Rulemakingcurrent
09000064818c98aa
U.S. DOT/PHMSA - Draft Environmental Assessment for Columbia Gas transmission, Line R-701 natural gas transmission pipeline located in Lawrence County, Ohio
Current as of source date
RegulusPipeline researchRegulusPipeline research09000064818c98aa
Page 1DRAFT PHMSA Special Permit Application Environmental Information Submittal Environmental Assessment Special Permit No. PHMSA-2008-0345 August 2014 Columbia Gas Transmission Company 1700 MacCorkle Ave SE Charleston, West Virginia 25325-1273 Area - 3 Area - 2 Area - 1 Lawrence County Wayne County Prepared by ecology and environment, inc. Global Environmental Specialists 02:1004044.0005.03/Columbia *EA Cover2.ai-8/22/14-GRA#
Page 2DRAFT PHMSA Special Permit Application Environmental Information Submittal Environmental Assessment Special Permit No: PHMSA-2008-0345 August 2014 Prepared for: COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY 1700 MacCorkle Ave SE PO Box 1273 Charleston, West Virginia 25325-1273 Prepared by: ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT, INC. 368 Pleasant View Drive Lancaster, New York 14086 ©2014 Ecology and Environment, Inc.#
Page 3Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Table of Contents Section Page List of Tables………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….iii List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…..iii Acronyms and Abbreviations…………………………………………………………………………………………………iv 1.0 Background ................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Site Description ........................................................................................................... 2 3.0 4.0 5.0 Purpose and Need ....................................................................................................... 3 Affected Resources and Environmental Consequences ................................................. 4 4.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................ 4 4.2 Agricultural Resources ........................................................................................................ 5 4.3 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................... 6 4.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................... 6 4.4.1 Land Cover/Vegetation .......................................................................................... 6 4.4.2 Wildlife ................................................................................................................... 7 4.4.3 Federal and State Protected Species ..................................................................... 7 4.5 Climate Change ................................................................................................................... 8 4.6 Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................. 8 4.7 Environmental Justice ......................................................................................................... 8 4.8 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources ............................................................................... 9 4.9 Hazardous Materials ......................................................................................................... 10 4.10 Indian Trust Assets ............................................................................................................ 11 4.11 Land Use ............................................................................................................................ 12 4.12 Noise ................................................................................................................................. 12 4.13 Recreation ......................................................................................................................... 13 4.14 Safety ................................................................................................................................ 13 4.15 Socioeconomics ................................................................................................................ 14 4.16 Topography ....................................................................................................................... 14 4.17 Transportation .................................................................................................................. 15 4.18 Floodplains ........................................................................................................................ 15 4.19 Water Resources ............................................................................................................... 15 Alternatives Considered and Environmental Impacts of Each Alternative ................... 16 5.1 5.2 5.3 Alternative 1: Grant the Request with Conditions ........................................................... 16 Alternative 2: Deny the Request Resulting in the MAOP Reduction ................................ 17 Alternative 3: Deny the Request Resulting in Pipe Replacement ..................................... 18 6.0 References ................................................................................................................ 18 Appendices A Figures B Site Reconnaissance Report C Federal and State Protected Species ii#
Page 4Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 List of Tables Table Page 1. Special Permit Segment Areas………………………………………………………………………….………………………2 2. Nearest Existing Access Roads for Each Area…………………………………………….………………………..….15 List of Figures (Appendix A) Figure 1. Project Location 2a. Area 1 Aerial Imagery 2b. Area 2 Aerial Imagery 2c. Area 3 Aerial Imagery 3. Land Use/Land Cover 4. Geology 5. Recreational Opportunities 6. SSURGO Soils 7. Water Resources 8. Cultural Resources 9. Ecoregions 10. Seismic Hazard 11. Mineral Resources iii#
Page 5Burlington to Jackson PHMSA‐2008‐0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Acronyms and Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations Columbia Gas Columbia Gas Transmission Company DOT Department of Transportation EA Environmental Assessment EO Executive Order ESA Endangered Species Act FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission MAOP Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NGVD National Geodetic Vertical Datum NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NWI National Wetlands Inventory ODNR Ohio Department of Natural Resources OHPO Ohio Historic Preservation Office PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration PIR Potential Impact Radius ROW Right‐Of‐Way SSA Sole Source Aquifer U.S.C. Unites States Code USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USCB United States Census Bureau USDA United States Department of Agriculture USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS United States Geological Survey iv#
