Silver Springs Maintenance Stationclearinghouse.nv.gov/public/Notice/2019/E2019-058.pdfmaintenance station, to be known as the Silver Springs Maintenance Station. NDOT submitted an

PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Nevada Department of Transportation,

Silver Springs Maintenance Station

DOI-BLM-NV-C010-2017-0004-EA

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management

Carson City District Sierra Front Field Office 5665 Morgan Mill Road Carson City, NV 89701

775-885-6000 October 2018

DOI-BLM-NV-C010-2017-0004-EA

It is the mission of the Bureau of Land Management to sustain the health,diversity, and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment ofpresent and future generations.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE AND NEED .............................................................................1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................1 1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED .........................................................................................................1 1.3 LAND USE PLAN CONFORMANCE STATEMENT ........................................................3 1.4 RELATIONSHIP TO STATUTES, REGULATIONS, AND OTHER PLANS ...................3

2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ......................................................................4

2.1 PROPOSED ACTION ...........................................................................................................4 2.1.1 Site Development ............................................................................................................6 2.1.2 Maintenance Station Operations ......................................................................................8 2.1.3 Resource Protection and Monitoring ...............................................................................9

2.2 ALTERNATIVE A ..............................................................................................................11 2.3 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...........................................................................................11 2.4 OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM CONSIDERATION ...................................................................................................................12

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .................12

3.1 SCOPING AND ISSUE IDENTIFICATION ......................................................................12 3.2 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVE B ...............................................................13

3.2.1 Supplemental Authorities ..............................................................................................14 3.2.2 Resources or Uses Other than Supplemental Authorities..............................................17 3.2.3 Land Use Authorization ................................................................................................19 3.2.4 Soils ...............................................................................................................................21 3.2.5 Visual Resources ...........................................................................................................22

3.3 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...........................................................................................27 3.4 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................................27 3.5 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ..................................................................................................27 3.6 MONITORING ....................................................................................................................28

4.0 PERSONS, GROUPS, AND AGENCIES CONSULTED ......................................................28 5.0 REFERENCES AND ACRONYMS .......................................................................................30

5.1 REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................30 5.2 ACRONYMS .......................................................................................................................31

TABLES Table 1. Supplemental Authorities ...............................................................................................15 Table 2. Resources or Uses Other than Supplemental Authorities ...............................................17

FIGURES Figure 1. Regional Location of Proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station .............................2 Figure 2. Portion of NDOT Material Site LY 04-13 to be Relinquished for Maintenance Station

Use ..................................................................................................................................5 Figure 3. Conceptual Maintenance Station Site Plan ......................................................................7 Figure 4. Views from Existing NDOT Material Site LY 04-13 ............................................. 24-25

Environmental Assessment October 2018 NDOT Silver Springs Maintenance Station Lyon County NV

Page 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE AND NEED 1.1 INTRODUCTION This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared to analyze the effects of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Sierra Front Field Office (SFFO), potential lease and conveyance of public lands to the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) to establish a new highway maintenance station, to be known as the Silver Springs Maintenance Station. NDOT submitted an Recreation and Public Purposes Act of 1954 (R&PP Act) (43 CFR. 2740) Lease application to the SFFO, to lease and eventually patent 20 acres of BLM-managed lands within an existing 40-acre material source site (BLM Case Serial Number CC021630), currently operated by NDOT. This material site (NDOT LY 04-13) is located on BLM-managed lands in Lyon County, Nevada, on a right-of-way (ROW) granted to NDOT by the BLM in 1943. The site is approximately one mile west of the community of Silver Springs, on the north side of US-50 at milepost LY 28.5 (Figure 1). The project proponent is NDOT. The EA is a site-specific analysis of potential impacts that could result from the implementation of the Proposed Action or No Action Alternative. The EA was prepared to ensure compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and to assist BLM with determining whether any “significant” impacts could result from the analyzed actions. “Significance” is defined by NEPA and is found in Chapter 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1508.27. An EA provides evidence for determining whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or a statement of “Finding of No Significant Impact”. 1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED The purpose of this Proposed Action is for the BLM to consider issuing a lease under the R&PP Act to NDOT for a proposed maintenance station approximately one mile west of Silver Springs, Nevada. The need is for the BLM to comply with the R&PP Act that authorizes the lease and transfer of certain public lands to States or their political subdivisions, and to nonprofit corporations and associations, for recreational and public purposes. NDOT wishes to appropriate public land to establish a maintenance station that would support constructing, reconstructing, improving, operating, managing, and maintaining highways in the surrounding area, as authorized by Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) chapter 408. “Highways” may include roads, bridges, structures, culverts, curbs, drains, and all buildings, communication facilities, services, and works incidental to highway construction. The maintenance station may also be used for staging, as needed, for highway construction projects in the vicinity. The need for a maintenance facility has been increasing over the years due to recent roadway widening on US-50, establishment of a new major freight corridor on SR-439 (USA Parkway), and significant residential and industrial growth in Storey and Lyon counties. This growth and infrastructure expansion have increased the use and importance of these corridors, thereby increasing the need for shorter response times to roadway incidents and shorter drive times to maintain the roads and manage projects.


Page 2

Figure 1. Regional Location of Proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station


Page 3

The NDOT application is for a section of public land that is surrounded on three sides by private land and isolated from other contiguous public lands. BLM has a need to consolidate land that is difficult to manage through transfer or exchange out of federal ownership. Furthermore, the State of Nevada expedited construction of SR-439 (USA Parkway) to meet commitments related to industrial development in the area (e.g., the Tahoe Reno Industrial Center in Storey County). SR-439 is considered a critical project for meeting the aggressive needs of these new industrial developments. As a high-priority freight corridor, SR-439 requires high-quality roadway maintenance and emergency roadway services with fast turnaround times. To accomplish this, NDOT needs to have a functioning maintenance station to meet SR-439 service demands. The recent opening of SR-439 to traffic has expedited the need for a maintenance station in this area. The proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station would provide a site for a Nevada Highway Patrol (NHP) substation. Similar to NDOT’s need for a maintenance yard facility in this vicinity, the NHP needs a facility to help reduce response times to meet growing needs in the region. DECISION TO BE MADE The BLM Authorized Officer will decide whether to approve or deny the application for R&PP Act conveyance. 1.3 LAND USE PLAN CONFORMANCE STATEMENT The Proposed Action is in conformance with the Carson City Field Office Consolidated Resources Management Plan (May 2001), pages LND-6 and LND-7, Administrative Actions 3, 4, and 5. 1.4 RELATIONSHIP TO STATUTES, REGULATIONS, AND OTHER PLANS The Proposed Action and Alternatives are consistent with the following documents:

• Recreation and Public Purposes Act (R&PP Act) (43 C.F.R. 2740);

• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969;

• National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC 470f), implemented through the State Protocol Agreement between BLM Nevada and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Office for Implementing the National Historic Preservation Act (2012) under the provisions of the National Programmatic Agreement between the BLM and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation;

• Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, as amended;

• Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976, as amended;

• Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 USC Section 1531);


Page 4

• The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918, as amended (16 USC Section 703-711);

• Memorandum of Understanding Between the BLM and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to Promote the Conservation of Migratory Birds – BLM 2010-110;

• Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978;

• Title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations Subpart 4100 – Grazing Administration;

• The National Trails System Act (NTSA) of 1968;

• National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966;

• Noxious Weed Act of 1974;

• Standards and Guidelines for Nevada's Sierra Front-Northwestern Great Basin Area (2003);

• The National Fire Plan, Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy (January 2001);

• Protecting People and Natural Resources, A Cohesive Fuels Treatment Strategy (2006);

• Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment (2015); and

• Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments – Executive Order (EO) 13175.

