Laserfiche WebLink
CHAPTERFOUR Enuironmenta~ Consequences <br />Pipeline <br />Construction of the product pipeline would temporarily disturb 165 acres of fragile soils <br />(8 percent of the pipeline corridor) (Table 4.2-1). The predominant fragile soils ;tffected include <br />Casmer, Glendive, Irigul-Pazachute, Red Creek, Redcreek-Rentsac, and Nihill sails, which aze <br />distributed along the entire pipeline corridor. <br />Where topsoil is 6 inches or greater in depth, it would be segregated and stored along the ROW. <br />Immediately following pipeline installation, subsoil material would be replaced in the trench, and <br />any salvaged topsoil would be placed on top. Revegetation of the pipeline corridor would be <br />initiated during the first fall following pipeline installation. Upon successful rev~:getation of the <br />pipeline corridor with grasses and forbs, soils would be stabilized and the site returned to <br />productive use. <br />Parachute Site <br />The Pazachute Site has lazgely been disturbed by previous industrial activities; however, <br />construction of new facilities would have long-term impacts to about 7 acres of fi-agile soils <br />(2 percent of the Pazachute Site). The Arvada soils on the eastern side of the Parachute Site are <br />considered fragile due to a severe potential hazazd for water erosion. The rigorous application of <br />erosion control measures prior to soil disturbance, as described above, would reduce the potential <br />for soil erosion. <br />Since disturbance of the Pazachute Site is for the life of the project, final reclamation measures <br />aze not stipulated in The Plan. These measures would be finalized in cooperation with <br />appropriate state and county agencies as the project neazs completion. However, it is anticipated <br />that typical closure and reclamation concepts would be implemented. Any non-salvageable <br />structures, facilities, slab footings and foundations would be demolished and buried onsite. <br />Areas disturbed by decommissioning would be regraded, covered with topsoil, and revegetated. <br />Accelerated Development Alternative <br />This alternative is similar to the Proposed Action, and, for the soils resource, them would not be <br />a notable difference in impacts. A few project facilities would be enlazged, and Table 4.2-2 <br />shows the acres of disturbance for this alternative. Table B-6 in Appendix B shows acres of <br />disturbance by soil type. About 1,156.5 acres would be disturbed under this alternative; <br />however, only an additional 4 acres of fragile soils would be affected compazed Nzth the <br />Proposed Action. Two pump stations neaz Davis Point, although not formally de:;igned and <br />sited, would likely occupy fragile soils for the ] 0-yeaz life of the project. <br />The decreased duration of the project life is the only major difference between the' Accelerated <br />Development Alternative and the Proposed Action. Under this alternative, the duration of <br />impacts to the soils resource, including fragile soils, would be reduced to 10 yeaz~; however, the <br />amount of soils disturbed and exposed to the forces of erosion at any one time would be <br />increased inversely. <br />All other impacts, mitigation measures and reclamation activities would be the same as described <br />for the Proposed Action. <br />4-8 Soils <br /> <br />