Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume I, Main Text and Appendices A-J

Home Browse Search

Meanwhile, upon review of the applications and submittals by intervenors, the Commission staff determined that the issuance of licenses for the Kingsley Dam and North Platte/ Keystone projects would constitute a major federal action that could significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission issued a notice on August 17, 1990, indicating its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) evaluating the probable impacts of the Districts' Proposal for the two projects and of alternative courses of action. To determine the issues to be addressed in the EIS, the staff initiated a formal scoping process in October 1990. The staff held five public scoping meetings in Nebraska to identify issues and solicit comment, and reviewed the comments of agencies, intervenors, and the interested public relating to the EIS scope. Based on the results of the scoping process, the staff distributed a document entitled Scoping Document 2, which described the issues to be addressed in the EIS. The principal issues included potential effects on: (1) channel morphology; (2) vegetation and wildlife; (3) aquatic resources; (4) irrigation supplies; (5) power generation; and (6) recreation. In January 1992, the Commission staff published a Draft EIS (DEIS), which evaluated the potential natural resource benefits, economic costs, and environmental impacts associated with relicensing the projects. The DEIS addressed three principal alternatives, each of which involved modifications to current project operating regimes, along with other resource protection and improvement measures. The three alternatives were: (1) the Districts' Proposal; (2) the Districts' Proposal with Supplemental Measures; and (3) the Staff Alternative. The staff formulated the latter alternative after evaluating six alternative operating regimes, including those proposed by the Platte River Whooping Crane Critical Habitat Maintenance Trust (the Trust) and the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (NGPC). The staff's analysis also benefited from the instream flow levels suggested by the U.S. Department of the Interior (Interior) and the National Audubon Society et al. (Conservation Intervenors). Concurrent with DEIS printing and distribution, the Commission received modified relicensing proposals from the two applicants. On December 4, 1991, NPPD filed an offer of settlement that revised NPPD's earlier proposal for the North Platte/Keystone Diversion Dam Project. On January 10, 1992, Central filed additional information that included a revised project plan for the Kingsley Dam Project. Both filings were received too late to be addressed in the DEIS. In May 1992, the staff prepared a Supplemental Report, the purpose of which was to determine if the revised proposals submitted by the Districts would result in environmental impacts that were different than those associated with the Districts' Proposal presented in the DEIS. The Supplemental Report concluded that the applicants' revised proposals constituted material changes, both in the nature of the plans and in their environmental impact. In response to both the DEIS and the Supplemental Report, the staff received numerous comments from the applicants, intervenors, resource agencies, and the general public. A 1 -2