2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES The Proposed Action, Alternative B and No Action Alternative are described below. Additionally, the alternatives considered but eliminated from consideration are summarized. 2.1 ALTERNATIVE A -PROPOSED ACTION NDOT has submitted an Application for Land for Recreation or Public Purposes (R&PP Application) to BLM, requesting that the southern 20 acres of Material Site LY 04-13 (CC021630) be concurrently relinquished back to the BLM and acquired by NDOT under this R&PP application to be developed and operated as a highway maintenance station (Figure 2). The R&PP Act, enacted in 1954, authorizes the sale or lease of public lands for recreational or public purposes to state and local governments and to qualified nonprofit organizations. Whether the land is to be purchased or leased, BLM will classify for purposes of the act only the amount of land required for efficient operation of the project described in the applicant’s development plan. Applicants are


Page 5

Figure 2. Portion of NDOT Material Site LY 04-13 to be Relinquished for Maintenance Station Use


Page 6

required to first accept a lease, or lease with option to purchase, to assure development takes place before a sale is made and a patent (Government deed) is issued. Under the Proposed Action, NDOT intends to eventually convert the right granted under the R&PP Application (considered to be a lease) to a patent after approximately five years of use as a maintenance station. The proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station site intersects US-50 at milepost LY 28.34. As discussed previously, the Proposed Action would involve acquisition of 20 acres, described as M.D.M., T.18N., R.24E., Section 24, NE¼ NW¼ SW¼ and NW¼ NE¼ SW¼. The primary site users will be NDOT employees (maintenance crews), NHP substation employees, and contracted construction companies performing maintenance and construction on highways in the vicinity of the maintenance station. If approved, construction of the project could require up to five years for completion of all facilities, although maintenance station operations would start much earlier. 2.1.1 Site Development As depicted in the conceptual site plan shown in Figure 3, development of the site would include a paved access road, paved material storage areas, structures, lighting, and fencing. In addition to these maintenance station facilities, a NHP substation would be constructed onsite. Site development is anticipated to include the following:

• NDOT crew room modular (1,440 square feet [sf], 16 feet high) • Nevada Highway Patrol substation modular (1,440 sf, 16 feet high) • Sand/salt storage structure (5,775 sf, 29 feet high) • Eight-bay maintenance station (10,440 sf, 26 feet high) • Brine maker building (525 sf, 20 feet high) • Two 20,000-gallon brine storage tanks (12-foot diameter, 14 feet high) • Sander racks (576 sf, 14 feet high, with 22-foot high light poles) • Above-ground fuel tank (96 sf, 7 feet high) • Asphalt paved area (47,000 sf) • Asphalt paved yard (142,000 sf), including wash pad • Light poles (30 feet high) • Chain link perimeter security fencing with gates (3,800 linear feet) • Three-wire (smooth) fencing with gates (2,600 linear feet) • Truck wash station • Communications hub building • Radio communications tower

In addition to these facilities, NDOT anticipates establishing material piles on the paved yard, including a rip-rap pile (10,000 sf by 10 feet high), a decomposed granite base pile (6,000 sf by 10 feet high), and a gravel base pile (3,500 sf by 10 feet high). As the above facilities indicate, the maintenance station site would be fenced and gated to provide security to the site. Additionally,


Page 7

Figure 3. Conceptual Maintenance Station Site Plan


Page 8

the remaining 20 acres of existing material site LY 04-13 would be fenced using three-wire smooth fencing with gates. During the “lease” period of site use, a contractor would be providing potable water and sewage collection and disposal services, using a blackwater tank, to the maintenance station and the NHP substation. Once the site has been permanently acquired by NDOT, it is anticipated that NDOT would drill a well and construct an onsite sewage disposal system (OSDS) (i.e., septic system). All county and state permits required to construct and operate the well and OSDS would be acquired at the time permanent facilities are established on the site. A paved road from the US-50 right-of-way to the proposed maintenance station site currently exists. This access road begins where the southeast corner of the material site overlaps the US-50 right-of-way, and does not cross private property (see Figure 3). But access to this road from US-50 would be from a new frontage road that would cross private property between the US-50 right-of-way and the southern material site boundary. Property needed for the frontage road will be acquired from the private landowner as part of a separate NDOT project (US-50 widening from Chaves Road to its junction with US-95A). Under this US-50 widening project, a frontage road will be constructed that will safely bring US-50 traffic to and from the maintenance station site. The US-50 widening project is currently under design, and NEPA compliance documentation is currently being prepared for the project. Lighting would be needed during nighttime hours for both security and operational purposes. Lights would be mounted on 30-foot poles in locations similar to those shown on Figure 3 and would adhere to the measures described below in Section 2.1.3, Resource Protection and Monitoring, “Visual Quality.” 2.1.2 Maintenance Station Operations The proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station will serve to assist NDOT in meeting its goal of preserving roadway facilities in a safe and usable condition. NDOT’s maintenance work is generally categorized into three areas: (1) Routine maintenance—Work needed daily to repair damage to the highway system and perform operational activities that keep the traveling public moving in a safe and efficient manner. Examples are sweeping, pulling shoulders, grading ditches, removing debris, controlling vegetation, patching pavement, filling cracks, striping, repairing concrete, and cleaning culverts. (2) Capital improvement—Work that will slow down the deterioration or extend the life of the highway system. Examples are chip seal, cold in-place recycle, microsurfacing, bridge maintenance, slope flattening, and guardrail installation. (3) Emergency activities—Work needed due to accidents and natural disasters to stabilize and remediate travel ways and damaged structures. Examples are snow removal, traffic incident cleanup, flood damage repair, and guardrail repair.


Page 9

Other maintenance activities may include providing roadside tree and vegetation control, responding to roadway hazards, and maintaining roadway signs. In addition to supporting these activities, the maintenance crew assigned to the proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station will provide equipment and vehicle repair and storage services; operate facilities to store and dispense fuels and motor oils; clean vehicles and equipment; store and manage materials and supplies (e.g., traffic control devices, fencing materials, guideposts, crack filler, salt and sand); and produce and store brine solution for highway deicing operations. Materials will be stored and managed in accordance with NDOT’s maintenance manual to reduce the risk of spills and environmental contamination. The maintenance station will be in operation 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It is anticipated that NDOT will staff the maintenance station with from five to seven permanent employees; others, including NDOT staff and contractors, will be working out of this facility when large projects are being constructed in the vicinity of the station. 2.1.3 Resource Protection and Monitoring As part of the Proposed Action, NDOT is responsible for implementing the following resource-protection and monitoring measures. Air Quality. NDOT or any contractor developing or using the proposed maintenance station site must comply with existing federal, state, and local air quality regulations. Prior to engaging in surface disturbance at the site, contractors would be required to obtain and pay for required permitting. The contractor would be required to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) for control of fugitive dust, as specified in the permit. Paving undeveloped or disturbed land areas is a recognized mitigation measure for particulate matter (PM) equal to or less than a nominal aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers (PM10) under the federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program. Paving the area of the maintenance station would act to reduce area PM10 emissions. Additionally, establishing the Silver Springs Maintenance Station would result in an overall reduction in vehicle miles and vehicle hours traveled for NDOT to achieve its mission as discussed in the purpose and need. These reductions would represent a corresponding reduction in projected vehicle emissions. Fire Protection. The Nevada State Fire Marshal performs routine annual inspections of maintenance stations to determine the extent of compliance with the provisions of all laws and regulations adopted by the State of Nevada to protect employees, the general public, and property against fire. Inspections include all emergency exit lighting, sprinklers, and fire extinguishers, open penetration in walls, and Americans with Disabilities Act compliance issues. If a maintenance station property fails to comply with an order of the State Fire Marshal for any change within 30 days, the Fire Marshal will report any failure to the State Public Works Division, which shall take the necessary steps to correct the situation.


