
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 156 (Monday, August 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48138-48145]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19781]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Jordan Cove Energy Project LP--Docket No. PF12-7-000: Pacific 
Connector Gas Pipeline LP--Docket No. PF12-17-000]


Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for 
the Planned Jordan Cove Liquefaction and Pacific Connector Pipeline 
Projects, Request for Comments on Environmental Issues, and Notice of 
Public Scoping Meetings

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or 
Commission), in cooperation with other federal agencies, will prepare 
an environmental impact statement (EIS) that will discuss the 
environmental impacts of Jordan Cove Energy Project LP's (Jordan Cove) 
proposed liquefaction project in Coos County, Oregon, and Pacific 
Connector Gas Pipeline LP's (Pacific Connector) proposed pipeline 
project crossing portions of Klamath, Jackson, Douglas, and Coos 
Counties, Oregon. The FERC is the lead federal agency in the 
preparation of an EIS to satisfy the requirements of the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The United States (U.S.) Army Corps of 
Engineers (COE), U.S. Department of Energy Office of Fossil Energy 
(DOE), U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (Forest Service), 
and the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management 
(BLM), Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), and Fish and Wildlife 
Service are cooperating agencies assisting the FERC in preparation of 
the EIS.
    The Commission will use this EIS in its decision-making process, to 
determine whether the Jordan Cove liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal 
is in the public interest, and whether the Pacific Connector pipeline 
is in the public convenience and necessity, in accordance with the 
Natural Gas Act (NGA). The BLM and Forest Service propose to adopt the 
FERC EIS in accordance with Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 
1506.3 to support decisions and findings that must be made by each 
agency with respect to the Pacific Connector pipeline project.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the 
Commission, Forest Service, BLM, and Reclamation will use to gather 
input from the public and interested agencies on the planned projects. 
Your input will help the Commission staff determine what issues should 
be evaluated in the EIS. Please note that the scoping period will close 
on September 4, 2012.
    You may submit comments in written form or verbally. Further 
details on how to submit written comments are in the Public 
Participation section of this notice. In lieu of or in addition to 
sending in written comments, the Commission invites you to make verbal 
comments \1\ at the public scoping meetings scheduled as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Verbal comments at the public scoping meetings will be 
transcribed by a court reporter and placed into the public record 
for these proceedings.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Monday, August 27, 2012, 6:30 p.m.  Tuesday, August 28, 2012, 6:30 p.m.
Southwestern Oregon Community        Umpqua Community College, Campus
 College, Hales Performing Arts       Center Dining Room, 1140 Umpqua
 Center, 1988 Newmark Ave., Coos      College Rd., Roseburg, OR 97470,
 Bay, OR 97420, 541-888-2525          541-440-4600

[[Page 48139]]

 
  Wednesday, August 29, 2012, 6:30     Thursday, August 30, 2012, 6:30
                p.m.                                 p.m.
Oregon Institute of Technology,      Medford School District, Education
 College Union Auditorium, 3201       Center Auditorium, 815 S. Oakdale
 Campus Dr., Klamath Falls, OR        Ave., Medford, OR 97501, 541-842-
 97601, 541-885-1030                  3636.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental 
mailing list for these projects. State and local government 
representatives should notify their constituents about these projects 
and this scoping effort, and encourage interested members of the public 
to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a Pacific Connector 
representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to 
construct, operate, and maintain the planned facilities. The company 
would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if 
the Commission approves the Pacific Connector pipeline project, that 
approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if 
easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the pipeline 
company could initiate condemnation proceedings where compensation 
would be determined in accordance with state law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural 
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' is available for 
viewing on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). This fact sheet addresses 
a number of typically-asked questions, including the use of eminent 
domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings.

Background

    On December 17, 2009, the Commission issued an Order authorizing 
the Jordan Cove LNG import terminal in Docket No. CP07-444-000 and 
Pacific Connector pipeline in Docket No. CP07-441-000. The Commission 
vacated those authorizations in an Order issued April 16, 2012, after 
Jordan Cove submitted its request to begin the pre-filing process to 
change the facility's purpose from an LNG import terminal to an export 
terminal.
    The FERC staff and cooperating agencies produced an EIS for the 
previous projects in May 2009. The new EIS for the currently proposed 
projects will make use of the previous analyses, update information, as 
needed, and evaluate the impacts associated with the new or modified 
facilities and routes.

