Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 1
Kalispell-Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project
Final Environmental Assessment
DEPARTMENTOFENERGYBonnevillePowerAdministration
DOE/EA‐1961December2016
ThisdocumentistheFinalEnvironmentalAssessment(EA)fortheproposedKalispell‐KerrTransmissionLineRebuildProject(Project).BonnevillePowerAdministration(BPA)preparedthisdocumentasanabbreviatedFinalEAbecausetherehavebeennosubstantialchangestotheProposedAction,alternatives,orenvironmentalanalysispresentedintheDraftEA.ThisabbreviatedFinalEAprovideschangesmadetothetextoftheDraftEA,aswellascommentsreceivedontheDraftEAandBPA’sresponsestothosecomments.ThisFinalEAshouldbeusedasacompaniondocumenttotheDraftEA(DOE/EA‐1961,datedFebruary2016),whichcontainsthefulltextdescribingtheproject,itspotentialenvironmentalimpacts,andmitigationmeasurestoreduceimpacts.TheDraftEAisavailableontheprojectwebpageatwww.bpa.gov/goto/KalispellKerr.
Summary
BPAproposestorebuilditsKalispell‐Kerrtransmissionline,whichrunsfromKalispelltoPolson,Montana.Theexisting41‐mile‐long115‐kilovolt(kV)transmissionlineisaging,andBPAproposestoreplaceitswood‐polestructuresandotherlinecomponentsandimproveitsroadsystemthatprovidesaccesstotheline.
BPAreleasedtheDraftEAforpubliccommentonFebruary1,2016;thecommentperiodranuntilMarch1,2016.TheDraftEAdescribestheProject,itspotentialenvironmentalimpacts,andmitigationmeasurestoreducethoseimpacts.BPAsenttheDraftEAtoagenciesandinterestedpartiesandnotifiedotherpotentiallyaffectedpartiesabouttheavailabilityoftheDraftEA,aswellashowtorequestacopy.Forfurtherinformationregardingthecommentperiodandcommentsreceived,seethesectiontitledCommentsReceivedonDraftEAandBPA’sResponsesattheendofthisdocument.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Changes to the Draft EA
AnumberofminorchangesweremadesincereleaseoftheDraftEAforpubliccommentandarepresentedbelowbythechapterandsectioninwhichtheyappearintheDraftEA.Wheretexthasbeenmodified,deletedtextisindicatedas“strikethrough”formatandnewtextisunderlined.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 2
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Changes to Cover Page
TheDraftEAissuancedateonthecoveroftheDraftEAhasbeenrevisedasfollowstoprovidethecorrectissuancedate:
February20152016
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Changes to Chapter 2—Proposed Action and Alternatives
2.1 Existing Transmission Line
ThelastsentenceofthefirstparagraphofSection2.1hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
(RepresentativephotographsarepresentedinSection3.5,WildlifeandSection3.8,VisualQuality.)
ThefirstsentenceofthethirdparagraphofSection2.1hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Theexistingtransmissionlineismade‐upof359wood‐polestructures,whicharemostlytwo‐polewood‐poleH‐framestructures,withsomethree‐polewoodstructuresandtwo‐polesteelstructures.
ThethirdsentenceofthethirdparagraphofSection2.1hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Thetransmissionlinehasthreeconductors(electricalwires)andstretchesofoverheadgroundwireforthefirst0.5mileoutfromeachsubstationitpassesthrough(Kalispell,Elmo,andKerrsubstations)toprotectsubstationequipmentfromlightningstrikes.
2.2 Proposed Action
ThefirstsentenceinthefirstbulletofSection2.2hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Removalandreplacementofall354oftheexisting359wood‐poletransmissionlinestructures(includingcomponentssuchascross‐arms,insulators,dampers,andguywires).
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 3
Section 2.2.1 Transmission Line Structures
ThefollowingrowsinTable2.2‐1havebeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Table 2.2‐1. Quantity of Required Elements for Proposed Action Activities
Description Quantity a
Access Road Activities
Gates (new/replaced) 77 81/28
Vegetation Removal
Removal of trees inside transmission line right‐of‐way Estimated up to 750 135
Removal of trees outside (adjacent) transmission line right‐of‐way Estimated up to 200 165
Removal of trees along access roads Estimated up to 1,300 1,150
Access Road Activities
Culverts (new/repair or replaced) 21/8 9
Section 2.2.2 Conductors, Optical Ground Wire, and Counterpoise
Optical Ground Wire and Counterpoise
ThesecondsentenceofthefourthparagraphunderthissubsectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Counterpoisewouldbeinstalledintrenchesapproximatelybetween12to30inchesdeepand2412incheswideandvaryinlengthfrom15to100feet(Figure2.2‐1).
Section 2.2.4 Access Roads
ThefirstsentenceofthefifthparagraphofSection2.2.4hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Asacomponentofaccessroadconstructionandimprovements,21newculvertswouldbeinstalledand89existingculvertsrepairedorreplacedtomanagestormwaterrunoffand,inonetwolocations,possiblyprovidefishpassage.
ThethirdsentenceofthesixthparagraphofSection2.2.4hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Twenty‐eightexistinggateswouldbereplacedaspartoftheProposedAction,and7781newgateswouldbeinstalled.
2.2.5 Vegetation Removal
ThefirstandsecondsentencesofthesecondparagraphofSection2.2.5havebeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
About130acresoflowgrowingvegetation(grasses,low‐shrubs,smallsaplings,andagriculturalcrops)wouldbedisturbedorclearedforconstructionactivities,andabout
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 4
2,2501,450treeswouldberemoved.Treestobecutwouldinclude750135corridortrees,200165dangertrees,and1,3001,150treesforaccessroadwork(Table2.2‐2).
TheseventhsentenceofthesecondparagraphofSection2.2.5hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
The1,3001,150treesthatwouldberemovedfortheaccessroadworkwouldbefornewroadconstruction,existingroadreconstructionorimprovement,ortoprovidesufficientclearanceforconstructionequipment.