Page 10

Hazardous Waste Management. Hazardous waste is managed according to CFR Title 40, Part 262 “Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous Waste”. It is not anticipated that hazardous waste will be generated or stored at the proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station. An equipment maintenance facility will not be constructed as part of the maintenance station, but minor equipment maintenance would be performed onsite, as needed, using services provided by mobile mechanics. These mechanics would collect any oils, solvents, and other fluids generated by maintenance activities and transport them to an NDOT major maintenance facility (e.g., in Carson City or Reno) for ultimate disposal. As a result, equipment fluid disposal issues are anticipated to be minor at the proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station. Major equipment repair and maintenance would occur at an offsite NDOT major maintenance facility. Fueling of equipment will take place at the proposed maintenance station. Fueling systems will have safety features and secondary containment, as required by applicable regulation and law. NDOT maintains minimum Class A/B and Class C Underground Storage Tank (UST) training for all staff responsible for and using NDOT fuel systems, regardless of whether fuel tanks are located above or below ground. Should an unforeseen spill incident occur, reportable quantity releases of all hazardous or regulated materials would be reported to federal and state authorities as required by 40 CFR 302.6. Resultant impacted material would be remediated and/or disposed of in accordance with applicable state and federal requirements subject to the authority and direction of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP). NDOT’s Environmental Services Division regularly inspects each maintenance station to review practices.

Migratory Birds. Vegetation removal would be conducted to conform with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to avoid impacts to listed migratory birds (50 CFR 10.13) that may be actively utilizing vegetation for nesting. When possible, vegetation removal would not occur during avian breeding season (March 1 through July 31). If vegetation removal must occur during avian breeding season, nesting surveys would be conducted by a qualified biologist within ten days prior to land disturbance. If nesting sites are found, a suitable species-specific buffer area around the nest site would be established utilizing the BLM Carson City District-recommended bird nest buffer sizes. Nest areas would be flagged and avoided until the birds fledge.

Visual Resources. Measures to minimize site-use visibility would be incorporated into the site-use stipulations, including using neutral, non-obtrusive colors like tan, brown, white or gray for structures, when possible. Lighting would be designed to provide only what is needed for safe site operations and security purposes. NDOT would coordinate with Lyon County to achieve an acceptable lighting plan. Lighting likely would be provided by partially or fully shielded LED fixtures to minimize the amount of undesirable light potentially emitted into the night sky and to reduce the visibility of light from residential viewsheds. Lighting would be designed and arranged in accordance with applicable codes and best management practices to minimize artificial light from escaping the site.

Water Quality. NDOT or its construction contractor is responsible for acquiring any water quality-related permits required for construction and operation of the proposed maintenance station. Furthermore, NDOT is responsible for adhering to state and federal water quality regulations, notably with its statewide Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Permit


Page 11

and associated Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP), to prevent or reduce (to the maximum extent practicable) the discharge of pollutants from its rights-of-way and properties. As a requirement of the MS4 Permit, facility pollution prevention plans (FPPPs) have been developed to govern the day-to-day operations of all NDOT maintenance facilities statewide. The FPPPs serve as the foundation for stormwater pollution prevention practices implemented at NDOT’s maintenance facilities. NDOT’s minor maintenance facilities, which would include the proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station, are covered under one FPPP with site-specific BMPs as appropriate. (Material storage/stockpile areas are also covered.) All plans provide information and guidance pertaining to BMPs appropriate for maintenance stations and associated operations, allowable and non-allowable discharges, and routine site inspections. All NDOT FPPPs have designated administrators who are responsible for ensuring the plans are implemented accordingly for their respective facility. FPPP-related maintenance tasks (e.g., routine facility sweeping, etc.) are documented in NDOT’s Maintenance Management System. A summary of FPPP-compliant tasks is provided to NDOT’s Stormwater Division annually and forwarded to NDEP as part of NDOT’s SWMP Annual Report. Administrators are required to have copies of FPPPs on-site, as well as copies of all stormwater inspection documentation. FPPPs are reviewed and updated annually, as needed, by NDOT’s Stormwater Division. As discussed previously, a water well eventually would be drilled onsite. The contractor would be responsible for Nevada Division of Water Resources notification and permit acquisition, and for retaining a Nevada-licensed driller to properly install the well pursuant to Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 534. 2.2 ALTERNATIVE B Alternative B was developed to address the BLM’s need to consolidate public lands to facilitate ease of management. This alternative is substantially the same as the Proposed Action, with the following differences: 1) the entire 40 acres within Section 24 would be made available for conveyance to NDOT or another state agency (see Figure 2), and 2) the property could be conveyed under the authority of Section 203 or FLPMA, for full fair market value, without the restrictions or reservations to the United States that accompany an R&PP lease and patent. This would allow the State of Nevada to utilize the property as needed in the future without further consultation with BLM. All other elements of the proposed action would stay the same. 2.3 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE The No Action Alternative is that the BLM would reject NDOT’s application for an R&PP Lease. Under the No Action Alternative, the southern 20 acres of the existing material site LY 04-13 would not be developed as a highway maintenance station and would continue to be used as part of the larger material site, available to be mined for aggregate resources. Highway maintenance activities and emergency responses to traffic- and highway-related incidents in the Silver Springs area, including on US-50, US-95A, and SR-439 (USA Parkway), would continue to be supported by NDOT maintenance crews located in Reno, Carson City, Fallon, Fernley, and Yerington. Among these maintenance crews, the closest is in Fernley, approximately 16 miles from the proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station site. The other maintenance stations are located no closer than 29 miles from the proposed Silver Springs site.


Page 12

2.4 OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM CONSIDERATION Several alternative sites for the proposed maintenance yard were considered by NDOT but were eliminated for various reasons, including parcels being too small to accommodate needed facilities, parcels being located in areas with incompatible adjacent land uses, and parcels lacking near-term availability. Developing a maintenance station on an alternative site of necessary size near Silver Springs would likely require substantial land disturbance for site development. The proposed site, located between existing material site operations and US-50, is already substantially disturbed because of its use as a material site. Developing the maintenance station on an alternative site with good access to US-50 could result in greater environmental impacts than developing the proposed site. With these factors in mind, NDOT considered use of the now-abandoned Silver Springs Conservation Camp site owned and operated by the Nevada Department of Corrections, but this site was eliminated from consideration because the property was determined to be too small for a maintenance station and too close to existing residential development. Several existing buildings on the site would need to be demolished and removed before a maintenance station could be constructed. Additionally, a handful of small parcels along the new SR-439 (USA Parkway) alignment were considered for the maintenance station, but NDOT was unable to find a readily available parcel that was large enough to accommodate needed maintenance station facilities. NDOT also considered the possibility of sharing the existing Storey County road maintenance facility, but this option was rejected because the site was deemed to be too small for this type of arrangement. 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES This chapter identifies and describes the current condition and trend of elements or resources in the human environment which may be affected by the Proposed Action or the No Action Alternative and the environmental consequences or effects of the action. 3.1 SCOPING AND ISSUE IDENTIFICATION As described in more detail below in Section 4.0, Persons, Groups, and Agencies Consulted, public scoping for the EA was conducted over a 30-day period from March 30 through April 28, 2017. Scoping included mailing a public notice to relevant agencies, elected officials, interest groups, tribes, and landowners, and posting the notice on BLM and NDOT websites. In response, comment letters were received from the following agencies: the Nevada State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO); the NDEP, Bureau of Water Pollution Control; the State Land Use Planning Agency; and the Lyon County Planning Department. Comments concerned the following issues.