Summary of the Planned Projects

    Jordan Cove proposes to construct and operate an LNG export 
terminal on the North Spit of Coos Bay. The terminal would have the 
capacity to produce about six million metric tons per annum (MMTPA) of 
LNG (equivalent to 0.9 billion cubic feet per day [Bcf/d] of natural 
gas). Facilities would include:
     7.3-mile-long waterway in Coos Bay for about 80 LNG 
carriers per year;
     0.3-mile-long access channel and marine berth;
     A cryogenic transfer pipeline;
     Two 160,000 cubic meter LNG storage tanks;
     Four liquefaction trains (each with a capacity of 1.5 
MMTPA);
     two feed gas and dehydration trains with a combined 
throughput of 1 Bcf/d of natural gas; and
     a 350 megawatt South Dunes power plant.
    The Pacific Connector pipeline would be 36-inches-in-diameter and 
about 230-miles-long, extending from interconnections with other 
interstate pipelines near Malin, Oregon to the Jordan Cove LNG terminal 
at Coos Bay. The pipeline would have a design capacity of 0.9 Bcf/d of 
natural gas. Related facilities include:
     Two meter stations at the interconnections with the 
existing Gas Transmission Northwest (GTN) and Ruby pipelines near 
Malin, in Klamath County, Oregon;
     A 23,000-horsepower compressor station adjacent to the GTN 
and Ruby meter stations;
     A meter station at the interconnection with the existing 
Williams Northwest Pipeline system near Myrtle Creek, in Douglas 
County, Oregon; and
     A meter station at the Jordan Cove terminal, in Coos 
County, Oregon.
    The general location of the project facilities is shown in Appendix 
1.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in 
the Federal Register. Copies of the appendices were sent to all 
those receiving this notice in the mail and are available at 
www.ferc.gov using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the 
Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, or call (202) 502-8371. For instructions on 
connecting to eLibrary, refer to the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    The newly proposed Jordan Cove LNG export terminal in PF12-7-000 
occupies the same footprint that was analyzed in our \3\ May 2009 EIS, 
with the addition of the South Dunes power plant at the location of the 
previously proposed dredged material placement area. Likewise, the 
Pacific Connector pipeline as proposed in Docket PF12-17-000 basically 
follows the route that was previously analyzed, with a few minor 
adjustments, and the relocation of the compressor station to the east 
end of the project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff 
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As presented in our May 2009 EIS, construction of the Jordan Cove's 
LNG terminal would affect about 390 acres onshore, with an additional 
72 acres needed to construct the marine berth and access channel for 
the LNG ships in Coos Bay. Construction of the Pacific Connector 
pipeline would affect a total of about 6,217 acres. The permanent 
operational easement for the pipeline right-of-way (ROW) and 
aboveground facilities would occupy about 1,439 acres.

The EIS Scoping Process

    The NEPA requires the Commission to take into account the 
environmental impacts that could result from an action whenever it 
considers the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and 
Necessity, or makes a public interest determination. The NEPA also 
requires us to discover and address concerns the public may have about 
proposals. This process is referred to as scoping. The main goal of the 
scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EIS on the important 
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public 
comments on the scope of the issues to be addressed in the EIS. We will 
consider all filed comments during the preparation of the EIS.
    In the EIS we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of 
the construction and operation of the planned projects under these 
general headings:
     Land use;
     Geology and soils;
     Water resources and wetlands;
     Vegetation and wildlife;
     Cultural resources;
     Recreation and visual resources;
     Air quality and noise; and
     Public safety.
    We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the planned projects 
or portions of the projects, and make recommendations on how to lessen 
or avoid impacts on the various environmental resources. The EIS will 
present our independent analysis of the issues.
    Although no formal applications have been filed yet, we have 
already initiated

[[Page 48140]]

our NEPA review under the Commission's pre-filing process. The purpose 
of the pre-filing process is to encourage early involvement of 
interested stakeholders, and to identify and resolve issues before the 
FERC receives an application. As part of our pre-filing review, we have 
begun to contact some federal and state agencies to discuss their 
involvement in the scoping process and the preparation of the EIS.
    The COE, DOE, Forest Service, BLM, and Reclamation also have 
responsibilities under the NEPA, and can adopt the EIS for their own 
agencies purposes. The BLM, Reclamation, and Forest Service will use 
this EIS to evaluate the effects of the Pacific Connector pipeline 
project on lands and facilities managed by these agencies. The BLM and 
Forest Service will also use the EIS to address proposed amendments of 
their respective land management plans \4\ that may be necessary to 
make provision for the project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ BLM land management plans are called ``Resource Management 
Plans'' or RMPs. Forest Service land management plans are called 
``Land and Resource Management Plans'' or LRMPs. The term ``land 
management plan'' is generic and may apply to either an RMP or LRMP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With this notice, we are asking other agencies with jurisdiction by 
law and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues 
related to the projects to formally cooperate with us in the 
preparation of the EIS.\5\ Agencies that would like to request 
cooperating agency status should follow the instructions for filing 
comments provided under the Public Participation section of this 
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing 
cooperating agency responsibilities are at 40 CFR 1501.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We will publish and distribute a draft EIS for public comment. 
After the comment period, we will consider all timely comments and 
revise the document, as necessary, before issuing a final EIS. To 
ensure we have the opportunity to consider and address your comments, 
please carefully follow the instructions in the Public Participation 
section of this notice.