Table2.2‐2hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Table 2.2‐2. Summary of Tree Removal
Proposed Activity Estimated Quantity
Removal of trees outside of, or within the unoccupied portions of the
transmission line right‐of‐way a, b 950 300
U.S. Forest Service Swan Lake Ranger District 10
Flathead Indian Reservation 550 85
Non‐federal lands 440 205
Removal of other trees along access roadsa, c 1,300 1,150
U.S. Forest Service Swan Lake Ranger District 550 500
Flathead Indian Reservation 220 200
Non‐federal lands 530 450
a Approximately 90% of all trees identified area 18‐inch diameter at breast height (dbh) or smaller. b The trees to be removed along the transmission line right‐of‐way include 95 83% conifer and 5 17% deciduous. c The trees to be removed for access road construction include 98 90% conifer and 2.0 10% deciduous.
2.5 Comparison of Alternatives
ThefollowingrowinTable2.5‐1hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Table 2.5‐1. Comparison of the Proposed Action and No Action Alternative by Purposes
Purpose Proposed Action No Action Alternative
Demonstrate cost‐effectiveness
Total costs would be about $24,000,000 to $29,000,000 million.
The No Action Alternative would not require the expenditure of funds to rebuild the transmission line at this time. Repairs would require an ongoing outlay of funds to replace failed structures, rebuild roads, and replace and re‐string failed conductors. The rate of maintenance spending would likely increase as aging structures fail at increasing rates. An as‐needed approach would likely increase the cost associated with multiple mobilizations and would likely be less cost efficient, when compared to the Proposed Action.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 5
ThefollowingrowsinTable2.5‐2havebeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Table 0.5‐2. Comparison of the Environmental Impacts by Alternative
Alternative Anticipated Level of
Impact Potential Impacts
Geology and Soils
Proposed Action Low to Moderate 60 acres of total permanent soil disturbance.
35 acres of permanent disturbance in areas of severe erosion potential.
2,250 1,450 trees removed.
Disturbance would be dispersed throughout right‐of‐way and would not occur in one area or all at one time.
Permanent and temporary erosion control measures would be implemented.
Vegetation
Proposed Action Low 55 acres of permanent impacts on vegetation, 70% within grasslands.
2,250 1,450 trees removed.
Vegetation removal and changes in plant cover.
Soil compaction and disturbance.
Increased potential for spread of invasive plants. Low potential for special status plants to be impacted due to lack of suitable habitat.
Wetlands and Floodplains
Proposed Action Low for wetlands
Negligible to Low for floodplains
Less than 1 acre of wetland and floodplain habitat filled for road construction
Disturbance of wetlands and temporary disruption of wetland functions.
Soil compaction and crushing of wetland vegetation.
Tree removal in floodplains.
Potential for accidental chemical spills and PCP leaching from wood poles.
Socioeconomics and Public Services
Proposed Action Negligible Low to no for population
Low to no for economic characteristics
No impacts for environmental justice populations
Low for public services
Temporary, small increase in population, stimulation of the economy, demand for lodging.
No environmental justice populations in project area.
BPA would compensate landowners for economic loss associated with agriculture and forestry.
No long‐term changes to property values.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 6
Alternative Anticipated Level of
Impact Potential Impacts
Cultural Resources
Proposed Action Negligible to Low to No No adverse effect to the Kalispell‐Kerr transmission line
Minimal impact to a rock wall that is likely not eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.
No effect to the Kalispell Substation, the Elmo Substation, or the Kerr Substation, Flathead Lake fish hatchery, or other identified cultural resources.
Potential disturbance of unidentified cultural resources.
Changes to Chapter 3—Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures
3.2 Land Ownership, Use, Recreation, and Transportation
3.2.1 Affected Environment
Land Use
ThefirstsentenceinthefirstparagraphoftheLandUsesub‐section(page3‐2)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Landusescrossedbythetransmissionlineandaccessroadrights‐of‐wayincludeagriculture,forestry,openspace,andresidential,andlimitedareasoflightindustrialandcommercial(Figure3.2‐2).
3.2.2 Environmental Consequences–Proposed Action
Forestry
Thesecondsentenceinthefirstparagraphofthissubsection(page3‐10)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Approximately1,088700treeswouldberemovedadjacenttothetransmissionlineright‐of‐way(dangertrees)andalongaccessroadswithinforestrylands.
Undeveloped Open Space
Thefifthsentenceinthefirstparagraphofthissubsection(page3‐11)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Approximately240150treeswouldberemovedaspartofstructurereplacementandaccessroadworkinareasofopenspace.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 7
3.2.3 Mitigation Measures
ThefollowingmitigationmeasuresinSection3.2.3havebeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
LAND‐2:Provideaconstructionscheduletoallpotentiallyaffectedlandownersalongtheright‐of‐wayandpostthisscheduleinaffectedrecreationalareas.
LAND‐8:Compensatelandownersforthevalueofcommercialcropsorpropertydamagedbyconstructionactivitiesasappropriate.
LAND‐89:Coordinatewithlocalagenciestoavoidconstructionactivitiesthatcouldconflictwiththeirownconstructionactivities.
LAND‐910:Restorecompactedcroplandsoilsascloseaspossibletopre‐constructionconditions.Breakupcompactedsoilsinnon‐croplandwherenecessarybyripping,tilling,orscarifyingbeforeseeding.
3.3 Geology and Soils
3.3.2 Environmental Consequences‐Proposed Action
ThefirstsentenceinthefourthparagraphoftheGeologyandSoilssub‐section(page3‐16)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Atotalofabout2,2501,450treeswouldberemovedaspartoftransmissionreplacementandaccessroadconstructionactivities,whichcouldaffectsoilstabilityandincreasethepotentialforerosionandlandslides.
3.3.3 Mitigation Measures
ThefollowingmitigationmeasureinSection3.3.3hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
GEO‐67:Retainexistinglow‐growingvegetationwherepossible,andminimizetheuseofclearing/grubbingtopreservetherootsoftheseplants.
GEO‐78:Reseeddisturbedareaswithnativegrassesandforbs(orlandowner‐requestedspecies,asappropriate),usingappropriateseedmixes,applicationrates,methods,andtimingforthesiteconditionsassoonaspracticablefollowingthecompletionofconstruction.Monitorrevegetationandsiterestorationworkforadequategrowth;implementcontingencymeasuresasnecessary.
GEO‐89:Leaveerosionandsedimentcontroldevicesinplaceuntilalldisturbedsitesarerevegetatedanderosionpotentialhasreturnedtopre‐constructionconditions.
GEO‐910:Locatematerialsstorageandtemporarystagingareasinflat,previouslydisturbedorgraveledsitesoutsideofsensitiveareastominimizesoilandvegetationdisturbance,wherepracticable.