• The SHPO comment letter stated that the project area has been previously inventoried and no significant resources were identified.


Page 13

• The NDEP letter identified permits that may be required for construction and operation of the maintenance station.

• The State Land Use Planning Agency comment requested that the EA consider cumulative visual impacts from temporary and permanent development activities, particularly the proliferation of improper lighting, and requested the following mitigation measures for temporary or permanent lighting at the maintenance station:

o Utilize consistent lighting mitigation measures that follow “Dark Sky” lighting practices.

o Effective lighting should have screens that do not allow the bulb to shine up or out. All proposed lighting shall be located to avoid light pollution onto any adjacent lands as viewed from a distance. All lighting fixtures shall be hooded and shielded, face downward, located within soffits and directed on to the permanent site only, and away from adjacent parcels or areas.

o Submit a lighting plan indicating the types of lighting and fixtures, the locations of fixtures, lumens of lighting, and the areas illuminated by the lighting plan.

• The Lyon County Planning Department comment letter included the following questions: o Will a domestic well and an individual sewage disposal system (septic system) be

used for domestic water and sewage disposal for the maintenance/NHP substation facility? Neither Lyon County Utilities (sewer) nor Silver Springs General Improvement District (water) currently have sewer or water service in this area of Silver Springs.

o Will fueling take place on-site? If so, can you describe how fuel spill situations will be addressed?

o Will there be equipment maintenance done on-site? If so, can you describe how used equipment fluid disposal will be treated?

o Access to the site currently crosses through private property. Is an alternate access to be developed or has an access easement for the existing route through the private property been secured and recorded?

o Have conceptual floor plans and/or architectural elevations/building materials and colors been completed for the proposed maintenance/substation facility?

All comments were considered and incorporated into the scope of the EA. 3.2 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVE B The project site is located approximately one mile west of the community of Silver Springs in Lyon County, on the north side of US-50 at milepost LY 28.5. The site is situated across the highway from the Silver Springs Airport on an existing 40-acre NDOT material site (LY 04-13). Rhyolite Lane diagonally crosses the northwest corner of the material site. The proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station would be located on the southern half of this material site. The LY 04-13 material site is actively mined to produce and process materials (e.g., gravel, rip-rap) used for road construction and maintenance in the region. As such, the site is largely disturbed. Existing facilities on the site include a telephone line and an asphalt paved access road from US-50 to the pit area. The southernmost half of the material site is entirely fenced, with gates on both the front and back fence lines to allow access from US-50 and to provide access to the


Page 14

back half of the material site. Two other gated roads also provide access to the site, one a paved road from the US-50 right-of-way to the location of the proposed maintenance station, the other an unpaved road from Rhyolite Road to the northern part of the material site. The portion of the site that would be used for the maintenance station is relatively flat and has been categorized as within the Lahontan Salt Shrub Basin Ecoregion of Nevada (U.S. Department of the Interior-Geological Survey 2013). Vegetation on the site is sparse due to previous disturbance, but what is present is consistent with salt desert shrublands. Vegetation found at the site includes shadscale (Atriplex canescens), budsage (Artemisia spinescens), rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus spp.), smooth horsebrush (Tetradymia canescens), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), winterfat, (Krascheninnikovia lanata), and various species of bunch grasses. No state-listed noxious weeds have been found on the site, but cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) is present. Signs of wildlife noted at the site include antelope ground squirrel (Ammospermophilus leucurus), coyote (Canus latrans) scat, blacktailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), and feral horses (Equus ferus). Wildlife that was documented but was noted as unidentifiable due to observation distance or lack of detailed sign, includes small lizards, passerines, and small rodent burrows. 3.2.1 Supplemental Authorities BLM Nevada IM NV-2009-030 (Supplemental Authorities to Consider in National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Documents) provides guidance to BLM District and Field Offices on how supplemental authorities outlined in Appendix 1 of H-1790-1 should be considered in NEPA documents. Attachment 1 to IM NV-2009-030 provides the Supplemental Authorities list as a screening tool for review and documentation of relevant authorities (laws, regulations, executive orders, directives, etc.) in NEPA documents. The Supplemental Authorities list is organized by elements of the human environment; the elements and corresponding legal authorities are collectively referred to as “Supplemental Authorities.” The list expands on Appendix 1 of H-1790-1 to include other legal authorities, with requirements specified by statute or executive order, which must be considered in all Nevada BLM EA documents. The table below lists the Supplemental Authorities, their status in relation to the Proposed Action, and rationale for whether the topic will be carried forward for detailed analysis. Supplemental Authorities determined to not be present or present, but not affected by the Proposed Action need not be carried forward or discussed further. Supplemental Authorities determined to be present and may be affected may be carried forward in the document if there are issues which warrant a detailed analysis. Table 1 below lists the Supplemental Authorities and their status in the project area. Supplemental Authorities that may be affected by the Proposed Action and Alternative B are further described in this EA.


Page 15

Table 1. Supplemental Authorities.

Resource* Present Yes/No

Affected Yes/No

Rationale

Air Quality Yes No No adverse effects on air quality are anticipated. The project area is located in Hydrographic Area (HA) 102, Lyon County, NV. HA102 is designated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) as unclassifiable/attainment for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). A transportation conformity analysis is not required in attainment areas, and, therefore, no conformity analysis is required for the Proposed Action [Clean Air Act Section 176(c)] [42 U.S.C. 7506(c)]. Given the USEPA designation of the project area, establishing the Silver Springs Maintenance Station would not cause any adverse air quality impacts and would not violate the identified NAAQS. During the project construction phase, there will be short-term, localized increases in the ambient concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO) from emissions of exhaust from construction equipment. However, these CO increases would be temporary and would not cause long-term adverse effects. Contractors are required to comply with federal, state, and local regulations for the control of air pollution.

Emissions of fugitive dust are anticipated during construction. The resulting increases of PM10 concentrations would be temporary and would not cause long-term adverse effects. Contract documents would specify that the contractor must comply with all federal, state, and local regulations for the control of air pollution. Existing federally enforceable control measures for NOx (nitrogen oxides) and VOCs (volatile organic compounds) will limit the formation of ground-level ozone. These control measures include the new diesel and gasoline engine emissions standards and new standards for gasoline and diesel fuel.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

No No The project site is not located in an area of critical environmental concern.

Environmental Justice No No The project site is located adjacent to currently undeveloped property. No residential neighborhoods are located within three-quarters of a mile of the project site. Therefore, the adverse effects of the Proposed Action on residential areas, which could include lighting and vehicle noise and emissions, would be minimal in the context of the existing effects of nearby material site operations, Silver Springs Airport operations, and US-50 use.


Page 16


Affected Yes/No

Rationale

Cultural Resources Yes No In accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the BLM completed a Class III cultural resources inventory of 111 acres (BLM Report #: CRR 3-2766) and identified segments of one eligible site and two ineligible sites in the Indirect Area of Potential Effect (APE) (1,251 acres north of US-50). No sites are located within the Direct APE (the 20-acre Proposed Action site). The BLM submitted the report and a finding of No Adverse Effect to the SHPO on May 18, 2018, and June 20, 2018. The SHPO concurred on the BLM’s determinations on June 21, 2018.

National Historic Trails Yes No High Potential Segments of the California National Historic Trail (CA NHT) are present within and near the project site. The BLM consulted with the National Park Service (NPS) and the Oregon-California Trails Association (OCTA) in accordance with the National Trails System Act, BLM Manual 6280, and NHPA. BLM Report #: CRR 3-2766 identified segments of CA NHT adjacent to the project area and considered indirect effects to these segments. Although the CA NHT corridor passes through the project site, no physical traces of the trail and no artifacts related to the trail are present due to ongoing material site activities since 1943. The BLM has completed the process within BLM Manual 6280, page 1-18.