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's 
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic 
Preservation Act (NHPA), we are using this notice to initiate 
consultations with the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office 
(SHPO), and to solicit its views, and those of other government 
agencies, interested Indian tribes, and the public on the projects' 
potential effects on historic properties.\6\ The EIS will define the 
project-specific area of potential effects (APE), determined in 
consultation with the SHPO. On natural gas projects, the APE at a 
minimum encompasses all areas subject to ground disturbance (including 
the construction ROW, temporary extra workspaces, contractor/pipe 
storage yards, compressor stations and other aboveground facilities, 
and access roads). The EIS will document our findings on the projects' 
potential impacts on historic properties and summarize the status of 
consultations under section 106. The cooperating agencies will also 
participate in the section 106 consultation process to ensure that 
their requirements under the NHPA are met.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regulations 
are at 36 CFR part 800. Those regulations define historic properties 
as any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, 
or object included in or eligible for inclusion in the National 
Register for Historic Places.
    \7\ We and the federal land managing agencies previously 
executed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to resolve adverse effects 
at historic properties for the Jordan Cove LNG terminal and Pacific 
Connector pipeline in Docket Nos. CP07-441-000 and CP07-444-000. The 
MOA will be amended for the new proposals under Docket Nos. PF12-7-
000 and PF12-17-000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Currently Identified Environmental Issues

    The purpose of the public scoping process is to determine relevant 
issues that will influence the scope of the environmental analysis, 
including alternatives. Scoping also allows the public to comment on 
the BLM and Forest Service plan amendment process, and the 
consideration of a ROW Grant.
    Based in part on our previous environmental analysis, information 
provided by Jordan Cove and Pacific Connector for their new proposals, 
and input from other federal and state resource agencies, and other 
stakeholders, we have already identified several issues that we think 
deserve attention during our current review. This preliminary list of 
environmental issues may change based on your comments and our further 
analysis. The FERC staff identified the following preliminary list of 
issues:
     Reliability and safety for LNG carrier traffic in Coos 
Bay, the LNG terminal, and the pipeline;
     Impacts on aquatic resources from dredging the LNG 
terminal access channel and berth, and pipeline trenching in Coos Bay;
     Geological hazards to the LNG terminal from seismic 
activity;
     Geological hazards, including landslides at steep slopes, 
along the pipeline route;
     Impacts of pipeline construction on federally listed 
threatened and endangered species, including salmon, marbled murrelet, 
and northern spotted owl;
     Impacts of pipeline construction on private landowners; 
and
     Visual impacts resulting from construction and operation 
of the projects.
    Preliminary issues for the plan amendments have been identified by 
BLM and Forest Service staff. The issues include:
     Effects of proposed amendments on Survey and Manage 
species and their habitat;
     Effects of proposed amendments on contiguous existing or 
recruitment habitat for marbled murrelets within 0.5 mile of occupied 
marbled murrelet sites;
     Effects of proposed amendments on habitat in Known Owl 
Activity Centers (KOAC); and
     Effects of the proposed amendments on Late Successional 
Reserves (LSR).
    Preliminary BLM and Forest Service planning criteria include:
     Evaluation of significance of proposed amendments of 
Forest Service Land and Resource Management Plans (LRMP) in the context 
of goals and objectives of the affected LRMPs. Whether a plan amendment 
is significant is guided by several factors, including the timing and 
duration of the proposed change, the location and size of the project, 
and how the proposed change could alter multiple-use goals and 
objectives for long-term land and resource management;
     Likelihood of persistence of affected Survey and Manage 
species within the range of the northern spotted owl;
     Amount and quality of marbled murrelet habitat affected by 
construction and operation of the Pacific Connector pipeline project;
     Amount and quality of habitat in KOAC affected by 
construction and operation of the Pacific Connector pipeline project;
     Functionality of LSR; and
     Impacts on Connectivity and Diversity Blocks on BLM lands.
    The BLM and Forest Service seek public input on issues and planning 
criteria related to amendment of their District and Forest land 
management plans related to the Pacific Connector pipeline project. The 
BLM, Reclamation, and Forest Service also seek public input on issues 
and planning criteria related to issuance of the ROW Grant, as 
discussed below (under Proposed Actions of the BLM and Forest Service).

[[Page 48141]]

Proposed Actions of the DOE

    The DOE must meet its obligation under section 3 of the NGA, to 
authorize the import and export of natural gas, including LNG, unless 
it finds that the proposed import or export will not be consistent with 
the public interest. The purpose and need for DOE actions is to respond 
to the application filed by Jordan Cove with the DOE on March 23, 2012 
(FE Docket No. 12-32-LNG), seeking authorization to export up to 6 
MMTPA of LNG, an export volume equivalent to about 292 Bcf per year of 
natural gas, for a 25-year period, commencing the earlier of the date 
of first export or seven years from the date of issuance of the 
requested authorization. The LNG proposed for export would be from 
Jordan Cove's proposed Coos Bay terminal to any country: (1) With which 
the U.S. does not have a free trade agreement requiring the national 
treatment for trade in natural gas; (2) that has, or in the future 
develops, the capacity to import LNG; and (3) with which trade is not 
prohibited by U.S. law or policy.
    Because the proposed projects may involve actions in floodplains, 
in accordance with 10 CFR part 1022, Compliance with Floodplain and 
Wetland Environmental Review Requirements, the EIS will include a 
floodplain assessment, as appropriate. A floodplain statement of 
findings will be included in any DOE determinations.

