their concerns and issues. The primary
concerns are about impacts of reconstruction to aquatic and riparian
ecosystems in North Boulder Creek if the pipeline follows the
historical right-of-way, or concerns for personal safety and
convenience if Sugarloaf Road is closed for periods of time for
construction along the road. The environmental analysis will also
address impacts to air, soils, forested and nonforested terrestrial
ecosystems, recreation and visual resources, cultural resources and
private properties and residents.
The Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests and Pawnee National
Grassland intend to publish the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
for public comment in mid-February, 1996. The Comment period on the
draft environmental impact statement will be 45 days from the date the
Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in
the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of
draft environmental impact statements must structure their
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is
meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. versus NRDC, 435 U.S.
519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at
the draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may
be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon versus Hodel, 803
F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. versus
Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these
court rulings, it is very important that those interested in this
proposed action participated by the close of the 45 day comment period
so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the
Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and
respond to them in the final environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives
formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing
the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act as
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
The Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests and Pawnee National
Grassland intend to issue the final Environmental Impact Statement the
end of June 1996.
Dated: December 13, 1995.
M.M. Underwood, Jr.,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 95-31070 Filed 12-20-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M