OCR Text |
Show Pag Mantl Mssngr, Thursday, April 9, 1987 Committee discusses prison rationale Public Notices UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Notice of Application Filed with the Commission March 31, 1987 Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and is available for public inspection. a. Type of Application: License (under 5 Mw) b. Project No.: 9310-00c. Date Filed: April 17, 1986 d. Applicant: City of Mt. Pleasant, UT e. Name of Project: Pleasant Creek Canyon Project f. Location: On Pleasant Creek in Sanpete County, Utah: Sections 1, 2, 3, T15S, R4E; Sections 4. 5, 6, 9, 10 T15S, R5E: SLB&M. g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. paras. 791(a) 825(r) Mt. Mt. of Pleasant, h. Contact Person: Amoir Deuel, Mayor, City 6 Tel: Utah (801) 84647, Pleasant, i. Comment Date: May 29, 1987 j. Description of Project: The proposed project would be located on State of Utah and private lands, and consists of a series of 4 developments concrete diversion dam at (ABC&D): A(l) a elevation 7,680 feet m.s.l.; and (2) a Sulfur Springs concrete diversion structure also at elevation 7,680 feet m.s.l.; (3) a wye connecting both steel penstock; (4) an diversions to a 350-kunder a net head of upper powerhouse with an installed capacity of 347 feet; (5) a tailrace to Pleasant Creek at elevation 7,240 feet m.s.l.; B(6) a concrete diversion dam at elevation 7,240 feet steel penstock; (8) a lower m.s.l.; (7) a powerhouse with an installed capacity of 425 kW under a net head of 237 feet; (9) a tailrace to Pleasant Creek at elevation 6,910 feet m.s.l.; C(10) a concrete diversion dam at elevation 6,900 feet m.s.l. on Pleasant Creek; and (11) another diversion dam on Coal Fork Tributary, also at elevation 6,900 feet m.s.l.; steel pipe from Coal Fork Dam (12) an penstock from Pleasant connecting to a Creek dam; (13) a lower debris basin powerhouse with an installed capacity of 1 ,250 kW under a net head of 410 feet; (14) a tailrace to Pleasant Creek at an elevation of 6,260 feet m.s.l.; D(15) a diversion weir at elevation PVC and iron 6,260 feet m.s.l.; (16) a pipelinepenstock; (17) a lower pressure reducing station powerhouse with an installed capacity of 600 kW under a net head of 393 feet; (18) a connection back to the pipeline at elevation 5,839 m.s.l.; (19) approximately transmission lines; and (20) appurtenant 5.5 miles of 2.4-kand 7.2-kfacilities. The total powerplant capacities would be 2,625 kW, and the Applicant estimates that the average annual energy output would be 10,510,000 kWh. k. Purpose of Project: Project energy would be utilized by the Applicant. l. This notice also consists of the following standard paragraphs: A3, A9, B, C, and Dl. A3. Development Application Any qualified development applicant desiring to File a competing application must submit to the Commission, on or before the specified comment date for the particular application, a competing development application, or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing development application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. Applications for preliminary permit will not be accepted in response to this notice. A9. Notice of Intent A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either (1) a preliminary permit application or (2) a development application (specify which type of application), and be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. B. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 C.F.R. paras. 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commissions Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. C. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title COMMENTS, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS, NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION. COMPETING APPLICATION, PROTEST or MOTION TO INTERVENE, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing is in response. Any of the above named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies required by the Commissions regulations to: Kenneth F. Plumb, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426. An additional copy must be sent to: Mr. Fred E. Springer, Director, Division of Project Management, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Room 203-Rat the above address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. Dl. Agency Comments States, agencies established pursuant to federal law that have the authority to prepare a comprehensive plan for improving, developing, and conserving a waterway affected by the project, federal and state agencies exercising administration over fish and wildlife, flood control, navigation, irrigation, recreation, cultural and other relevant resources of the state in which the project is located, and affected Indian tribes are requested to provide comments and recommendations for terms and conditions pursuant to the Federal Power Act as amended by the Electric Consumers Protection Act of 1986, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Historical and Archeological Preservation Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, Pub. L