Page 6Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 1.0 Background On April 13, 2010, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) granted Columbia Gas Transmission Company (Columbia Gas) a special permit (PHMSA-2008-0345) to operate special permit segments of the Line R-701 natural gas transmission pipeline at the current maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP), where a change in class locations occurred from Class 1 to Class 3. The special permit allows Columbia Gas to continue to operate the three pipeline segments at their existing MAOP without replacement subject to several stringent conditions. The Special Permit PHMSA- 2008-0345 applies to three natural gas pipeline segments on the 24-inch Line R-701 pipeline operated by Columbia Gas located in Lawrence County, Ohio. This Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared by Columbia Gas to assist PHMSA in preparation of their EA in accordance with Department of Transportation (DOT) Order 5610.1C, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) §§ 4321 – 4375, and the Council on Environmental Quality regulations 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §§ 1500-1508. NEPA requires that federal agencies analyze a proposed federal action to determine whether the action will have a significant impact on the human environment. Columbia Gas understands that PHMSA analyzes special permit requests for potential risks to public safety and the environment that could result from their decision to grant or deny the request. As part of this analysis, PHMSA evaluates whether a special permit would impact the likelihood and consequences of a pipeline failure as compared to the status quo in the absence of the special permit. PHMSA may grant the special permit request, grant the request with additional conditions, or deny the request. Columbia Gas developed this EA to assist PHMSA in determining the effects of the permit decision, if any, on the environment. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 60118(c) and 49 CFR § 190.341, Columbia Gas understands that PHMSA may only grant special permit requests that are consistent with pipeline safety. PHMSA will impose conditions in the special permit if PHMSA concludes they are necessary for safety, environmental protection, or are otherwise in the public interest. If PHMSA determines that a special permit would be inconsistent with pipeline safety or is not justified, the application will be denied. Provided here is a summary of the three alternatives assessed in this EA. Section 5 provides detailed descriptions of these alternatives and the results of implementation of each. • Alternative 1: Grant the Request with Conditions (Preferred Alternative). This alternative includes the PHMSA approval of a special permit (with conditions) that would allow Columbia Gas to continue to operate the three pipeline segments at their current MAOP with conditions for increased inspection and monitoring of the segments. This option, with the potential 1#
Page 7Burlington to Jackson PHMSA‐2008‐0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 conditions, will provide the least impact to environment, residents, surrounding land uses, operating requirements, and Columbia Gas’s existing customers. Alternative 2: Deny the Request Resulting in the MAOP Reductions. This alternative includes PHMSA denying the special permit and would force Columbia Gas to reduce its MAOP through the pipeline segments. Therefore, Alternative 2 would not allow Columbia Gas to meet its contractual obligations with its current customers. This alternative is thought to be non‐viable and was therefore not considered. Alternative 3: Deny the Request Resulting in Pipe Replacement. If PHMSA denies the special permit, Columbia Gas would have to replace these three segments of the pipeline so that the current MAOP could be maintained and Columbia Gas could keep its contractual obligations. Unlike the other alternatives, implementing Alternative 3 would impact the environment, residential landowners, scenic views, and county infrastructure. The replacements required in this alternative would require additional financial costs, which would increase fees for Columbia Gas’s existing customers. 2.0 Site Description The Line R‐701 natural gas transmission pipeline originates near Burlington, Ohio, and terminates near McArthur, Ohio. This special permit request involves three segments that are described and referred to as three areas along the pipeline in Lawrence County, Ohio. Table 1 details the locations of each. Figure 1 (all figures are provided in Appendix A) shows the area locations, and Figures 2a through 2c provides aerial imagery of each area. Table 1. Special Permit Segment Areas Pipeline Pipeline Diameter Description County, State Length (feet) Begin Station End Station MAOP Area 1 Line R‐701 24‐inch Route 52 Lawrence, Ohio 148 28+34 29+82 900 Area 2 Line R‐701 24‐inch Lewis Fork Road 1 Lawrence, Ohio 544 133+06 138+50 900 Area 3 Line R‐701 24‐inch Lewis Fork Road 2 Lawrence, Ohio 2,211 152+85 174+96 900 Area 1 includes a 148‐foot segment of the Line R‐701 pipeline. This area is located adjacent to the northern limits of Burlington, Ohio, on the north side of U.S. Highway 52. The area is a maintained herbaceous right‐of‐way (ROW) within a landscape consisting of a mixture of forested areas and commercial development. The topography of Area 1 slopes steeply to the southeast, with elevations ranging from 597 to 680 feet above National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) for mean sea level. Appendix B includes copies of site photographs that show various features associated with Area 1. 2#
Page 8Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Area 2 includes a 544-foot segment of the Line R-701 pipeline. This area is located approximately 1.3 miles northeast of South Point, Ohio, and generally parallels Lewis Fork Road at an offset of generally 100 feet. The area is a maintained herbaceous ROW within a landscape consisting of a mixture of residences, agriculture, and forested areas. The topography is relatively flat with a few gently rolling hills, with elevations ranging from 596 to 614 feet above the NGVD for mean sea level. Appendix B includes copies of site photographs that show various features associated with Area 2. Area 3 includes a 2,211-foot segment of the Line R-701 pipeline. This area is located approximately 1.5 miles northeast of South Point, Ohio, and generally parallels Lewis Fork Road at an offset of generally 100 feet. The area is a maintained herbaceous ROW within a landscape consisting of a mixture of residences, agriculture, and forested areas. The topography is gently rolling with one steep hill located in the center of Area 3, and elevations ranging from 615 to 725 feet above NGVD for mean sea level. Appendix B includes copies of site photographs that show various features associated with Area 3. On August 13, 2014, a field team consisting of two qualified biologists visited these areas to document environmental resources on or immediately adjacent to the areas. Appendix B contains the site reconnaissance report from this event. There are no schools, libraries, playgrounds, parks, theatres, or hospitals on, or immediately adjacent to, these three areas. Based on U.S. Census data (United States Census Bureau [USCB] 2010), the population of Lawrence County was 62,450 in 2010 and the median household income was $40,244. 