65 FR 67033 - Tims Ford Reservoir Land Management - U.S. ...

67034 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 8, 2000 / NoticesSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Tims FordReservoir was completed in 1970 byTVA for the purposes of flood control,hydroelectric generation, recreation, andeconomic development. The reservoir is34 miles long at full pool. There areapproximately 250 miles of shoreline atnormal summer pool (NSP). Followingcompletion of the reservoir, theTennessee Elk River DevelopmentAgency (TERDA), a state agency,developed subdivisions and recreationalfacilities on reservoir propertiesbetween 1970 and 1996. In 1996, theTennessee General Assembly passedPublic Chapter 816, which terminatedTERDA and transferred all powers,duties, contractual obligations,functions and remaining land interestsof the agency to TDEC. TDEC and TVAagreed by contract in 1998 to develop acomprehensive land management anddisposition plan to determine specificuses of reservoir lands. This EIS andland management plan are in fulfillmentof that contract. Originally, 21,863 acresof land were acquired for the Tims FordProject. Reservoir acreage above NSPwas 11,183. Subsequent transfers andsales of land for various commercial,industrial, residential, and recreationaluses have resulted in a current balanceof 6,453 acres of project lands aboveNSP. These lands are divided inownership between TVA (1,854 acres)and TDEC (4,599 acres).TVA and TDEC announced theirproposal to prepare a Tims Ford LandManagement Plan in October 1998 andheld public scoping meetings onNovember 9, 1998 in Winchester,Tennessee and November 10, 1998 inFayetteville, Tennessee. Writtencomments also were requested throughpublication of a notice in a newspaperand a website. As land allocation andscoping for the land plan developed, itbecame evident that increased levels ofresidential development would resultfrom some of the alternatives.Accordingly, the agencies determinedthat an EIS would allow betterunderstanding of the impacts of thevarious alternatives. On July 22, 1999,TVA issued a Notice of Intent to preparean EIS on alternatives for a landmanagement plan at Tims FordReservoir. The Notice of Intentindicated that additional comments onthe scope of issues to be addressedcould be submitted in writing orthrough a website. These comments andprevious comments from the 1998scoping period were analyzed todetermine the issues and alternatives tobe considered in the EIS. A Notice ofAvailability for the Draft EIS waspublished in the Federal Register onNovember 12, 1999. TVA and TDECsubsequently held public meetings inWinchester, Tennessee on November 30,1999 and Tullahoma, Tennessee onDecember 2, 1999 to discuss the draftEIS and solicit comments on the draft.Comments were received at publicmeetings and by written responsesthereafter from 268 people, agencies,and organizations. After considering allcomments, the Final EIS was completedand distributed to commenting agenciesand the public. A Notice of Availabilityfor the Final EIS was published on July7, 2000.Alternatives ConsideredTVA initially considered fouralternatives, including no action, forallocation of Tims Ford lands. Theaction alternatives were characterized as‘‘Balanced Land Development andConservation,’’ ‘‘Maximum LandDevelopment,’’ and ‘‘Maximum LandConservation.’’The alternatives were designed tovary in the amount of land allocated forresidential development and forresidential shoreline access. In responseto public comments on the Draft EIS,TVA developed a fifth alternative,designated ‘‘Balanced LandDevelopment with ConservationPartnership.’’ This alternative wasdesigned to allow increased reservoiraccess while providing additionalshoreline protection.Under Alternative A, the No ActionAlternative, TVA and TDEC would notadopt a jointly prepared plan. In theabsence of a plan, TVA and TDECwould proceed with disposition ormanagement of properties on a case-bycasebasis. Because no joint plan wouldexist, the project lands could beconsidered for a variety of uses. Morethan likely, some amount of shorelineproperty (up to 45 percent of projectlands) could eventually be consideredfor residential or commercial uses.About 22 percent already has beentransferred to the state and localgovernments for recreational usage orare currently being used for recreationalpurposes such as parks and marinas.Those tracts (9 percent of project lands)identified during the planning processas containing rare species, wetlands,cultural resources, or unique naturalfeatures would likely be maintained ina protective category to facilitate TVA’sand TDEC’s compliance with lawsrelating to protection of sensitiveresources. Approximately 20 percent ofproject lands would likely be managedfor natural resource conservationbecause it has been deemed in thecurrent planning process as not suitableor capable for development. Theremaining 4 percent would be retainedfor use as TVA dam reservation (TVAproject operation).Under Alternative B, Balanced LandDevelopment and Conservation, parcelstotaling 938 acres would be available forresidential development or residentialaccess, with the rest of project landsallocated to natural resource-orientedand recreational uses. Cumulatively, 25percent of project lands would beallocated to residential uses, 25 percentto recreation uses, and 36 percent tonatural resource-oriented uses. As inAlternative A, approximately 9 percentof project lands would be allocated tosensitive resource management, and 4percent to TVA project operations.Alternative B was identified as theagencies’ preferred alternative in theDraft EIS.Under Alternative B1, Balanced LandDevelopment with ConservationPartnership, TVA modified AlternativeB to respond to comments received onthe draft EIS and plan. One parcel of128 acres, which was previouslyallocated to residential development,was changed to a natural resourcemanagement allocation. In addition, anew zone was created, designated‘‘conservation partnership,’’ for certainnarrow shoreline strips of public land.On Tims Ford Reservoir, the agenciesfound numerous locations where thepublic land was narrow and does notprovide sufficient conservation buffer topreserve water quality, conserveshoreline habitat, protect shorelinesfrom long-term erosion, or retainshoreline aesthetics. It has also beenTVA’s experience that due to the closeproximity of private lands to the lake,these narrow public land strips presentunique management problems. Many ofthose who commented on the draft EISstated that because of the closeproximity of their property to thewater’s edge, they had an expectation ofgaining water access under previousmanagement policies. In the new zone,TVA would consider granting wateraccess in the form of limited communitywater use facilities in exchange for awider shoreline buffer zone.Cumulatively, Alternative B1 wouldresult in 24 percent of project landsbeing allocated to residential uses, 25percent to recreation, 37 percent tonatural resource management, 9 percentto sensitive resource management, and 4percent to project operations. Althoughthe acreage difference betweenAlternative B and B1 is small,approximately 9 additional shorelinemiles would be open for considerationof requests for community docks underAlternative B1. Alternative B1 wasVerDate 112000 17:37 Nov 07, 2000 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 08NON1