Proposed Actions of the BLM and Forest Service

    The purpose of and need for the proposed action by the BLM is to 
respond to a ROW Grant application originally submitted by Pacific 
Connector on April 17, 2006 to construct, operate, maintain, and 
eventually decommission a natural gas pipeline that crosses lands and 
facilities administered by the BLM, Reclamation, and Forest Service. In 
addition, there is a need for the BLM and the Forest Service to 
consider amending affected District and Forest land management plans to 
make provision for the Pacific Connector ROW.
    The proposed action of the BLM and Forest Service has two 
components. First, the BLM would amend its Resource Management Plans 
(RMP) for the Coos Bay, Roseburg, and Medford Districts, and Klamath 
Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview District; while the Forest Service 
would amend its LRMPs for the Umpqua, Rogue River, and Winema National 
Forests to make provisions for the Pacific Connector pipeline project. 
Reclamation has no land use plan amendments associated with this 
action. Second, in accordance with 43 CFR 2882.3(i), the BLM would 
issue a ROW Grant in response to Pacific Connector's application for 
the project to occupy federal lands, with the written concurrence of 
the Forest Service and Reclamation. Each agency may submit specific 
stipulations, including mitigation measures, for inclusion in the ROW 
Grant related to lands, facilities, and easements within their 
respective jurisdictions.
    The Secretary of the Interior has delegated authority to the BLM to 
grant a ROW in response to Pacific Connector's application for natural 
gas transmission on federal lands under the Mineral Leasing Act of 
1920. The Responsible Official for amendments of BLM RMPs and issuance 
of the ROW Grant is the BLM Oregon/Washington State Director. The 
Responsible Official for amendment of Forest Service LRMPs is the 
Forest Supervisor of the Umpqua National Forest. The Responsible 
Official for concurrence on issuance of the ROW Grant by Reclamation is 
the Area Manager of the Mid-Pacific Region's Klamath Basin Area Office. 
In accordance with 36 CFR 219.17(b)(2), the Deciding Official for the 
Forest Service has elected to use the 1982 planning rule procedures to 
amend Forest Service LRMPs as provided in the transition procedures of 
the 2000 planning rule.
    If the BLM adopts the new FERC EIS for the Pacific Connector 
pipeline project (in Docket No. PF12-17-000), the Oregon/Washington 
State Director of the BLM will make the following decisions and 
determinations:
     Determine whether to amend the RMPs for the BLM Coos Bay, 
Roseburg, and Medford Districts and the Klamath Falls Resource Area of 
the Lakeview District as proposed or as described in an alternative to 
the Proposed Action; and
     Respond to the Pacific Connector application, with 
concurrence of Reclamation and Forest Service, by issuing a ROW Grant, 
granting the ROW with conditions, or denying the application.
    If the Forest Service adopts the new FERC EIS for the Pacific 
Connector pipeline project (in Docket No. PF12-17-000), the Forest 
Supervisor of the Umpqua National Forest will make the following 
decisions and determinations:
     Decide whether to amend the LRMPs of the Umpqua, Rogue 
River, and Winema National Forests as proposed or as described in an 
alternative; and
     Determine the significance of the proposed amendments or 
alternatives in accordance with national forest planning regulation 36 
CFR 219.10(f) (1982 procedures) using criteria in Forest Service Manual 
1926.5

Amendment of BLM and Forest Service Land Management Plans

BLM/FS-1--Site-Specific Waiver of Management Recommendations for Survey 
and Manage Species on the BLM Coos Bay District, Roseburg District, 
Medford District, and Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview 
District RMPs, and the Umpqua National Forest, Rogue River National 
Forest, and Winema National Forest LRMPs
    Applicable BLM District RMPs and National Forest LRMPs would be 
amended to exempt certain known sites within the area of the proposed 
Pacific Connector ROW Grant from the Management Recommendations 
required by the 2001 ``Record of Decision and Standards and Guidelines 
for Amendments to the Survey and Manage, Protection Buffer, and other 
Mitigation Measures Standards and Guidelines,'' as modified in July 
2011. For known sites within the proposed ROW that cannot be avoided, 
the 2001 Management Recommendations for protection of known sites of 
Survey and Manage species would not apply. For known sites located 
outside the proposed ROW but with an overlapping protection buffer only 
that portion of the buffer within the ROW would be exempt from the 
protection requirements of the Management Recommendations. Those 
Management Recommendations would remain in effect for that portion of 
the protection buffer that is outside of the ROW. The proposed 
amendment would not exempt the BLM or the Forest Service from the 
requirements of the 2001 Survey and Manage Record of Decision, as 
modified, to maintain species persistence for affected Survey and 
Manage species within the range of the northern spotted owl. This is a 
site-specific amendment applicable only to the Pacific Connector ROW 
and would not change future management direction at any other location.