No. and other applicable statutes. Recommended terms and conditions must be based on supporting technical data filed with the Commission along with the recommendations, in order to comply with the requirement in Section 313(b) of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. Para. 8251 (b), that Commission findings as to facts must be supported by substantial, evidence. All other federal, state, and local agencies that receive this notice through direct mailing from the Commission are requested to provide comments pursuant to the statutes listed above. No other formal requests will be made. Responses should be confined to substantive issues relevant to the issuance of a license. A copy of the application may be obtained directly from the applicant. If an agency does not respond to the Commission within the time set for filing, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agencys response must also be sent to the Applicants representatives. Kenneth F. Plumb Secretary Publish Mantl Messenger April 9, 16, 23, 1987. 1 462-245- 6,000-foot-lon- 5,950-foot-lon- 1,800-foot-lon- g, 13,800-foot-lon- g, 12,120-foot-lon- g, 88-2- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Notice of Application Filed with the Commission March 31, 1987 Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and is available for public inspection. a. Type of Application: Preliminary Permit b. Project No.: 10241-00- 0 c. Date Filed: January 12, 1987 d. Applicant: Warm Creek Hydroelectric Company e. Name of Project: Gunnison-Fayett- e Canal Diversion Project f. Location: On the Sevier River, near Gunnison, in Sanpete County, Utah g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. paras. 791(a) 825(r) h. Contact Person: Mr. Jordan Walker, Warm Creek Hydroelectric Company, P. O. Box N, Manti, UT 84642 (801) i. Comment Date: May 29, 1987 j. Description of Project: The proposed project would consist of: (1) an concrete diversion dam owned by the existing Gunnison-Fayett- e Canal Company; (2) a penstock; (3) a powerhouse containing two turbine-generatunits with a combined rated capacity of 200 kW under a head of 18 feet and a design flow of 150 cfs per unit, and producing an estimated annual generation of 876,000 kWh; and (4) a 12.5 kV transmission line interconnecting the project to an existing Utah Power and Light Company line. The proposed project would be located in Section 18, Township 20 South, Range 7 East, SLBJcM, Sanpete County, Utah. k. This notice also consists of the following standard paragraphs: A5, A7, A9, A10, B, C, and D2. 835-020- 2 y The citizens committee working to obtain a correctional facility for this area Is presenting a series of weekly informational articles. This Is the fourth In that series. Communities in Utah and neighboring states which host correctional facilities have found the benefits of those facilities far outweigh the negatives. Members of the committee working to bring a corrections facility to Sanpete County contacted spokesmen for communities in several other states before deciding to endorse a corrections facility for Sanpete. Their findings pointed out some aspects of having a prison in the neighborhood were even more positive than expected. A commonly-voice- d concern is that the development of a correctional facility would inhibit home constructourism. tion and recreation-base- d Within the past month, however, Estes Corporation has announced plans to develop approximately 5,000 acres lying directly east of the Point of the Mountain, site of the Utah State Prison. The development will house a resort hotel, golf course, tennis courts, indoor and outdoor housing and pools, single-familcondominiums. The developers selected the site because of its proximity to recreational facilities in both Utah and Salt Lake Counties, and because of the view. All aspects associated with the small satellite prison facility under construction in Cedar City indicate it will be a positive influence on the community, according to Deputy Rick Evans, and studies conducted in Cedar City indicate that there will be no increase in drug or alcohol use. Iron County Commissioner Jim Robinson says he was surprised by the development which has taken place in the vicinity of the satellite correctional facility. When the facility was first proposed, Robinson says, property owners in the subdivision north of town protested, but have since changed their minds. The prison facility nearby is the best looking building out there, and the site of the most expensive building lots in the area, Robinson says. New homes and condos have sprung up right across the street from the facility, mostly in the $80,000 range. According to Robinson, the college and the interstate traffic present more drug and crime problems than the prison. In Sheridan, Oregon, site of a new facility, at maximum the prison will employ 300 capacity 250 of them local. It will people also create at least 288 jobs in spinoff industries. The city is now construc 18-ho- y 750-inma- te ting new sewer and water lines and undergoing major street repair, all