Bureau of Land Management's Decision Record and Environmental

Jersey Valley Geothermal Development Project
Environmental Assessment: NV063-EAO8-091
construction is close to the buffered areas, an archaeological monitor would be present to
insure that eligible and unevaluated cultural sites are not disturbed.
• The power plant, pipelines, wellheads, pump motors and motor control buildings would
each be painted an appropriate color to blend with the area and minimize visibility.
• The proposed transmission line would also provide raptor protection in compliance with
the standards described in the “Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power
Lines, The State of the Art in 2006.”
• An anti-perching device, (a cone, Kaddas Enterprises type KE1058 or equal) would be
installed on the top of each transmission line pole along the entirety of the transmission
line (see Figure 12 and Figure 13).
• All power poles will utilize BLM-approved raptor deterrents.
• Bird flight diverters will be attached to the transmission line conductors located
immediately over the open water areas of the Jersey Valley and Buffalo Valley hot
springs, and out to approximately 100 feet on each side of the hot springs. The spacing of
the diverters will be approximately 15 feet between each device.
• Should construction be planned within the greater sage-grouse wintering season, prior to
the commencement of construction, areas proposed for disturbance will be surveyed by a
qualified biologist to determine if wintering concentrations of sage-grouse exist. Any
wintering concentrations of birds will be avoided by 0.6 miles.
• Construction noise would be minimized through practices which avoid or minimize
actions which may typically generate greater noise levels, or generate distinctive impact
noise.
• Ormat will obtain and comply with an Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit, as
appropriate.
2.2 ALTERNATIVES
NEPA requires that a reasonable range of alternatives to the Proposed Action be considered that
could feasibly meet the objectives of the Proposed Action as defined in the purpose and need for
the project [40 CFR 1502.14(a)]. The range of alternatives required is governed by a “rule of
reason” (i.e., only those feasible alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice need be
considered). Reasonable alternatives are those that are practical or feasible based on technical
and economic considerations [46 Federal Register 18026 (March 23, 1981), as amended;
51 Federal Register 15618 (April 25, 1986)].
Alternatives to the Proposed Action must be considered and assessed whenever there are
unresolved conflicts involving alternative uses of available resources (BLM 1988 and BLM
2008a). One alternative to the Proposed Action has been identified to reduce or avoid potential
effects to bat species within the Jersey Valley Unit Area.
2.2.1 Alternative 1
Alternative 1 differs from the Proposed Action only within the Jersey Valley Unit Area. Whereas
the weilfield remains the same under Alternative 1, the power plant, pipeline system, road
- 22 -