GEO‐1011:Usecontainmentvessels,absorbentmaterials,orotherremovableimperviousmaterialstocontainleachingofpreservativesandhazardousmaterialleaks.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 8
3.4 Vegetation
3.4.2 Environmental Consequences—Proposed Action
General Vegetation
ThethirdsentenceofthefirstparagraphintheGeneralVegetationsub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
ConstructionoftheProposedActionwouldresultin54.654.5acresofpermanentimpactsassociatedwiththelossofvegetation(Table3.4‐4).
ThethirdparagraphintheGeneralVegetationsub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Theremovalofanestimated2,2501,450treeswouldaffecttheplantcommunitiesinwhichtheyarelocatedbyincreasinglightwithintheunderstory,possiblyresultinginsmall,localizedchangesinspeciescomposition,dependingonwhatshrubsorseedsarepresentintheaffectedarea.NearlyhalfMost(5470percent)ofthetotalnumberoftreesthatwouldberemovedare6tolessthan12inchesdbh.Inconiferforests,treesofthissizearetypically16to30yearsold.Maturetrees,whicharetypicallybetween31and80yearsoldwith13to18inchdbh,accountfor3120percentofthetotalnumberoftreesthatwouldberemoved.Theremaining10percentoftreestoberemovedarebetween19to37inchesdbh,withanaveragedbhof22inches.
Special‐Status Plant Species
TheSpecial‐StatusPlantSpeciessub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Fourofthe9special‐statusplantspecieswiththepotentialtooccurwithinthetransmissionlineandaccessroadrights‐of‐waygrowinwetlandandriparianvegetationcommunities.TheProposedActionwouldtemporarilydisturb2.2acresandpermanentlyremove0.3acreofwetlandandriparianvegetation.Mostofthetemporarydisturbancewouldbeassociatedwithtemporaryaccessroadworkinalargewetlandnearlinemile26.Toreplacestructuresintheselocations,woodmatsorothermeasures(e.g.,lowgroundpressureequipment)wouldbeutilized;thesemeasureswouldcrushvegetationbutnotresultinapermanentchangetothehabitat.Althoughwetlandandriparianhabitatwouldbedisturbed,itisunlikelythatspecial‐statusplantspecieswouldbeaffectedbytheProposedActionbecausenonewereobservedduringthewetlanddelineationorinvasiveweedfieldsurveys.Additionallytheonedocumentedoccurrenceofwedge‐leafsaltbushnearBigArmhasnotbeenobservedinmorethan20years(MTNHP2014)andisunlikelytobeaffectedbytheProposedAction.ThenativecampionspeciesthatwasfoundduringtheJune2014surveysisoutsideofallworkareasandwouldbeavoided.BPAalsoperformedsurveysforSpalding’scampioninJuly2016usinginformationonpotentialadditionalsuitablehabitatidentifiedthroughdiscussionswiththeMNHP(pers.comm.,Pipp2016).NoSpalding’scampionwere
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 9
identifiedduringthesurveys.Therefore,impactsonspecial‐statusplantspecieswouldbelowtono.
BPApreparedaBiologicalAssessment(BA)toevaluatetheeffectsoftheProposedActiononESA‐listedspeciesandcriticalhabitats.TheBArecommendedadeterminationof“mayaffect,notlikelytoadverselyaffect”forSpalding’scampion.FurtherinformationontheinformalconsultationprocessisincludedinSection4.2.1.
3.4.3 Mitigation Measures
ThefollowingmitigationmeasuresinSection3.4.3havebeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
VEG‐10:Implementmeasurestominimizethespreadofnoxiousweedsinagriculturallandsandareasofintactnativevegetation(e.g.,linemiles27and28),includingcleaningofvehiclesbeforeenteringconstructionareas,andinstallationanduseofweedwash/blowstationsatselectedlocationswithintheprojectarea,andapplicationofherbicidestocontroloccurrencesofPriority1Bweedspecies(rushskeletonweed).
VEG‐11:Identifynoxiousweedinfestationswithfencing,flagging,orstakesatconstructionsitesinagriculturallandsandnativevegetationlocations,andavoidtheseareasasmuchaspracticableduringconstruction.
3.5 Wildlife
3.5.1 Affected Environment
Montana Wildlife Species of Concern
Thefourthsentenceofthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Basedonthissearch,Montanawildlifespeciesofconcernthathaveamoderatepotentialtooccurinthetransmissionlineandaccessroadrights‐of‐wayincludethefollowing:thewesterntoad(Anaxyrusboreas),baldeagle(Haliaeetusleucocephalus),Clark’snutcracker(Nucifragacolumbiana),greatblueheron(Ardeaherodias),hoarybat(Lasiuruscinereus),long‐billedcurlew(Numeniusamericanus),andveery(Catharusfuscescens;abirdinthethrushfamily).
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 10
ThefollowingrowinTable3.5‐2hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Table 3.5‐2. Wildlife Species of Concern Documented Within 5 Miles of the Project Area and Potential Occurrence in the Project Area
Common Name
Scientific Name
USFWS Status
U.S. Forest Service Status
Montana Status a Habitat Association
Potential for Occurrence in the Project Area b
Hoary Bat Lasiurus cinereus
G5/S3 Summer resident of forested habitats. Typically forages over water near forested areas; habitats used range from coniferous forests to riparian habitats.
Low. Moderate. Most forests crossed by the line are not in close association with water. Marginal amount of fragmented riparian habitat is present along the Flathead River, Ashley Creek, and West Fork Dayton Creek.
ESA‐listed Wildlife Species
Grizzly Bear
Thefifthsentenceofthissub‐section(page3‐35)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
However,currentinformationsuggeststhatthegrizzlybearpopulationontheFlatheadNationalForestandtheNorthernContinentalDivideEcosystemisexpandingitsrangeoutsideoftherecoveryzoneandhasapopulationthatexceedsrecoveryplanlevels(Kendalletal.2009;U.S.ForestService20022012b).
Meltwater Lednian Stonefly
Thelastsentenceofthissub‐sectionhasbeendeletedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
TheFinalEAwillincluderesultsfrominformalconsultationunderSection7oftheESAwiththeUSFWSongrizzlybearandCanadalynx.
3.5.2 Environmental Consequences—Proposed Action
Montana Wildlife Species of Concern
Veery
Thefirstsentenceofthesecondparagraphinthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
TheProposedActionisanticipatedtopermanentlyimpactnomorethan0.2acresofripariandeciduousforestforestedwetland(Table.3.4‐4).