of which are funded through federal and state grants for which the city became eligible after location of the prison there. In Boise, no increase has been noted in drug use, crime, or welfare rolls, according to spokesman Bill Means, but there has definitely been an increased enrollment at the college level among students majoring in social services and law enforcement. Boises 600-inma- prison is currently expanding to house another 250 inmates. Rawlins, Wyoming, with a prison population of 1,000 inmates, has experienced no increase in drug abuse, crime, or welfare move-mand the prison has been a good employer and a good neighbor, says Debbie Weaver. Tahchapi, California, a city of 4,600 hosts three correctional facilities. administrator Three city officials Ron Young, Mayor Owens, and councilman George Koutroulis, say social problems resulting from the prisons proximity have been nil. Conversely, the city shows a very low crime rate in comparison with the rest of the state. Canon City, Colorado, has four prisons and the city bid for the fifth, but it was located in another area which needed economic development. The prison, says city administrator Shulley, has been a good neighbor, a good employer, and has not contributed to drug or crime problems. In fact, says Mrs. Shulley, Canon City has the lowest crime rate per capita in the state of Colorado. Mrs. Shulley attributes this in part to a crime prevention program at the prison which involves local youths. Canon Citys population is growing, new home construction is up, the business climate is good, and no effect has been made on school enrollment. Of all the cities contacted, not one showed any impact on school enrollment. All said the prison was a strong employer of local people. Only Boise where the number of college students in certain fields increased could document any change at all in school enrollment figures attributable to the prison. Nor could any communities hosting corrections facilities point to an increase in welfare families moving to the area. In fact, most cities showed a decrease in welfare recipients. A corrections officer at the Point of the Mountain says this is one of the d of all fears concerning the construction of a prison. Only about 56 percent of those convicted are married or involved in a s, least-founde- The applicant estimates that the cost of the work to be performed under this preliminary permit would be $5,000. A5. Preliminary Permit Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application see 18 CFR 4.36 (1985). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) (1) and (9) and 4.36. A7. Preliminary Permit Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before the specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 (b) (1) and (9) and 4.36. A9. Notice of intent A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either (1) a preliminary permit application or (2) a development application (specify which type of application), and be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. A10. Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study qf environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. B, Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 C.F.R. paras. 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commissions Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. C. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title COMMENTS, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS, NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION, COMPETING APPLICATION, PROTEST" or MOTION TO INTERVENE, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing is in response. Any of the above named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies required by the Commissions regulations to: Kenneth F. Plumb, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426. An additional copy must be sent to: Mr. Fred E. Springer, Director, Division of Project Management, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Room 203-Rat the above address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. D2. Agency Comment Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. (A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant.) If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agencys comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kenneth F. Plumb, Secretary Publish Mantl Messenger, April 9, 16,23.30. 