Farmlands (prime or unique)

No No No Prime or Unique Farmlands are located within the project site, but the soil unit dominating the site potentially qualifies as Farmland of Statewide Importance, as mapped by the National Resources Conservation Service. However, because of the lack of an irrigation water supply, the site does not meet Nevada’s definition of Farmland of Statewide Importance (James Komar personal communication). Consequently, compliance with the federal Farmland Protection Policy Act is not required.

Floodplains No No Per federal Emergency Management Agency flood maps, the project site is not within a designated 100-year floodplain. The site is within an area mapped as an “Area of Minimal Flood Hazard.”

Invasive, Nonnative Species

Yes No Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) is considered an invasive species and is present at the project site and surrounding areas. The density of cheatgrass on the site is less than surrounding areas due to the high level of disturbance activities at the site.

Migratory Birds Yes No Although nests were not observed during the biological surveys of the project site, birds were present and potential habitat for nesting birds is available in surrounding areas. Nesting surveys are required for all NDOT projects prior to disturbance activities. If an active nest is located, an avoidance area would be delineated, and activities could not continue until the young have fledged. Therefore, no impacts to migratory birds are anticipated.

Native American Religious Concerns

No No The BLM notified the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony of the project on August 24, 2017 and notified the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California on April 18, 2018. No religious concerns have been identified.


Page 17


Affected Yes/No

Rationale

Threatened or Endangered Species (plants and animals)

No No No Threatened or Endangered Species or suitable habitat are present within or near the project site.

Wastes, Hazardous or Solid

No No No adverse impacts concerning hazardous wastes or solids are anticipated. No known hazardous or solid wastes are located in the project area, based on an Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project (NDOT 2017). Any spills, either during construction or operations of the Proposed Action, would be addressed through required BMPs and in accordance with applicable federal and state regulations. See “Resource Protection and Monitoring” under Section 2.0, “Proposed Action and Alternatives.”

Water Quality (Surface/Ground)

Yes No Standard BMPs would keep surface and/or ground water resources from being affected. No water quality or stormwater permits (e.g., Section 401) would be required to construct the project.

Wetlands/Riparian Zones

No No No wetlands or riparian zones are present in the project area.

Wild and Scenic Rivers No No The Proposed Action would have no foreseeable adverse effects on a river on the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System or under study for designation to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

Wilderness/WSA No No The project site is not located within a designated Wilderness Area or Wilderness Study Area. *See H-1790-1 (January 2008) Appendix 1 Supplemental Authorities to be Considered.

Supplemental Authorities determined to be Not Present or Present/Not Affected need not be carried forward or discussed further in the document.

3.2.2 Resources or Uses Other than Supplemental Authorities The following resources or uses, which are not Supplemental Authorities as defined by BLM’s Handbook H-1790-1, may be present in the area. BLM specialists have evaluated the potential impact of the Proposed Action and Alternative B on these resources and documented their findings in the table below. Resources or uses that may be affected by the Proposed Action, Alternative B, or No Action Alternative are further described in this EA. Table 2. Resources or Uses Other Than Supplemental Authorities.

Resource or Issue** Present Yes/No

Affected Yes/No

Rationale

BLM Sensitive Species (animals)

No No None observed on the project site.

BLM Sensitive Species (plants)

No No None observed on the project site.


Page 18


Affected Yes/No

Rationale

Fire Management Yes No Vegetation on the project site is sparse, resulting in relatively low fire risk. Use of the site could increase fire risk, but vegetation remaining on the site following development of the maintenance station would be managed to reduce this risk. As a result, fire risk is not expected to increase relative to current and future risk associated with use of the site as a material source. General Wildlife Yes No Individuals may be affected through displacement or potential mortality if crushed during daily operations (driving, parking, stockpiling, staging equipment, fueling, etc.). Although individual mortality may occur on site, observed species would not be affected at the population level since they are commonly found in the surrounding areas and throughout the state.

Land Use Authorization Yes Yes Carried forward for analysis. See discussion below in Section 3.2.3.

Livestock Grazing No No The project site is not within an existing BLM grazing allotment.

Minerals Yes No According to mineral, energy, and mining maps included in the Carson City District Consolidated Resource Management Plan (BLM 2001), the project site is not located within a mining district, nor does it have mining potential. No active mineral leases or oil or gas wells are located on the site. However, as demonstrated by its current use as part of an NDOT material site, the project site potentially contains aggregate, sand, gravel, and other material usable for roadway construction and maintenance purposes. Development of the maintenance station would eliminate the potential for NDOT to mine the southern half of the existing material site in the future; however, NDOT mining operations have been and will continue to be concentrated in the northern half of the material site, which will not be affected by the Proposed Action. The potential loss of materials displaced by the Proposed Action would be minimal.

Paleontological No No No paleontological resources are located within the project site.

Recreation No No The project site is currently part of an active NDOT material site. Any recreational use of the site is limited and incidental to the primary use of the site. Development and use of the southern 20 acres of the material site as a maintenance station would have little if any effect on recreational activities relative to any existing use levels.


Page 19


Affected Yes/No

Rationale

Socioeconomics No No No adverse socioeconomic effects would result from development and operation of the project site as a maintenance station. Operations of the maintenance station and DHP substation would generate a small amount of permanent onsite employment (probably fewer than 10 employees), but this would generate little or no population growth or demand for housing in the Silver Springs area.

Soils Yes Yes Carried forward for analysis. See discussion below in Section 3.2.4.

Vegetation Yes No Individual plants may be affected by mortality if crushed during daily operations or ground disturbances (driving, parking, stockpiling, staging equipment, fueling, etc.). Although individual mortality may occur on site, observed species would not be affected at the population level since they are commonly found in the surrounding areas and throughout the state.

Visual Resources Yes Yes Carried forward for analysis. See discussion below in Section 3.2.5.

Feral Horses and Burros Yes No Feral horses are present in the surrounding areas. A fence is in place to keep all horses out of the existing material pit. This fence will remain in place and there are no additional impacts to individual horses or the local herds.

**Resources or uses determined to be Not Present or Present/Not Affected need not be carried forward or discussed further in the document.

3.2.3 Land Use Authorization Affected Environment The project site is currently located within NDOT Material Site LY 04-13 (BLM CC021630). This 40-acre site is situated on a right-of-way granted to NDOT by BLM in 1943. The site has been mined for roadway materials periodically since its acquisition, with mining activities concentrated in the northern half of the material site. An existing paved road from US-50 traverses north across the material site to provide access to the active pit areas of the site. Additionally, two other access roads are located on the site, one from US-50 to the site of the proposed maintenance station and the other from Rhyolite Lane to the northern part of the material site. No other permanent facilities are located on the site, although work trailers, material stockpiles, vehicles, and other equipment may be temporarily onsite when active material mining operations are underway. Lyon County provides land use goals and policies for this area in the Lyon County Master Plan (Lyon County 2010). The goals and policies set forth in the Lyon County Master Plan include allowing development in certain locations that do not degrade or destroy natural and cultural resources. According to the Lyon County Master Plan, the project area and surrounding area are designated for “Employment” land uses. This land use category provides concentrated locations for employment, combined with a mix of complementary commercial and residential uses. The proposed maintenance station project site is zoned RR5, allowing residential development on 5-