ESA‐Listed Wildlife
Thefollowingparagraphwasaddeddirectlyunderthe“ESA‐ListedWildlife”subheading:
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 11
BPApreparedaBiologicalAssessment(BA)toevaluatetheeffectsoftheProposedActiononESA‐listedspeciesandcriticalhabitats.TheBArecommendedadeterminationof“mayaffect,notlikelytoadverselyaffect”forgrizzlybearandCanadalynx.FurtherinformationontheinformalconsultationprocessisincludedinSection4.2.1.
Canada Lynx
Thesecondsentenceofthethirdparagraphinthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Approximately2,2501,450treeswouldberemovedfromtheedgesoftheexistingright‐of‐wayandaccessroads,whichistheseareasaregenerallydevoidofthedense,multi‐layeredconiferousforesthabitatthatCanadalynxprefer.
3.5.3 Mitigation Measures
ThefollowingmitigationmeasuresinSection3.5.3havebeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
WILD‐4:Forallspeciesotherthanbaldeagles,iftreevegetationremovaloccursduringthenestingseason(March15‐August31),conductnestingbirdpre‐constructionsurveyspriortotreevegetationremovalandavoidremovaloftreesvegetationwithactivenestsuntilfledginghasbeencompleted.
WILD‐5:Conductpre‐constructionassessmentwithconstructioncontractortoidentifyopportunitiestoavoidsnagandlargetreeremovaltotheextentpossible.
WILD‐7:Wherenotahazardtootherresources(recreationalusers,roads,structures,etc.)andthetreeswouldwillnotre‐sprout,top,trim,orgirdledangertreestocreatesnagswherepracticable.
3.6 Wetlands and Floodplains
3.6.2 Environmental Consequences—Proposed Action
Wetlands
ThefourthandfifthsentencesofthefirstparagraphintheWetlandssub‐sectionhavebeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
FourofTthe10structuresreplacedwithinwetlandswouldbeplacedin4‐footdiameterverticalcorrugatedmetalpipebackfilledwithcrushedrock,resultinginapproximately12.5squarefeetofpermanentimpactsperpole(or25squarefeetperstructure).Therewouldbeaforatotaloflessthan0.1acreofpermanentimpactsdistributedacrosssevenwetlandsasaresultofallstructurereplacement.
Thesecondsentenceofthethirdparagraph(pg3‐47)ofthissub‐sectionhasbeenremovedtheDraftEAasfollows:
Nonewculvertswouldbeplacedinwetlands.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 12
Thefirstsentenceofthesixthparagraph(pg3‐48)ofthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
AlltemporarydisturbanceareasinwetlandswouldbereseededwithanappropriatenativeseedmixandBPAwouldmonitortheseareasforadequategrowthandimplementcontingencymeasuresasnecessary.
ThelastsentenceofthesecondparagraphintheFloodplainssub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Constructionworkareasandtemporaryaccessroadscouldresultinsomevegetationdisturbance;however,theeffectonvegetationanditsroleinfloodplainfunctionwouldbenegligiblelow.
3.6.3 Mitigation Measures
ThefollowingmitigationmeasureinSection3.6.3hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
WET‐6:Revegetatealltemporarydisturbanceareaswithinwetlandswithnativeanappropriateseedmix.Monitorrevegetationandsiterestorationworkforadequategrowth;implementcontingencymeasuresasnecessary.
3.7 Water Resources and Fish
3.7.1 Affected Environment
Surface Water and Water Quality
Ashley Creek
Thecitationinthelastsentenceofthesecondparagraphofthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Alterationsinstream‐sidevegetationcoverandpollutants(chlorophyll‐a,nitrate/nitrite,nitrogen,andphosphorous)fromirrigatedcropproduction,municipalpointsources,andmunicipalseparatestormsewersystemsaretheprobablecausesandsourcesofimpairmentinthissegmentofAshleyCreek(MTDEQ20132012).
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 13
3.7.2 Environmental Consequences—Proposed Action
Streams and Water Quality
ThefollowingrowsinTable3.7‐1havebeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Table 3.7‐1. Permanent and Temporary Impacts within 100 feet of Streams
Stream Fish Presence
Permanent Disturbance
(acres) a
Temporary Disturbance
(acres) a
Number of New or Repaired/Replaced Stream Crossings b
Ronan Creek Bull trout d, Brook trout 0.0 0.1 0.6 0 1 replacement culvert
Total 2.8 2.9 8.7
Culverts: 1 new, 3 4 replaced
Fords: 1 new, 1 repaired
ThefirstsentenceofthethirdparagraphintheStreamsandWaterQualitysub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
TheProposedActionincludestheinstallationof21newculverts,repairofoneculvert,andreplacementof78culverts.OnenewculvertwouldbeinstalledinatributarytoFlatheadLake,oneculvertwouldbereplacedinatributarytoStonerCreek,oneculvertwouldbereplacedonRonanCreek,andtwoculvertswouldbereplacedintributariestoMiddleForkDaytonCreek.
Fish
ThesecondsentenceofthethirdparagraphintheCommonFishsub‐section(pg.3‐57)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
OneculvertwouldbereplacedinanunnamedtributarytoStoneCreek,andanotherinRonanCreek,bothofwhichisaarefish‐bearingstreamsbutdoesnotsupportanyfishthatareaSpeciesofConcernorESA‐listed.
ThefifthparagraphintheCommonFishsub‐section(pg.3‐57)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Overall,becauseonetwoculvertreplacementswouldoccurwithinknownfish‐bearingstreams,workwouldbedistributedthroughouttheprojectareaandnotbeconcentratednearanyonestream,culvertswouldbedesignedtomaintaincurrentstreamhydrauliccharacteristicsandmitigationmeasureswouldbeimplemented,impactsoncommonfishspecieswouldbelow,andprimarilyaresultofthepossibletemporaryminorinputofsedimenttostreamsfromadjacentuplandconstruction.
ThefirstparagraphintheESA‐listedFishsub‐section(pg.3‐57)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Therewouldbe0.6acreoftemporarydisturbanceassociatedwithdirectionoftravelrouteswithin100feetofRonanCreek,whichalsosupportsbulltrout.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 14
3.9 Air Quality and Climate Change
3.9.2 Environmental Consequences–Proposed Action
Greenhouse Gases
Tree Sequestration Reduction
Thefirstsentenceofthesecondparagraphinthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Rebuildingthetransmissionlinecouldrequiretheremovalofanestimated1810acresoftreesfornewstructures,accessroadwork,anddangertreeremoval(RefertoTable3.2‐4).