Amendments of BLM RMPs

BLM-1--Site-Specific Exemption of Requirement To Protect Marbled 
Murrelet Habitat on the BLM Coos Bay and Roseburg Districts
    The Coos Bay District and Roseburg District RMPs would be amended 
to waive the requirements to protect contiguous existing and 
recruitment habitat for marbled murrelets within the Pacific Connector 
ROW that is within 0.5 miles of occupied marbled murrelet sites, as 
mapped by the BLM. This is a

[[Page 48142]]

site-specific amendment applicable only to the Pacific Connector ROW 
and would not change future management direction at any other location.
BLM-2--Site Specific Exemption of Requirement To Retain Habitat in KOAC 
on the BLM Roseburg District
    The Roseburg District RMP would be amended to exempt the Pacific 
Connector pipeline project from the requirement to retain habitat in 
KOAC at three locations. This is a site-specific amendment applicable 
only to the Pacific Connector ROW and would not change future 
management direction at any other location.
BLM-3--Reallocation of Matrix Lands to LSR, Roseburg District
    The Roseburg District RMP would be amended to change the 
designation of approximately 409 acres from Matrix land allocations to 
the LSR land allocation in Sections 32 and 34, Township (T.) 29\1/2\ 
South (S.), Range (R.) 7 West (W.); and Section 1, T.30S., 
R.7W.,Willamette Meridian (W.M.), Oregon (OR). This change in land 
allocation is proposed to mitigate the potential adverse impact of the 
Pacific Connector pipeline project on LSRs in the Roseburg District. 
The amendment would change future management direction for the lands 
reallocated from Matrix lands to LSR.
BLM-4--Reallocation of Matrix Lands to LSR, Coos Bay District
    The Coos Bay District RMP would be amended to change the 
designation of approximately 454 acres from Matrix land allocations to 
the LSR land allocation in Sections 19 and 29 of T.28S., R.10W., W.M., 
OR. This change in land allocation is proposed to mitigate the 
potential adverse impact of the Pacific Connector pipeline project on 
LSRs in the Coos Bay District. The amendment would change future 
management direction for the lands reallocated from Matrix lands to 
LSR.

Amendment of the Umpqua National Forest LRMP

UNF-1--Site-Specific Amendment To Allow Removal of Effective Shade on 
Perennial Streams
    The Umpqua National Forest LRMP would be amended to change the 
Standards and Guidelines for Fisheries (Umpqua National Forest LRMP, 
page IV-33, Forest-Wide) to allow the removal of effective shading 
vegetation where perennial streams are crossed by the Pacific Connector 
ROW. This change would potentially affect an estimated total of three 
acres of effective shading vegetation at approximately five perennial 
stream crossings in the East Fork of Cow Creek subwatershed from 
pipeline mileposts (MP) 109 to 110 in Sections 16 and 21, T.32S., 
R.2W., W.M., OR. This is a site-specific amendment applicable only to 
the Pacific Connector ROW and would not change future management 
direction at any other location.
UNF-2--Site-Specific Amendment To Allow Utility Corridors in Riparian 
Areas
    The Umpqua National Forest LRMP would be amended to change 
prescriptions C2-II (LRMP IV-173) and C2-IV (LRMP IV-177) to allow the 
Pacific Connector pipeline route to run parallel to the East Fork of 
Cow Creek for approximately 0.1 mile between about pipeline MPs 109.5 
and 109.6 in Section 21, T.32S., R.2W., W. M., OR. This change would 
potentially affect approximately one acre of riparian vegetation along 
the East Fork of Cow Creek. This is a site-specific amendment 
applicable only to the Pacific Connector ROW and would not change 
future management direction at any other location.
UNF-3--Site-Specific Amendment To Waive Limitations on Detrimental Soil 
Conditions Within the Pacific Connector ROW in All Management Areas
    The Umpqua National Forest LRMP would be amended to waive 
limitations on the area affected by detrimental soil conditions from 
displacement and compaction within the Pacific Connector ROW. Standards 
and Guidelines for Soils (LRMP page IV-67) requires that not more than 
20 percent of the project area have detrimental compaction, 
displacement, or puddling after completion of a project. This is a 
site-specific amendment applicable only to the Pacific Connector ROW 
and would not change future management direction at any other location.
UNF-4--Reallocation of Matrix Lands to LSR
    The Umpqua National Forest LRMP would be amended to change the 
designation of approximately 588 acres from Matrix land allocations to 
the LSR land allocation in Sections 7, 18, and 19, T.32S., R.2W.; and 
Sections 13 and 24, T.32S., R.3W., W.M., OR. This change in land 
allocation is proposed to partially mitigate the potential adverse 
impact of the Pacific Connector pipeline project on LSR 223 on the 
Umpqua National Forest. This amendment would change future management 
direction for the lands reallocated from Matrix to LSR.