Page 20

acre-minimum parcels, but the material site right-of-way makes it unlikely that the site would ever be developed for residential use unless NDOT first relinquished the site back to BLM. Construction of the Proposed Action would be subject to Lyon County Development Code design standards. Currently, the project site is almost entirely surrounded by an undeveloped privately owned 168-acre parcel that has been zoned by Lyon County as RR5-C1. This zoning allows for residential development or development within a limited commercial district. No formal applications are pending to subdivide or develop this parcel. However, the Lyon County Planning Department had a meeting in April 2017 with a group that discussed conceptual plans for developing commercial uses adjacent to US-50 and mixed uses and a regional park on the northern part of the parcel (Rob Pyzel personal communication). No further discussions concerning this development have occurred since April 2017. US-50 borders the southern boundary of the project site, with Silver Springs Airport located on the south side of the highway. Environmental Consequences of Proposed Action Development of a permanent maintenance station on the existing material site is not consistent with allowable uses under the BLM right-of-way that grants use of the site for roadway materials extraction. To authorize maintenance station development on the southern 20 acres of the material site, BLM would need to make a finding that the proposed use is consistent with the R&PP Act, which authorizes the sale or lease of public lands for public purposes to a state agency, such as NDOT. The act applies to all public lands identified for disposal under BLM land use plans. Any state, state agency, or political subdivision of a state may acquire up to 640 acres annually for each public purpose program other than recreation. These lands must be within the political boundaries of the agency. The request by NDOT to lease and eventually acquire the proposed project site for use as a maintenance station and NHP substation is consistent with purposes of the R&PP Act. Furthermore, development and use of the site would be compatible with current existing land uses surrounding the site, which include an undeveloped parcel adjacent to the west, east, and north sides of the site, and US-50 and the Silver Springs Airport to the south. Should the surrounding parcels be eventually developed in commercial or mixed uses under existing RR5-C1 zoning, which has been conceptually discussed with Lyon County, the maintenance yard would be generally consistent with allowable uses. Residential development potentially allowed under the property’s zoning would need to be approved by Lyon County with full knowledge of the existence of the existing NDOT material site, as well as the proposed maintenance station and NHP substation on the project site. Environmental Consequences of Alternative B Under Alternative B the entire 40 acre parcel could be disposed of to NDOT without restrictions or reservations to the United States. This parcel is surrounded by private land that has potential to be developed. Disposing of the entire parcel eliminates an isolated holding of public land that is difficult to manage and meets the need to consolidate ownership. If the parcel was disposed of through a standard FLPMA land sale, it could be developed for any purpose, consistent with local planning requirements. Under this alternative NDOT would not have to coordinate with BLM in


Page 21

the future to facilitate changes at the maintenance station. Federal regulations that govern public land management would no longer apply to these lands and instead, uses of the land would conform to state and local requirements. NDOT currently has no plans to develop the northern 20 acres of the material site. This part of the site would most likely remain a material site for the foreseeable future. Evaluating the specific effects of developing this part of the site for any other uses, which would be subject to Lyon County zoning restrictions and other planning requirements, would be speculative. 3.2.4 Soils Affected Environment According to the Natural Resources Conservation soil survey for the project area, project site soils are largely composed of Malpais gravelly loam and Cleaver gravelly sandy loam. These well-drained soils are associated with alluvial fans. The profile of Malpais gravelly loam, which is the site’s dominant soil, is characterized by gravelly loamy sand in its uppermost layer (0 to 3 inches), very cobbly sandy loam in its middle layer (3 to 25 inches), and extremely cobbly sandy loam in its lower level (25 to 60 inches). This soil unit is rated as having a “slight” erosion hazard. Both soils have nonirrigated Land Capability Classifications of 7s, reflecting soils that have very severe limitations that make them unsuited to cultivation and that restrict their use mainly to grazing, forestland, or wildlife. Additionally, these soils have limitations within the rooting zone, such as shallowness of the rooting zone, stones, low moisture-holding capacity, low fertility that is difficult to correct, and salinity or sodium content. As part of existing NDOT material site operations, project site soils have been disturbed by past materials excavation, stockpiling, and hauling activities, although most excavation has been limited to the northern half of the existing material site. Environmental Consequences of Both Action Alternatives The Proposed Action and Alternative B would directly have minor temporary and permanent impacts to soils within the project site. Soils would be temporarily and permanently disturbed by site grading and construction of maintenance station facilities on the southern 20 acres of the existing material site and possibly on the northern 20 acres of the site, if eventually developed. The Proposed Action and Alternative B could permanently disturb up to 40 acres. Development activities would result in paving and additional surface disturbance and compaction of project site soils, reducing the soils’ already limited productivity, decreasing water infiltration, increasing runoff, and potentially causing erosion, although the erosion potential of the site is rated as slight. The soils in areas of the maintenance station that would be paved would not be recoverable unless project facilities were removed in the future. Effects of Alternative B could be similar, if eventually developed. The soil impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternative B, however, could be less severe than under the No Action Alternative, which would continue to make the site available for excavation of roadway materials, as allowed by the existing material site right-of-way.


Page 22

Impacts of maintenance station development and operations would be reduced by the implementation of BMPs to control fugitive dust and erosion of soils during construction. NDOT and its contractors developing and using the site would be required to comply with existing federal, state, and local air quality and stormwater discharge regulations. Prior to engaging in surface disturbance at the site, contractors would be required to obtain, and pay for, required permitting. Contractors would be required to implement BMPs for control of fugitive dust and erosion, as specified in permits. After the contractor completes development of the site, they would be required to stabilize disturbed areas of the site per Section 637 of NDOT’s Standard Specifications, which addresses temporary pollution control BMPs. 3.2.5 Visual Resources Affected Environment The Proposed Action and Alternative B could affect visual resources for two categories of viewers: travelers on US-50 and residents of the surrounding area. As described below, the existing visual quality of the project site is low because of the lack of any unique features and the site’s generally flat terrain and sparse vegetation. Adjacent land uses are vacant, except for US-50, which borders the site on the south. The topography of the project site is relatively flat near US-50, sloping gently upwards as it rises to the north. Views are generally long and unobstructed, interrupted only by rising hills to the distant north and south. As depicted in the photos in Figure 4, the visual appearance of the site is consistent with visual characteristics of much of the area adjacent to US-50 between the communities of Stagecoach and Silver Springs. Vegetation on the site is sparse, consisting of salt desert shrublands. Access roads and mined areas of NDOT material site LY 04-13, which borders the north side of the project site, are visible from US-50. Man-made features immediately visible near the project site include fencing along US-50, roadway signs, power poles, and hangars and other structures at Silver Springs Airport, located just to the south of the project site across US-50. About three-quarters of a mile east and west of the project site, rural homes and ranch buildings can be seen. Further to the east, about a mile from the site, buildings near the intersection of US-50 and US-95A (e.g., Silver Strike Casino and Silver Springs Nugget Casino) are also visible. No homes or structures are located north of the project site. The most visible feature near the project site is Silver Springs Airport, a public use, 24-hour general aviation airport. The lighted runway (medium intensity runway edge lights) is 6,000 feet long and 75 feet wide (Silver Springs Airport LLC 2017). The airport includes hangars, a white-green beacon that operates from sunset to sunrise, a pilot’s lounge, 24-hour security, and a business office.


