PacifiCorp Capacity Power Sale Contract Final Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0171)

Responsible Agency: U.S. Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)

Title of Proposed Action: PacifiCorp Capacity Power Sale Contract

States and Provinces Involved: Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, California, Nevada, Arizona, British Columbia.

Abstract: The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has surplus electrical capacity (peakload energy) that BPA projects will not be required to meet its existing obligations. Such obligations include those to meet the loads of firm power customers, pursuant to the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (Northwest Power Act), and previously committed capacity contracts.

BPA is authorized under the Northwest Power Act (§35(f)) to sell system capacity and/or energy that is surplus to its needs, with the obligation to offer any available surplus capacity/energy first to customers in the Pacific Northwest region.

BPA and PacifiCorp have negotiated a long-term contract for peaking capacity. The proposed long-term contract is for 1100 megawatts (MW) of contract demand limited to no more than 50 megawatthours (MWh) per week per megawatt of contract demand. Returns of peaking replacement energy are to be made within 168 hours. The proposed contract would expire August 31, 2011.

Alternatives considered were: Alternative 1, the Proposed Contract; Alternative 2, No Action;
Alternative 3, Larger Capacity Sale; Alternative 4, Stricter Return Provisions; and Alternative 5, Variations in Hours of Peak Demand Available. Alternative 1, the Proposed Contract, is the preferred alternative.

The No Action Alternative is expected to result in substantial impacts on air quality and resource consumption (particularly natural gas) related to the expected construction by PacifiCorp of combustion turbine projects to meet its peaking capacity needs in the absence of an assured long-term supply of capacity from BPA. Alternative 3, in which BPA would sell 900 MW of additional capacity to PacifiCorp or to other utilities, is expected to have the least impact on air quality and resource consumption because it would be expected to result in the least amount of new resource construction and operation. The impacts of the other alternatives are generally related to the respective parties' abilities to optimize operation of their power resources and have lesser potential environmental impacts.

Because comments on the draft EIS were minor, and differences in the text of the draft and final EISs are minimal, the Final EIS is not being redistributed in accordance with §1503.4(c) of the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act. Instead, the Draft EIS and this volume of Comments, Responses, and Errata constitute the Final EIS.

This Final EIS is being mailed to over 200 agencies, groups, and individuals.

For information on DOE NEPA activities contact: Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Oversight, EH-25, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20585, (800) 472-2756.