Amendment of the Rogue River National Forest LRMP

RRNF-1--Amendment To Provide for Energy Transmission
    The Rogue River National Forest LRMP would be amended to establish 
a Forest Plan objective that states: ``While considering other multiple 
use values, the Forest shall facilitate and make provision for energy 
transmission via the Pacific Connector consistent with the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005, the Mineral Leasing Act, the Natural Gas Act, the 
Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act, and the National Forest Management 
Act.''
RRNF-2--Site-Specific Amendment of Visual Quality Objectives (VQO) on 
the Big Elk Road
    The Rogue River National Forest LRMP would be amended to change the 
VQO where the Pacific Connector pipeline route crosses the Big Elk Road 
at about pipeline MP 161.4 in Section 16, T.37S., R.4E., W.M., OR, from 
Foreground Retention (Management Strategy 6, LRMP page 4-72) to 
Foreground Partial Retention (Management Strategy 7, LRMP page 4-86) 
and allow 10-15 years for amended VQO to be attained. The existing 
Standards and Guidelines for VQO in Foreground Retention where the 
Pacific Connector pipeline route crosses the Big Elk Road require that 
VQOs be met within one year of completion of the project and that 
management activities not be visually evident. This amendment would 
apply only to the Pacific Connector pipeline project in the vicinity of 
Big Elk Road and would not change future management direction for any 
other project.
RRNF-3--Site-Specific Amendment of VQO on the Pacific Crest Trail
    The Rogue River National Forest LRMP would be amended to change the 
VQO where the Pacific Connector pipeline route crosses the Pacific 
Crest Trail at about pipeline MP 168 in Section 32, T.37S., R.5E., 
W.M., OR, from Foreground Partial Retention (Management Strategy 7, 
LRMP page 4-86) to Modification (USDA Forest Service Agricultural 
Handbook 478) and to allow 15-20 years for amended VQOs to be attained. 
The existing Standards and Guidelines for VQOs in Foreground Partial 
Retention in the area where the Pacific Connector pipeline route 
crosses the Pacific Crest Trail require that visual mitigation measures 
meet the stated VQO within three years of the completion of the project 
and that management activities be visually subordinate to the 
landscape. This

[[Page 48143]]

amendment would apply only to the Pacific Connector pipeline project in 
the vicinity of the Pacific Crest Trail and would not change future 
management direction for any other project.
RRNF-4--Site-Specific Amendment of Visual Quality Objectives Adjacent 
to Highway 140
    The Rogue River National Forest LRMP would be amended to allow 10-
15 years to meet the VQO of Middleground Partial Retention between 
Pacific Connector pipeline MPs 156.3 to 156.8 and 157.2 to 157.5 in 
Sections 11 and 12, T.37S., R.3E., W.M., OR. Standards and Guidelines 
for Middleground Partial Retention (Management Strategy 9, LRMP Page 4-
112) require that VQOs for a given location be achieved within three 
years of completion of the project. Approximately 0.8 miles or 9 acres 
of the Pacific Connector ROW in the Middleground Partial Retention VQO 
visible at distances of 0.75 to 5 miles from State Highway 140 would be 
affected by this amendment. This amendment would apply only to the 
Pacific Connector pipeline project in Sections 11 and 12, T.37S., 
R.3E., W.M., OR, and would not change future management direction for 
any other project.
RRNF-5--Site-Specific Amendment To Allow Utility Transmission Corridors 
in Management Strategy 26, Restricted Riparian Areas
    The Rogue River National Forest LRMP would be amended to allow the 
Pacific Connector ROW to cross the Restricted Riparian land allocation. 
This would potentially affect approximately 2.5 acres of the Restricted 
Riparian Management Strategy at one perennial stream crossing on the 
South Fork of Little Butte Creek at about pipeline MP 162.45 in Section 
15, T.37S., R.4E., W.M., OR. Standards and Guidelines for the 
Restricted Riparian land allocation prescribe locating transmission 
corridors outside of this land allocation (Management Strategy 26, LRMP 
page 4-308,). This is a site-specific amendment applicable only to the 
Pacific Connector ROW and would not change future management direction 
at any other location.
RRNF-6--Site-Specific Amendment To Waive Limitations on Detrimental 
Soil Conditions Within the Pacific Connector ROW in All Management 
Areas
    The Rogue River National Forest LRMP would be amended to waive 
limitations on areas affected by detrimental soil conditions from 
displacement and compaction within the Pacific Connector ROW in all 
affected Management Strategies. Standards and Guidelines for 
detrimental soil impacts in affected Management Strategies require that 
no more than 10 percent of an activity area should be compacted, 
puddled or displaced upon completion of project (not including 
permanent roads or landings). No more than 20 percent of the area 
should be displaced or compacted under circumstances resulting from 
previous management practices including roads and landings. Permanent 
recreation facilities or other permanent facilities are exempt (RRNF 
LRMP 4-41, 4-83, 4-97, 4-123, 4-177, 4-307). This is a site-specific 
amendment applicable only to the Pacific Connector ROW and would not 
change future management direction at any other location.
RRNF-7--Reallocation of Matrix Lands to LSR
    The Rogue River National Forest LRMP would be amended to change the 
designation of approximately 512 acres from Matrix land allocations to 
the LSR land allocation in Section 32, T.36S., R.4E. W.M., OR. This 
change in land allocation is proposed to partially mitigate the 
potential adverse impact of the Pacific Connector pipeline project on 
LSR 227 on the Rogue River National Forest. This amendment would change 
future management direction for the lands reallocated from Matrix to 
LSR.