Page 23

In addition to airport lighting, other sources of light within a mile or two of the project site include outside lighting located at residences and ranch operations to the east, west, and south, and parking lot and signage lighting at the Silver Strike Casino and Silver Springs Nugget Casino at the US-50/US-95A intersection. Other commercial and residential lighting emanates from housing and commercial development in Silver Springs, about a mile to the east of the project site, and from housing located south of Silver Springs Airport. While the vicinity of the project site is generally dark at night, the presence of these existing lighting sources, as well as vehicle lights on US-50, diminishes the “dark-sky” qualities of the area. (Dark-sky generally denotes an area where the darkness of the night sky is relatively free of interference from artificial light, increasing the number of stars visible at night.) Environmental Consequences of Action Alternatives According to National BLM policy contained in the CCD Consolidated Resource Management Plan (BLM 2001), BLM’s contrast rating process (BLM Manual Section 8431 Visual Resource Management) is required to assess visual effects for proposed projects in highly sensitive areas or for high impact projects, but a brief narrative visual assessment may be completed for all other projects that require an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. The proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station project is not located in a highly sensitive area and would not result in high visual impacts. Thus, visual effects of the Proposed Action were evaluated qualitatively. The BLM employs the Visual Resource Management (VRM) process to manage the quality of landscapes on public land and to evaluate the potential impacts to visual resources resulting from development activities. VRM class designations are determined by assessing the scenic value of the landscape, viewer sensitivity to the scenery, and the distance of the viewer to the subject landscape. These management classes identify various permissible levels of landscape alteration, while protecting the overall visual quality of the region. They are divided into four levels (Classes I, II, III, and IV). Class I is the most restrictive and Class IV is the least restrictive. The proposed project site has not been inventoried for visual resources and, therefore, has not been assigned a visual management classification (BLM 2012). The Consolidated Resource Management Plan (BLM 2001), however, directs that the US-50 East area is to be managed to achieve VRM Class IV standards, which allow activities that may dominate the view and be the major focus of viewer attention. The objective of Class IV is to provide for management activities that require major modification of the existing character of the landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape is expected to be high. However, every attempt should be made to


Page 24

FIGURE 4. VIEWS FROM EXISTING NDOT MATERIAL SITE LY 04-13

Looking south toward US-50 and Silver Springs Airport

Looking southwest toward US-50 and hangars at Silver Springs Airport


Page 25

FIGURE 4 (cont.). VIEWS FROM EXISTING NDOT MATERIAL SITE LY 04-13

Looking west toward Rhyolite Lane

Looking south, with existing material site disturbance in foreground


Page 26

minimize the impact of these activities through careful location, minimal disturbance, and repeating the basic elements of the landscape. The proposed site development will change the visual character of the 20-acre site during both day and nighttime hours, and is expected to create low-to-moderate adverse visual impacts. As described under Section 2.1.1, Site Development, the proposed maintenance station would add several structures to the site, including two 1,440-sf modular buildings and a 10,440-sf eight-bay maintenance station. These structures would range in height from 16 to 29 feet. Additionally, storage tanks and material piles, ranging up to 14 feet in height, would be located on the 142,000-sf paved asphalt yard. Lighting, needed for both security and operational purposes, would be mounted on 30-foot light poles in locations similar to those shown on Figure 3. Given the topography of the landscape and relatively short distance of the proposed maintenance station improvements to US-50, the maintenance station could attract the attention of the casual observer traveling on US-50. The replacement of desert vegetation with a large asphalt yard, structures, and material piles would create a moderate visual contrast with the surrounding vegetation. Use of the site, however, would not dominate the northerly view from the highway because of the large, open expanses that would remain on three sides of the maintenance station. From the viewsheds of residents to the east and west of the project site, the maintenance station would not dominate or highly affect views because of the distance to the site. Visual effects of maintenance station structures would be similar to those caused by existing structures at the Silver Springs Airport and nearby ranching operations. Measures to minimize site use visibility would include using neutral, non-obtrusive colors like tan, brown, white or gray for structures, when possible. Visual impacts of site use may be most acute at night, when lighting at the maintenance station could make the site more apparent from US-50 and more visible to distant homes. However, the distance of the project site from the nearest homes (i.e., three-quarters of a mile to a mile away) would diminish the visual impact of site lighting, although the site would still be visible at night. Site lighting would be consistent with light coming from other nearby sources, including lighting at Silver Springs Airport, lighting at casinos and other businesses in Silver Springs, and outside lighting at homes and ranches. Vehicle lights on US-50 also adds lighting to the surrounding area. To minimize visibility during night-time hours, NDOT would cooperate with Lyon County to develop an acceptable lighting plan. Lighting likely would be provided by partially or fully shielded LED fixtures to minimize the amount of undesirable light potentially emitted into the night sky and to reduce the visibility of light from residential viewsheds. Lighting at the site would be designed and arranged in accordance with applicable codes and best practices to minimize artificial light from escaping the site. Lighting would be generally consistent with “dark-sky” lighting practices. The isolated location of the maintenance station is one of the features that would limit its visibility; the maintenance station would be located on the interior of a larger parcel, surrounded by undeveloped land, and about three-quarters of mile from the nearest structure. With mitigation, the visual effects of the Proposed Action would not be substantial and would be consistent with changes allowed under a VRM Class IV designation.


Page 27

If the northern 20 acres of the site are eventually developed under Alternative B, visual effects would likely result in impacts similar to those described above for the Proposed Action. For the foreseeable future, the northern 20 acres of the site would continue to be used as a material site and no visual effects would result beyond those occurring under existing conditions. 3.3 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No Action Alternative, the NDOT highway maintenance station and NHP substation would not be developed on the project site and the site would remain part of NDOT Material Site LY 04-13. No further resource impacts or environmental consequences would occur, as detailed in Section 3.0. The southern 20 acres of the site would continue to be available for materials excavation and stockpiling. Resource impacts attributable to periodic materials excavation of the project site could occur under the No Action Alternative, including soil, vegetation, and habitat disturbance. Implementation of the No Action Alternative would not meet the need for the Proposed Action to improve response times to nearby traffic- and highway-related incidents and to provide for adequate staffing and resources for maintaining highways in the surrounding area, including US-50, US-95A, and SR-439 (USA Parkway, a new major freight corridor). Responses to incidents would continue to be provided by NDOT maintenance crews in Carson City, Fallon, Fernley, and Yerington. Response times to incidents, including NHP responses, would be slower and drive times to highway project sites would be longer than if they originated from a Silver Springs Maintenance Station location. 3.4 MITIGATION MEASURES With the resource protection and monitoring measures included in the project description, no additional mitigation measures are required. 3.5 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Cumulative impacts are those that result from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, combined with the specific impacts of an individual project. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively substantial impacts occurring over a period of time. With the exception of visual impacts, all contributions to cumulative effects to resources resulting from the proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station project are expected to be negligible. The study area for visual resources includes an area two miles around the proposed project site. Beyond two miles, the visual effects of the proposed maintenance station may be noticeable but would be negligible. As discussed previously for the direct effects of the Proposed Action, past and current actions that have caused daytime and nighttime visual effects in the study area include development and operations of the Silver Springs Airport; development and operations of casinos at the intersection of US-50 and US-95A; development of ranches and rural housing east, west, and south of the site; development and operations of businesses in Silver Springs; development of housing in Silver Springs; construction and vehicular use of highways and local roadways; and mining operations on NDOT’s LY 04-13 material site. These activities have disturbed the natural