Thefirstandsecondsentencesofthethirdparagraphinthissub‐sectionhavebeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Theestimated1810acresoftrees,ifnotremoved,wouldhavesequesteredapproximately5,0002,600metrictonsofcarbondioxideequivalentatfullmaturity(AppendixA).Thisquantitywouldhavesequesteredthequantityofcarbondioxideequivalentgeneratedby1,053549passengervehiclesin1year(EPA2016AppendixA).
3.10 Socioeconomics and Public Services
3.10.2 Environmental Consequences‐Proposed Action
Population and Community Character
Thelastsentenceofthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
GiventhattheProposedActionisnotexpectedtocauseanypermanentchangesinpopulation,itwouldhavenegligiblelowtonoimpactsonpopulationintheprojectarea.
3.10.3 Mitigation Measures
Thefirstparagraphofthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
InadditiontothefollowingmitigationmeasureproposedtoreduceoreliminateimpactsonsocioeconomicandpublicserviceresourcesfromtheProposedAction,BPAwouldimplementmeasuresLAND‐4(ScheduleConstruction),LAND‐5(LimitConstruction),LAND‐6(CoordinatewithLandowners),andLAND‐78(CompensateLandowners).
3.11 Cultural Resources
3.11.1 Affected Environment
Cultural Resource Investigation
Thesecondsentenceofthesixthparagraph(pg3‐78)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 15
AlthoughrockcairnscanbeassociatedwithpasteventsorpersonsifofimportancetoNativeAmericantribes,littleisknownaboutfunctionofthisrockfeature.
3.11.2 Environmental Consequences – Proposed Action
Thelastsentenceofthefirstparagraphofthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
BPAhassubmittedadeterminationofnoadverseeffecttotheMontanaSHPOforconcurrencecontinuestoworkwiththeCSKTonculturalresourcemanagementwithintheprojectarea(seeSection4.6).
Thefirstsentenceofthethirdparagraphofthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Thefivelinearrockwallfeatures,fourhistoricdebris/trashscattersspringboard‐notchedcuttreestumps,prehistoricisolate(stonetool),androckcairnidentifiedduringthesurveysarelocatedinareasthatwouldnotbeaffectedbyconstructionactivities.Therefore,therewouldbenoeffecttotheseresources.Fourofthefivelinearrockwallfeatures,arelocatedinareasthatwouldnotbeaffectedbyconstructionactivities.Thefifthrockwallwouldbeaffectedbyimprovementofaroadsegment;however,thefeatureislikelynoteligibleforinclusionintheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces.
Thelasttwosentencesofthethirdparagraphofthissub‐sectionhavebeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Thiscombinedwiththeinadvertentdiscoveryrequirementsimplementedduringconstructionwouldresultinnegligibletolowtonoimpactstoculturalresources.Therefore,impactstoculturalresourceswouldbeexpectedtobenegligibletolowtono.
3.12 Noise, Public Health, and Safety
3.12.3 Mitigation Measures
ThefollowingmitigationmeasureinSection3.12.3hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
NPHS‐6:Installbarrierwrapsonstructureswithinwetlands,within50feetofwetlandsandstreams,andwithinfloodplains.
3.13 Cumulative Impact Analysis
3.13.2 Cumulative Impacts
Geology and Soils
Thefourthsentenceofthesecondparagraphofthissub‐sectionhasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
TheProposedActionwouldremoveapproximately2,2501,450trees,themajorityofwhichwouldbeassociatedwithaccessroadconstruction,withinthisstretchthetransmissionline.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 16
Changes to Chapter 4—Consultation, Review, and Permit Requirements
4.2 Vegetation, Fish, and Wildlife
4.2.1 Endangered Species Act
ThethirdparagraphinSection4.2.1(page4‐1)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
BPAconductedinformalconsultationwiththeUSFWSfortheProposedActionandBPAispreparingpreparedabiologicalassessmentBAtoaddresspotentialimpactsonlistedfish,wildlife,andplantspecies.ThespeciesaddressedintheBAincludeCanadalynx,grizzlybear,bulltrout,Spalding’scampion,yellow‐billedcuckoo,andwaterhowellia.ProposedandTwocandidatespecies(meltwaterlednianstoneflyandwhitebarkpine)werewillalsobeaddressedinthebiologicalassessmentBA.Asaresultoftheconsultationprocess,theUSFWSwilllikelyprepareaBiologicalOpinion.TheBArecommendedafindingof“noeffect”forbulltrout,yellow‐billedcuckoo,waterhowellia,whitebarkpine,andmeltwaterlednianstoneflyandafindingof“mayaffect,notlikelytoadverselyaffect”forCanadalynx,grizzlybear,andSpalding’scampion.TheUSFWSissuedaletterofconcurrencetoBPAonFebruary11,2014,forthefindingspresentedintheBA(USFWS2016).
4.3 Water Quality, Wetlands, and Floodplains Protection
ThethirdsentenceofthefifthparagraphinSection4.3(page4‐3)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
BPAhassubmittedaCWA404NationwidePermitapplicationforthewouldobtaintherequiredpermitsforthisProposedActiontotheCorps.
4.6 Cultural and Historic Resources
ThethirdsentenceofthefourthparagraphinSection4.6(page4‐7)hasbeenrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
FieldsurveysoftheentireAPEplannedforwereconductedinthesummerof2015wouldtoverifytherecordssearchandidentifyundocumentedresources.
Changes to Chapter 7—References
7.1 Printed References
ThefollowingreferenceshavebeenaddedordeletedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
Bumback,S.,andJ.Mayer.2015(inpreparation).LiteratureReview,KalispelltoKerrTransmissionLineRebuild–Flathead,Lake,andSandersCounties,MT.PreparedforBonnevillePowerAdministration,Portland,OR.PreparedbyAECOM,Seattle,WA.April2015draft.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 17
ConfederatedSalishandKootenaiTribesandMontanaFish,Wildlife&Parks.2004.FlatheadSubbasinPlan:PartI:FlatheadRiverSubbasinAssessment.AreportpreparedfortheNorthwestPowerandConservationCouncil.Portland,OR.