1987 1. permanent relationship at the time of their incarceration, he pointed out,' and most of those who are married find themselves divorced shortly after their incarceration. Of those families who do remain together, most are incapable, financialy and otherwise, of moving to be near a family member they probably can only see for a couple of brief visits per 6 month. "It just doesnt happen, he stated. On the whole, the committee found that prison communities experience an upturn in economic status, increased employment, increased civic eligibility for grants funding comthe improvements throughout in drug munity, and downturns abuse, crime and welfare needs. Ephraim Council may use Bagford landfill operation. lock-ter- BY BRUCE JENNINGS in a load of said. "EveryDean Mr. garbage, value. has throw we away thing The upshot of the discussion was a decision by the council to examine the possibility of utilizing the Bagford landfill on a short term basis if it can be brought up to state standards. Weve got an immediate problem, Councilman Bob Stoddard commented, "because our present facility no longer meets our need for a solid waste site. The proposed county landfill wont under any conditions be available for several months. Several councilmen agreed with the principle that in the matter of a landfill, as in other services, private enterprise is preferable to a public operation. In other matters: The city authorized LaMar Hanson, Scandinavian Jubilee chairman to purchase two banners, 40 by 28 each, to advertise the event, at a total cost of $300.00. City officials agreed to meet with Ephraim Irrigation Co. officers in an attempt to iron on outgoing problems in connection with the cleaning of ditches. The Council agreed that the Irrigation Co. has the right to maintain its ditches throughout the city, but does not have the right to dump dirt and debris on city property. Councilman Craig Oberg said hed make two recommendations: that the dirt taken from ditches be hauled away rather than thrown on the shoulders of roads, and that waste water not be allowed to run down back roads since this results in damage to the asphalt. Theres money The proposed Sanpete County an issue that has become landfill increasingly controversial got a further airing at the Ephraim City Councils meeting last week. The landfill issue has become partly because of the opposition that has developed to heated several proposed locations, partly because a private landfill operator is concerned about the impact a public landfill would have on his facility and partly because several operators of collection services see a county-owne- d landfill as interfering with their businesses. Rolf Dean, who collects solid waste in Fairview and two other small North Sanpete area communities, made several points at the meeting for the councils consideration. Point No. 1 the John Bagford landfill in Chester can be brought to State Health Dept, requirements. a private operation, Point No. 2 both as regards a landfill and collection services, can be done more efficiently and at less cost to the public than a public operation. free enterprise Point No. 3 should be given a chance to prove that it can do the job. solid waste disposal Point No. 4 methods are changing dramatically. Burying garbage is becoming out of date because it is more and more becoming a revenue provider instead of an expense since much of the material hauled to dumps and covered by earth can be Point No. 5 Sanpete cities shouldn't commit themselves to a program that would lock them into a Fund shortfall cuts Main Street project Ephraims Main Street project has at least been cut down in size because of a shortfall temporarily of state funds. But the north end of the project, from Third North to the cemetery, will go forward at least in part. The city has decided to go forward with the replacement of the water line this summer on the west side of the street from Third North to the cemetery. The present four-inc- h line, which is in a poor condition and expensive to maintain, will be replaced by a h line. six-inc- Jones and DeMill, the city engineers, the city engineers, have estimated the cost of replacing the line at $12,000 with the materials coming in at about $4,000. The city will contract all or part of the job and will get a Community Impact Board grant to help with the funding. The east side of Main Street from Third North to the cemetery will also see a major improvement program this summer that will be undertaken by the city. Curb and gutter and sidewalks will be installed along this section with the participation of property owners. The Utah Department of Transportation has agreed to do the engineering on the two street side programs and will try to go for the entire north side project if funds become available. The new pipeline and the curb and gutter and sidewalk phases of the entire improvement project need to be in place before the widening of the street can be undertaken by UDOT. We emphasized to the state people the safety hazard that the street represents and are hopeful that will help get the entire Main Street moved up on the agenda, Mayor Bob Wamick said. Notice to Manti Citizens This is just a reminder to all Manti citizens that when requesting CITY POLICE ASSISTANCE the following phone numbers should be used: 911 - Emergency Only 835-219- 1 - Request to speak with an officer or for information. Both of the above numbers connect you directly with the Sanpete County Sheriffs Office Dispatch, which in turn will contact the Manti duty officer for appropriate action or will relay your message. y Calling an police officer at home, or calling the Manti City offices on police business only results in unnecessary delays in police response time. Thank you all for your help. off-dut- |