Page 28

landscape, introduced new visual elements (e.g., structures, signs), and introduced lighting into the nighttime environment. Foreseeable future actions that would affect visual resources include planned improvements at Silver Springs Airport and continued commercial and residential development in the Silver Springs area. Over the next five years, improvements at Silver Springs Airport are anticipated to include taxiway lighting, an automated weather observation station, additional automobile parking, and expansion of the apron (Nevada Appeal 2016). These improvements will add to the disturbance of the landscape around the airport, add more structures and paved areas to the landscape, and introduce more light to the nighttime environment. Additionally, continued residential and commercial development over the foreseeable future in the Silver Springs area to the east and southeast of the proposed project site will also result in landscape disturbance and the proliferation of structures and outdoor lighting. More speculative, but possible, is eventual development of the privately owned 168-acre parcel surrounding the proposed project site. As discussed previously in Section 3.1, “Land Use Authorization,” the parcel’s zoning allows for residential development or development within a limited commercial district. No formal applications are pending to subdivide or develop this parcel, but the Lyon County Planning Department has met with a group of developers, including owners of the parcel, to discuss conceptual plans for developing commercial uses adjacent to US-50 and mixed uses and a regional park on the northern part of the parcel. Development of this parcel would result in substantial visual impacts, including commercial and residential structures and substantial outdoor lighting. In the context of past and reasonably foreseeable future actions that could affect daytime and nighttime visual resources, the visual impacts of the proposed Silver Springs Maintenance Station and continued use of the northern 20 acres of the site as a material site would not be substantial. Mitigation measures described in Section 3.2.5, “Visual Resources,” of this document are expected to reduce to less than significant both the project-specific and cumulative visual effects of the Proposed Action. 3.6 MONITORING The resource protection and monitoring measures described for the Proposed Action in “Resource Protection and Monitoring” are requirements for site use. No additional monitoring needs have been identified for this action. 4.0 PERSONS, GROUPS, AND AGENCIES CONSULTED During preparation of the EA, the public was notified of the intent to prepare an EA for the Proposed Action by mailing a notice to relevant federal and state resource agencies; relevant federal, state, and local elected officials and Lyon County government departments; landowners within a quarter-mile of the project site; regional tribal contacts, and the state clearinghouse. The notice was also posted on the NDOT Internet Public Involvement website page from March 29 to April 28, 2017. A 30-day public comment period was available from March 30 through April 28, 2017.


Page 29

LIST OF PREPARERS

Bureau of Land Management

NAME TITLE PROJECT EXPERTISE Gerrit Buma Planning and Environmental

Coordinator NEPA, project coordination

Katrina Krause Wildlife Biologist Wildlife Matt Spaulding Range Specialist Range management Alicia Jensen Archaeologist Cultural and historic resources Dean Tonenna Botanist Botany and weeds Nicole Cutler Hydrologist Water quality, soils Victoria Wilkins Assistant Field Manager Realty, recreation

Nevada Department of Transportation

NAME TITLE PROJECT EXPERTISE Roger Trott NEPA Coordinator,

Socioeconomic Specialist Socioeconomics, land use, environmental justice, visual resources

Karin West Supervisor 2, Associate Engineer

Water quality, stormwater

Nova Simpson Environmental Scientist 4, Biologist

Biological resources

Dan Harms Supervisor 3, Associate Engineer

Air quality, noise, hazardous materials

Rob Piekarz Supervisor 2, Associate Engineer

Hazardous materials

Beth Smith Cultural/Natural Resources Specialist 3

Cultural resources

Gregorio Torres, LSI Supervisor, Right-of-Way Survey Services

Right-of-way issues, reviewer

Michael Fuess, PE, PTOE Assistant District Engineer – Maintenance

Project design, reviewer

Eugene Warren Project Coordinator – Architecture

Project design, reviewer

Ross Baker, PE Manager, Architecture Section Lighting issues


Page 30

PERSONS, GROUPS, OR AGENCIES CONSULTED

NAME AGENCY PROJECT EXPERTISE James Komar USDA Natural Resources

Conservation Service Nevada State Soil Scientist, Farmland Protection Policy Act

Michon Eben, THPO Reno-Sparks Indian Colony Cultural Resources, Native American Concerns

Darrel Cruz, THPO Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California

Cultural Resources, Native American Concerns

Rob Pyzel Lyon County Planning Department

Land Use Planning

Information for Planning and Consulting (IPaC)

US Fish and Wildlife Service Federal Listed Species

Eric Miskow, Environmental Scientist

Nevada Natural Heritage Program

Federal and State Listed Species

Jill Jensen, Archaeologist National Park Service Cultural Resources, National Historic Trails

Dick Waugh, President Jon Nowlin, Member Janet Nowlin, Member John Winner, Preservation Officer

Oregon-California Trails Association

National Historic Trails

5.0 REFERENCES AND ACRONYMS 5.1 REFERENCES BLM. 2001. Consolidated Resource Management Plan. Carson City Field Office. Carson City,

NV. BLM. March 9, 2012. Bureau of Land Management Carson City District Visual Resource

Management, Map 3.2. Available at: https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/lup/22652/34860/36274/SMap3.2_VRM.pdf. Accessed June 5, 2017.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2017. Data from Flood Insurance Rate Maps, Panel

32019C0211E, Effective 1/16/2009. Available at: http://fema.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=cbe088e7c8704464aa0fc34eb99e7f30&extent=-119.33327065161118,39.39393740606974,-119.1671024387208,39.43770148234566. Accessed March 29, 2017.

Komar, James. State Soil Scientist. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Services, Nevada State

Office, Reno, NV. Email communication concerning federal Farmland Protection Policy Act compliance issues, March 29, 2017.

https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/lup/22652/34860/36274/SMap3.2_VRM.pdf

https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/lup/22652/34860/36274/SMap3.2_VRM.pdf

http://fema.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=cbe088e7c8704464aa0fc34eb99e7f30&extent=-119.33327065161118,39.39393740606974,-119.1671024387208,39.43770148234566




Page 31

Lyon County. 2010. Lyon County Comprehensive Master Plan, County-wide Component.

Yerington, NV. Nevada Appeal. October 19, 2016. Silver Springs Airport Growing with Lyon County. Available

at: http://www.nevadaappeal.com/news/lahontan-valley/silver-springs-airport-growing-with-lyon-county/. Accessed June 5, 2017.

NDOT. 2017. Environmental Site Assessment for the Proposed Silver Springs Maintenance

Station. Carson City, NV. Pyzel, Rob. Planner. Lyon County Planning Department, Dayton, NV. Email communication

concerning land use issues, May 25, 2017. Silver Springs Airport LLC. 2017. Silver Springs Airport Website, Pilots Page. Available at:

http://www.silverspringsairport.com/1-Pilot-Info/index.html. Accessed June 5, 2017. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Survey. Web Soil Survey soil mapping and soils data for

Silver Springs Maintenance Station site. Available at: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Accessed March 29, 2017.

U.S. Department of the Interior-Geological Survey. 2013. Ecoregion Map. Reston, Virginia. 5.2 ACRONYMS APE-Area of Potential Effect BLM-Bureau of Land Management BMP-Best Management Practice CA NHT-California National Historic Trail CFR-Code of Federal Regulations CO-Carbon Monoxide EA-Environmental Assessment EIS-Environmental Impact Statement FLPMA-Federal Land Policy and Management Act FPPPs-Facility Pollution Prevention Plans HA-Hydrographic Area MS4-Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System NAAQs-National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAC-Nevada Administrative Code NDOT-Nevada Department of Transportation NDEP-Nevada Division of Environmental Protection NEPA-National Environmental Policy Act NHP-Nevada Highway Patrol NHPA-National Historic Preservation Act NPS-National Park Service NOx-Nitrogen Oxides

http://www.nevadaappeal.com/news/lahontan-valley/silver-springs-airport-growing-with-lyon-county/

http://www.nevadaappeal.com/news/lahontan-valley/silver-springs-airport-growing-with-lyon-county/

http://www.silverspringsairport.com/1-Pilot-Info/index.html

https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm


Page 32

NRS-Nevada Revised Statutes OCTA-Oregon-California Trails Association OSDS-Onsite Sewage Disposal System PM-Particulate Matter PM10-Particular matter equal to or less than a nominal aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers R&PP-Land for Recreation or Public Purposes R&PP Act-Recreation and Public Purposes Act of 1954 ROW-right-of-way SF-Square Feet SFFO-Sierra Front Field Office SHPO-State Historic Preservation Office SR-State Route SWMP-Stormwater Management Plan USEPA-U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USTs-Underground Storage Tanks VOCs-Volatile Organic Compounds VRM-Visual Resource Management