Hickman,G.R.,B.G.Dixon,andJ.Corn.1999.SmallMammals.Pages4.1‐4.16inG.JoslinandH.Youmans,coordinators.TheeffectsofrecreationonRockyMountainwildlife:AReviewforMontana.CommitteeonEffectsofRecreationonWildlife,MontanaChapterofTheWildlifeSociety.307pp.
Komonen,A.,Lensu,T.,Kotiaho,J.S.(2013),Optimaltimingofpowerlinerights‐of‐waysmanagementfortheconservationofbutterflies.InsectConservationandDiversity,6:522–529.doi:10.1111/icad.12009
MontanaDepartmentofEnvironmentalQuality(MTDEQ).2012FinalWaterQualityIntegratedReport.Availableonlineat:http://deq.mt.gov/Portals/112/Water/WQpb/CWAIC/Reports/IRs/2012/Final2012IR.pdf.Accessedon:January13,2013
MontanaDepartmentofEnvironmentalQuality(MTDEQ).2013.“CleanWaterActInformationCenter.”accessedJanuary13,2013athttp://deq.mt.gov/wqinfo/CWAIC/default.mcpx.
Passman,D.1995.NRCS/FWPCulturalResourcesHistoricSiteForm,24FH758(FlatheadLakeSalmonHatchery).OnfileattheMontanaStateHistoricPreservationOffice.
U.S.DepartmentofEnergy(DOE).2008.EnvironmentalJusticeStrategy.http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/EJ_Strategy_FINAL.pdf.AccessedMay302014.
U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA).1974.InformationonLevelsofEnvironmentalNoiseRequisitetoProtectPublicHealthandWelfarewithanAdequateMarginofSafety.ReportNo.550/9‐74‐004.Washington,D.C.
U.S.FishandWildlifeService(USFWS).2016.06E11000‐2016‐I‐0130Kalispell‐KerrTransmissionLineRebuild.February11.
U.S.ForestService.1999.EcologyandConservationofLynxintheUnitedStates.GeneralTechnicalReportRMRS‐GTR‐30WWW.ForestService,RockyMountainResearchStation.FortCollins,CO.
Changes to Appendix A—Assumptions Used to Calculate Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Detailed Results
Assumptions
Construction
ThethirdbulletincludedintheassumptionsforconstructionwaschangesasfollowsfromtheDraftEA:
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 18
Theround‐tripdistancetotheprojectareaisthedistancefromKalispell,MontanatotheHillsCreekKerrSubstationandback(about120milesroundtrip)1.
Tree Sequestration Reduction
Thefirstsentenceofthesecondparagraphofthissub‐sectionwasrevisedasfollowsfromtheDraftEA:
Theanalysisassumesthatapproximately1810acresoflandwouldbepermanentlyclearedoftreesandconvertedtoanareawheretreeswouldnotbeallowedtoregrow.
Detailed Results
Construction Emissions
Thesecondsentenceofthissub‐sectionwasrevisedasfollowsfromtheDraftEA:
ConstructionoftheProposedActionwouldresultinanestimated8,841.64,845.2metrictonsofCO2e1emissions.
TableA.1wasrevisedasfollowsfromtheDraftEA:
Table A‐1. Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Project Construction
Estimated GHG Emissions of Construction Activities
CO2
(metric tons)1 CH4 (CO2e)
(metric tons)2 N2O (CO2e)
(metric tons)2 Total CO2e
(metric tons)3
Peak construction transportation 452.8 296.7 1,773.2 2,522.7
Off‐peak construction transportation 56.6 37.1 221.7 315.3
BPA employee transportation 1.1 0.7 4.4 6.3
Helicopter operation 105.6 1.9 0.4 107.9
Peak construction: equipment operation 1,252.3 1.3 8.4 1,262.0
Off‐peak construction: equipment operation 626.1 0.7 4.2 631.0
TOTAL3 2,494.6 338.3 2,012.3 4,845.2
1 CO2 emission factors calculated from The Climate Registry (2014). 2 CH4 and N2O emissions have been converted into units of equivalent carbon dioxide (CO2e) using the IPCC global warming
potential (GWP) factors of 25 GWP for CH4 and 298 GWP for N2O (The Climate Registry 2014). 3 The sum of the individual entries may not sum to the total depicted due to rounding. 4 This value was rounded to 4,900 5,000 metric tons in Chapter 3 of the environmental assessment.
Tree Sequestration Reduction
Thissub‐sectionwasrevisedfromtheDraftEAasfollows:
BPAestimatesthatapproximately108acresoftreesneedtoberemovedfortheProposedAction.Ifthosetreesweretobeallowedtoreachfullmaturity,theareawouldprovideapproximately1,0802,600metrictonsofCO2e1.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 19
References
ThefollowingreferencewasaddedtothelistofreferencesinAppendixA:
EPA.2016.GreenhouseGasEquivalenciesCalculator.Availableat:https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse‐gas‐equivalencies‐calculator.Accessedon:August4,2016.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 20
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Comments Received on Draft EA and BPA’s Responses InordertosolicitcommentsontheDraftEA,anoticeofitsavailabilityoracopyoftheDraftEAitselfwase‐mailedormailedto392individuals,organizations,tribes,andgovernmentagencies.Approximatelyhalf(197)oftherecipientswereadjacentlandowners.Inaddition,BPApostedtheDraftEAontheprojectwebsite.ThecommentperiodranfromFebruary1throughMarch1,2016,andeightcommentletterswerereceived.
Thecommentswereeachassignedanidentifyingnumber.Insomeinstances,thecommentswerefurthersubdividedbysubject,andeachsubjectwasrespondedtoindividually.Table1providesthecommentnumberandtheassociatedauthorandaffiliation.Thecommentsarereproducedintheirentirety.
Table 1. Draft EA Comment Submittals
Comment Number Comment Author / Affiliation
KKTLR16 0001 Wisseman
KKTLR16 0002 McDonald
KKTLR16 00031 Auld
KKTLR16 0005 Fields
KKTLR16 0006 Malson Gray
KKTLR16 0007 Wood
KKTLR16 0008 Ambrose
KKTLR16 0009 Flathead Audubon Society 1Note that comment number 0004 received by BPA was a duplicate of comment 0003. Therefore, comment 0004 is not included.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 21
Comment KKTLR16 0001 Wisseman
Response to Comment KKTLR16 0001 Wisseman
AsdescribedinSection2.2.1(TransmissionLineStructures)andFigure2.2‐1(ExistingandProposedWood‐PoleStructures)oftheEA,BPAwouldrebuildthetransmissionlinewithnewwood‐polestructuressimilarinappearancetotheexistingstructures.