Amendment of the Winema National Forest LRMP

WNF-1--Site-Specific Amendment To Allow Utility Corridors in Management 
Area 3
    The Winema National Forest LRMP would be amended to change the 
Standards and Guidelines for Management Area 3 (MA-3) (LRMP page 4-103-
4, Lands) to allow the 95-foot-wide Pacific Connector pipeline corridor 
in MA-3 from the Forest Boundary in Section 32, T.37S., R.5E., W.M., 
OR, to the Clover Creek Road corridor in Section 4, T.38S, R.5. E., 
W.M., OR. Standards and Guidelines for MA-3 state that the area is 
currently an avoidance area for new utility corridors. This proposed 
new utility corridor is approximately 1.5 miles long and occupies 
approximately 17 acres. This is a site-specific amendment applicable 
only to the Pacific Connector ROW and would not change future 
management direction at any other location.
WNF-2--Site-Specific Amendment of VQO on the Dead Indian Memorial 
Highway
    The Winema National Forest LRMP would be amended to allow 10-15 
years to achieve the VQO of Foreground Retention where the Pacific 
Connector ROW crosses the Dead Indian Memorial Highway at approximately 
pipeline MP 168.8 in Section 33, T.37S., R.5E., W. M., OR. Standards 
and Guidelines for Scenic Management, Foreground Retention (LRMP 4-103, 
MA 3A, Foreground Retention) requires VQOs for a given location be 
achieved within one year of completion of the project. The Forest 
Service proposes to allow 10-15 years to meet the specified VQO at this 
location. This is a site-specific amendment that would apply only to 
the Pacific Connector pipeline project in the vicinity of the Dead 
Indian Memorial Highway and would not change future management 
direction for any other project.
WNF-3--Site-Specific Amendment of VQO Adjacent to the Clover Creek Road
    The Winema National Forest LRMP would be amended to allow 10-15 
years to meet the VQO for Scenic Management, Foreground Partial 
Retention, where the Pacific Connector Right-of-Way is adjacent to the 
Clover Creek Road from approximately pipeline MP 170 to 175 in Sections 
2, 3, 4, 11, and 12, T.38S., R.5E., and Sections 7 and 18, T.38S., 
R.6E., W.M., OR. This change would potentially affect approximately 50 
acres. Standards and Guidelines for Foreground Partial Retention (LRMP, 
page 4-107, MA 3B) require that VQOs be met within three years of 
completion of a project. This is a site-specific amendment would apply 
only to the Pacific Connector pipeline project in the vicinity of 
Clover Creek Road and would not change future management direction for 
any other project.
WNF-4--Site-Specific Amendment To Waive Limitations on Detrimental Soil 
Conditions Within the Pacific Connector ROW in All Management Areas
    The Winema National Forest LRMP would be amended to waive 
restrictions on detrimental soil conditions from displacement and 
compaction within the Pacific Connector ROW in all affected management 
areas. Standards and Guidelines for detrimental soil impacts in all 
affected management areas require that no more than 20 percent of the 
activity area be detrimentally compacted, puddled, or displaced upon 
completion of a project (LRMP page 4-73, 12-5). This is a site-

[[Page 48144]]

specific amendment applicable only to the Pacific Connector ROW and 
would not change future management direction at any other location.
WNF-5--Site-Specific Amendment To Waive Limitations on Detrimental Soil 
Conditions Within the Pacific Connector ROW in Management Area 8
    The Winema National Forest LRMP would be amended to waive 
restrictions on detrimental soil conditions from displacement and 
compaction within the Pacific Connector ROW within the Management Area 
8, Riparian Area (MA-8). This change would potentially affect 
approximately 0.5 mile or an estimated 9.6 acres of MA-8. Standards and 
Guidelines for Soil and Water, MA-8 require that not more than 10 
percent of the total riparian zone in an activity area be in a 
detrimental soil condition upon the completion of a project (LRMP page 
4-137, 2). This is a site-specific amendment applicable only to the 
Pacific Connector ROW and would not change future management direction 
at any other location.

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific 
comments or concerns about the Jordan Cove and Pacific Connector 
projects, and proposed BLM and Forest Service land management plan 
amendments. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental 
effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen 
environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful 
they will be. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly 
recorded, please send your comments so that the Commission receives 
them in Washington DC on or before September 4, 2012.
    The BLM, Reclamation, and Forest Service are participating as 
cooperating agencies with the FERC in this public scoping process. With 
this notice, the BLM is requesting comments through the FERC's public 
scoping process on proposed amendments of BLM RMPs to make provision 
for the Pacific Connector ROW on the Coos Bay, Roseburg, and Medford 
Districts and Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview District. The 
BLM is also requesting public comments on the issuance of the ROW Grant 
that would allow the Pacific Connector pipeline to occupy federal land. 
The Forest Service is requesting public comments on the proposed 
amendments of Forest Service LRMPs to make provision for the Pacific 
Connector ROW on the Rogue River, Umpqua, and Winema National Forests. 
Timely comments submitted by the public in response to the NOI 
previously issued by the Forest Service to make provision for the 
Pacific Connector ROW, published in the Federal Register on June 15, 
2009 (Vol. 74, No. 113, pages 27214-28217), will be considered in this 
scoping process if they are applicable to the current Forest Service 
proposal. Reclamation has no proposed land management plan amendments, 
but will consider comments related to the ROW Grant on Reclamation-
administered lands and facilities.
    Comments on actions by the BLM, Reclamation, or Forest Service 
should be submitted through the FERC comment process and within the 
timeline described. The submission of timely and specific comments can 
affect a reviewer's ability to participate in subsequent administrative 
or judicial review of BLM and Forest Service decisions. Comments 
concerning BLM and Forest Service actions submitted anonymously will be 
accepted and considered; however such anonymous submittals would not 
provide the commenters with standing to participate in administrative 
or judicial review of BLM and Forest Service decisions.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit 
your comments to the FERC. In all instances, please reference the 
docket numbers for these projects (PF12-7-000 and PF12-17-000) with 
your submission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of 
comments, and has expert staff available to assist you at (202) 502-
8258 or efiling@ferc.gov.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment 
feature located on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the 
Documents & Filings link. This is an easy method for interested persons 
to submit brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically using the eFiling 
feature located on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the 
Documents & Filings link. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a 
variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. 
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on 
``eRegister.'' You must select the type of filing you are making. If 
you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select 
``Comment on a Filing;'' or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to 
the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 
20426.
    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or 
other personal identifying information in your comments, you should be 
aware that the entire text of your comments--including your personal 
identifying information--would be publicly available through the FERC 
eLibrary system, if you file your comments with the Secretary of the 
Commission.

Environmental Mailing List

    The FERC's environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and 
local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; 
environmental groups and non-governmental organizations; interested 
Indian tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and 
newspapers. This list also includes all affected landowners (as defined 
in the Commission's regulations) who are potential right-of-way 
grantors, whose property may be used temporarily for project purposes, 
or who own homes within certain distances of aboveground facilities, 
and anyone who submits comments on the projects. We will update the 
environmental mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we 
send the information related to this environmental review to all 
individuals, organizations, and government entities interested in and/
or potentially affected by the planned projects. Please note that if 
you submitted comments on the previously reviewed projects (CP07-441-
000 and CP07-444-000) and want to be involved in the currently proposed 
projects (PF12-7-000 and PF12-17-000) you must resubmit comments.
    Copies of the completed draft EIS on compact discs (CD) will be 
sent to the environmental mailing list for public review and comment. 
If you would prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of 
the CD version, or would like to remove your name from the mailing 
list, please return the attached Information Request (Appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    Once Jordan Cove and Pacific Connector file their applications with 
the FERC, the Commission will issue a Notice of Application. In 
response to the Notice of Application, you may want to file a request 
to become an ``intervenor,'' which is an official party to the 
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the 
FERC process, and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be 
heard by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final 
ruling. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in the User's Guide 
under the ``e-filing'' link

[[Page 48145]]

on the Commission's Web site. Please note that the Commission will not 
accept requests for intervenor status during the pre-filing period. You 
must wait until the Commission receives applications for these 
projects.

Administrative Review of BLM and Forest Service Decisions To Amend Land 
Management Plans

    Decisions by the BLM and Forest Service to amend land management 
plans are subject to administrative review. In accordance with 36 CFR 
219.59, the Forest Service has elected to use the administrative review 
procedures (otherwise known as protest procedures) of the BLM. 
Administrative objections to Forest Service land management plan 
amendment decisions and protests of BLM land management plan amendment 
decisions may be filed under the provisions of 43 CFR 1610.5-2.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the projects is available from the 
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the 
FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). On the FERC Web page, go to Documents & 
Filings, and click on the eLibrary link. Then click on ``General 
Search,'' and enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits 
in the field (i.e., PF12-7 or PF12-17). Be sure you have selected an 
appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online 
Support at FercOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or toll free at (866) 208-3676, 
or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. The eLibrary link also provides 
access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such 
as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called 
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances 
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time 
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with 
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to 
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the 
Commission's calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: August 2, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-19781 Filed 8-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