Comment KKTLR16 0002 McDonald
Response to Comment KKTLR16 0002 McDonald
BPAfollowsindustrystandardsandimplementsathoroughquality‐assuranceandquality‐controlprogramtoensurepublicsafetyandelectricreliabilityonitstransmissionlinesandotherphysicalassets.
BPAadherestoallprevailingwagerequirementssetbyU.S.DepartmentofLaborthroughtheConstructionWageRateRequirementsStatute(formerlyreferredtoastheDavisBaconAct).Undertheserequirements,contractorsandsubcontractorsundercontractwithfederalagenciessuchasBPAmustpaytheirlaborersandmechanicsnolessthanthelocallyprevailingwagesandfringebenefitsforcorrespondingworkonsimilarprojectsinthearea.
AsdescribedinSection3.5.2(Wildlife:EnvironmentalConsequences‐ProposedAction)oftheEA,effectstowildlifewouldbelowbecause:(1)mostofthespeciesarehighlymobileandwouldavoidtemporaryconstructiondisturbance,(2)incidentalmortalitywouldnotaffectregionalpopulations,(3)habitatchangeswouldbeminimalwhencomparedtotheavailablehabitatadjacenttothetransmissionright‐of‐wayandaccessroads,(4)thespreadofnoxiousweedswouldbeminimizedthoughmitigationmeasures,and(5)foravianspecies,installationofbirdflightdiverterswouldreducetheriskofcollisionwithconductorsandoverheadgroundwire.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 22
Comment KKTLR16 0003 Auld
Response to Comment KKTLR16 0003 Auld
Sections1.3(PublicInvolvementandIssueSummary)and4.6(CulturalandHistoricResources)oftheEAdescribeBPA’sconsultationwiththeMontanaSHPOandtheConfederatedSalishandKootenaiTribesunderSection106oftheNHPA.Inaddition,Section3.11oftheEAdiscussespotentialimpactsoftheproposedprojectonarchaeologicalresourcesthathavebeenidentifiedorcouldoccurintheprojectvicinity.BPAcontinuestoworkwithconsultingpartiestoassesseffectsonhistoricpropertiesandwilldocumenttheagreed‐uponmitigationinaMemorandumofAgreement.
Comment KKTLR16 0005 Fields
Ihavea fewcomments. In regards to sprayingofnoxiousweeds,pleasedo selective sprayingofindividualplantsorinfestationstoleavenon‐targetplantsalone.Endeavortoreseedsprayareastoinhibit noxiousweed reinfestation.Reseed ormulch allmachine‐disturbed areas and utilize cuttimberasmulchorlimbedcastontheground.Ifpossible,leavedownhilltreesattheedgesoftherightawayuncuttosoftenthevisualimpactoftherightofway.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 23
Response to Comment KKTLR16 0005 Fields
Aspartofitsongoingvegetationmanagementpractices,BPAhasenteredintocontractswithFlatheadandLakeCountiestoconductweedcontrol(selectiveherbicideapplication)alongtheKalispell‐Kerrtransmissionlineright‐of‐way(ROW).
Section3.4.3(Vegetation:MitigationMeasures)oftheEAincludesmitigationmeasuresthataddressrevegetationofareasdisturbedbyconstructionactivities.
AsdescribedinSection3.5.3(Wildlife:MitigationMeasures)oftheEA,BPAwouldleavecuttreesinplacewheresuchpracticeisacceptabletothelandowneranddoesnotposeafirerisk.
Comment KKTLR16 0006 Malson Gray
Response to Comment KKTLR16 0006 Malson Gray
0006‐1 BPAonlyidentifiespropertylinesanddoesnot,inthecourseofitswork,addressanyissues,
0006‐1
0006‐2
0006‐3
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 24
suchasfencelineadjustments,thatmayarisebetweenlandowners.Issuessuchasthismustbeaddressedbetweentheaffectedlandowners.AllpropertylinesshownontheBPA’smapsindicateitssurveyresultsonly,asBPAisrequiredtoaddresslandrightswiththelegalownerofrecord.
0006‐2 AsstatedinSection2.2.3(TemporaryStagingAreas,TensioningSites,andGuardStructures)oftheEA,BPAhasnotyetdeterminedthelocationsofthetemporarystagingareasnecessarytoconstructtheKalispell‐Kerrtransmissionline.However,BPAcurrentlyhasnoplantousetheLionMountainSubstationasastagingareaforthisproject.
0006‐3 LionMountainSubstationisownedandoperatedbyFlatheadElectricCooperative.Ifyouhavequestionsregardingtheir“GoodNeighbor–BeautificationPlans,”BPArecommendsthatyoucontactFlatheadElectricCooperativeat(406)751‐4483.
Comment KKTLR16 0007 Wood
Response to Comment KKTLR16 0007 Wood
0007‐1
AsdescribedinSection3.4.3(Vegetation:MitigationMeasures)oftheEA,BPAwouldimplementmeasurestominimizethespreadofweedsthroughouttheprojectarea.Thesemeasuresincludeidentifyingknownweedpopulationstoensureconstructionworkersavoidthem,cleaningvehiclesbeforetheyentertheconstructionareas,usingweedfreestrawandmulchforerosioncontrol,andtreatingareasofPriority1Bweedspecies(rushskeletonweed).
0007‐1
0007‐2
0007‐3
0007‐4
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 25
Aspartofitsongoingvegetationmanagementpractices,BPAhasenteredintocontractswithFlatheadandLakeCountiestoconductweedcontrolthroughtheuseofselectiveherbicideapplicationalongtheKalispell‐Kerrtransmissionlineright‐of‐way.However,forthecountiestoconductweedcontrolwithintheright‐of‐way,theymustreceivearequestfromtheunderlyinglandowner.BPA’slocalNaturalResourceSpecialisthasbeennotifiedofyourdesiretohaveweedcontrolperformedonyourpropertyandhasnotifiedtheappropriatecountyofyourrequestsotheymaysendyouthenecessaryinformationandobtainyourauthorization.Ifyouhaveanyotherquestionsregardingvegetationmanagementandweedcontrolalongtheright‐of‐wayacrossyourproperty,pleasecontactBPA’slocalNaturalResourceSpecialistat(406)751‐7813.
0007‐2
WhenBPAacquiredthetransmissionlineeasementfortheexistinglineright‐of‐way,BPAprovidedlandownerswithjustcompensationfortheright‐of‐wayacrosstheirlands,aswellasfortheabilitytoremovetreesadjacenttotheright‐of‐waythatcouldthreatenthesafetyandreliabilityofthelineasneeded.Assuch,BPA’stransmission‐lineeasementgrantsittherighttoremoveanytreethatcouldviolatetheMinimumVegetationClearanceDistance;pleasealsoseetheresponsetocomment0007‐3below.However,BPA’sexistingandproposedaccessroadeasementslocatedoutsidethetransmissionlineROWdonotincludetherighttoremovetrees.Therefore,BPAwouldpaythelandownerforthefairmarketvalueofthosetreesremovedalongtheproposedaccessroads.
0007‐3
AsdescribedinSections2.1.2(OngoingVegetationManagement)and2.2.5(VegetationRemoval)oftheEA,BPAneedstokeepvegetationasafedistancefromthetransmissionlineandalongaccessroads.ThisincludesDangerTrees,whicharetreeslocatedoutsidethetransmissionlineright‐of‐waythathavethepotentialtoviolateMinimumVegetationClearanceDistancesbyfallinginto,bendinginto,orgrowingintotheconductor,orcomingcloseenoughtocauseflashoverofcurrentfromtheconductor.
BPAhasfurtherrefineddesignandtreeremovalestimates;thenumberoftreesidentifiedintheDraftEAhasbeenreduced.Table2.2‐2(SummaryofTreeRemoval)hasbeenrevisedtoreflectanestimatedtreeremovalof1,450trees,whichisabout35%lessthanoriginallystatedintheDraftEA.Pleasealsonotethatapproximately90%ofalltreesidentifiedare18‐inchdiameteratbreastheight(dbh)orsmaller.
Inaddition,BPAcontinuestostrivetoreducetreesidentifiedforremovalandhasrevisedmitigationmeasureWILD‐5torequireapreconstructionassessmentwiththeconstructioncontractortoidentifyopportunitiestofurtherreducethetreeremovalalongtheaccessroads.
0007‐4
Sections2.2.4(AccessRoads)and3.3.3(GeologyandSoils:MitigationMeasures)oftheEAdiscussBPA’sproposedaccessroadimprovementsthatwouldincludedraindips,crossdrainculverts,androadwayditchestomanagestormwaterrunoff.
Section3.3.3oftheEAincludesmitigationmeasurestominimizesoilcompaction(GEO‐3)anderosioncausedbyvegetationremoval(GEO‐6,GEO‐7).
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 26
Section3.12.3oftheEA(Noise,PublicHealthandSafety:MitigationMeasures)includesmitigationmeasuresthataddressdisposalofexistingwoodpolesandotherhazardousmaterials.
Section3.2.3oftheEA(LandOwnership,Use,Recreation,andTransportation:MitigationMeasures)discussesprovidingtheconstructionscheduletoaffectedlandowners.
Comment KKTLR16 0008 Ambrose
Response to Comment KKTLR16 0008 Ambrose
PleaserefertoresponsetocommentKKTLR160005.Additionally,BPAhasrevisedmitigationmeasureVEG‐10toincludeuseofherbicidestotreatknowninfestationsofPriority1Bweedspecies(rushskeletonweed).
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 27
Comment KKTLR16 0009 Flathead Audubon Society
0009‐1
0009‐2
0009‐3
0009‐4
0009‐6
0009‐5
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 28
Response to Comment KKTLR16 0009 Flathead Audubon Society
0009‐1
Commentnoted.
0009‐2
BPAisstronglycommittedtominimizingtheeffectsitsprojectshaveonthenaturalenvironmentandhasincorporatednumerousavoidanceandminimizationmeasures,wherepossible,intotheProposedAction.Therefore,thepermanentandtemporarywetlandimpactsidentifiedintheDraftEAwouldremainifBPAimplementstheProposedAction.Examplesofspecificavoidanceandminimizationmeasuresincluderelocatingonestructureoutofawetlandinline‐mile3andutilizingtemporaryaccessin‐lieuofapermanentroadinawetlandinline‐mile26.
Veeriesgenerallyinhabitdeciduousriparianforests.ByincorporatingavoidanceandminimizationmeasuresintotheProposedAction,permanentandtemporaryimpactstothishabitatwouldtotalabout0.2acre(seeTable3.4‐4StructureReplacementandAccessRoadImpactsonVegetation)ofthe3.5acrespresentwithintheprojectarea.
0009‐3
AsdiscussedintheEA,BPAwouldimplementseveralmeasuresthatwouldservetominimizeimpactstoveeryhabitat,includingminimizingconstructionfootprints(mitigationmeasureVEG‐4),avoidingtreeremovaluntilfledgingiscomplete(WILD‐4),andstakingavoidanceareastolimitvegetationdisturbance(VEG‐1).BecausepotentialimpactstoveeryfromtheproposedprojectwouldbeextremelyminimalasdiscussedinChapter3.5oftheEA,restorationofveeryhabitataspartoftheprojectisnotnecessary.
0009‐4
AsdiscussedinSections2.2.4(AccessRoads)and3.3.3(GeologyandSoils:MitigationMeasures)oftheEA,BPA’sproposedaccessroadimprovementsincludedraindips,crossdrainculverts,androadwayditchestomanagestormwaterrunoff.
Kalispell‐Kerr Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment 29
0009‐5
Pleaserefertoresponsetocomment0007‐1.
0009‐6
Thehoarybat’spotentialforoccurrenceintheProjectAreainTable3.5‐2oftheEA(WildlifeSpeciesofConcernDocumentedWithin5MilesoftheProjectAreaandPotentialOccurrenceintheProjectArea)hasbeenchangedfrom“low”to“moderate”forassuggestedbecauseoftheirhighmobilityandwidespreadoccurrencearoundthestate.However,evenifhoarybatsmaybeprevalentinthearea,effectstothemwouldstillremainlowbecausethespeciesishighlymobileandwouldavoidtemporaryconstructiondisturbance.Additionally,anyincidentalmortalitywouldnotaffectregionalpopulations,andhabitatchangesthatmayresultfromtheProposedActionwouldbeminimalwhencomparedtotheavailablehabitatadjacenttothetransmissionright‐of‐wayandaccessroads.