3.0 Purpose and Need The purpose of this EA is to identify resources associated with the natural and human environment as they relate to Areas 1, 2, and 3. This EA has been prepared to accompany a special permit petition to PHMSA for relief from the requirements of 49 CFR 192.611(a) for Areas 1, 2, and 3, which experienced class location changes from Class 1 to Class 3. Coverage of the identified areas under the special permit will allow the continued operation of the identified segments of the pipeline at the existing MAOP without pipeline replacement and its associated cost and impacts. The existing Special Permit No. PHMSA-2008-0345 contains numerous conditions to ensure and manage the operation, maintenance, design, and integrity threats for the covered pipelines. The special permit imposes stringent conditions over, not only the special permit segments (the areas identified in the permit where the class changes have occurred), but also an area corresponding to 25 miles on each side of the special permit segments or the closest upstream or downstream pig launcher/receiver. The aggressive assessment, review, and management of the length of pipeline covered under the special permit far outweighs the public safety benefit that would be obtained through the replacement of the relatively small areas of identified Class 3 pipeline. The actions specified in these special permits will help ensure pipeline and public safety to a much larger area than would be gained through pipe replacement. 3#
Page 9Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 In addition, replacement of the pipeline areas would involve the ground disturbance during excavation for the installation of the new pipe and removal of the old pipe within the vicinity of the identified areas with associated environmental and other impacts. Avoiding outages associated with Class 3 upgrades ensures reliable gas transportation and delivery for customers and avoids the need for gas blow downs to the atmosphere. 4.0 Affected Resources and Environmental Consequences The following sections provide the potential affected resources and environmental consequences for each area in accordance with PHMSA’s Guidance for Special Permit Applications on Providing Environmental Information (PHMSA n.d.). These are as follows: • Aesthetics • Land Use • Agricultural Resources • Noise • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Climate Change • Cultural Resources • Environmental Justice • Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources • Hazardous Materials • Recreation • Safety • Socioeconomics • Topography • Transportation • Floodplains • Water Resources • Indian Trust Assets 4.1 Aesthetics The land cover/land use within and surrounding the areas was examined to determine aesthetics or visual character within the vicinity of the areas in questions. The following subsections provide summaries for each of the areas. Figure 3 shows land use/land cover data within the vicinity of the three areas (USDA 2011). Area 1. Area 1 traverses maintained herbaceous ROW within a landscape of deciduous forest for the entirety of the segment. Immediately east of the ROW and outside Area 1 is grassy space/commercial development with several buildings. The Ohio River Scenic Byway (U.S. Highway 52) is approximately 250 feet from the eastern edge of Area 1 (Figure 4). Area 2. Area 2 traverses from west to east along maintained herbaceous ROW (residential yard), Lewis Fork Road, then a hay pasture, a driveway, and then again maintained herbaceous ROW (residential yard). The ROW is surrounded by deciduous forest. There are residences located adjacent to this area. 4#
Page 10Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Area 3. Area 3 traverses from north to south along maintained herbaceous ROW through primarily hay/pasture and residential yards. There are residences located adjacent to this area. This segment of the ROW is surrounded by deciduous forest. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to aesthetics. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. Alternative 3 would result in a temporary, localized impact during the construction of the pipeline replacement. This would be from the construction activities occurring within the three areas and any potential access roads or staging areas that would be needed as part of the replacement project. Once construction and restoration is complete, these areas would return to their previous visual character for operation of the pipeline. 4.2 Agricultural Resources Prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance have been identified by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) as areas of major importance in meeting the nation’s short- and long-range needs for food and fiber. Prime farmland, as defined by the NRCS, is land that has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops. Prime farmland soils have properties that are favorable for the economy and produce the highest crop yields with minimal inputs of energy and other economic resources (NRCS 2014). Farmland of statewide importance, as defined by the NRCS, is land, in addition to prime and unique farmland, that is of statewide importance for the production of food, feed, fiber, forage, and oil seed crops. Generally, additional farmlands of statewide importance include those that are nearly prime farmland and that economically produce high yields of crops when treated and managed according to acceptable farming methods. Some may produce as high a yield as prime farmlands if conditions are favorable. In some states, additional farmlands of statewide importance may include tracts of land that have been designated for agriculture by state law (USDA 2014). Area 1. According to the NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2014), Area 1 is not underlain by prime farmland soils or soils of statewide importance. Figure 5 details the soils within the vicinity of Area 1 as mapped by the NRCS. Additionally, neither the existing ROW nor the adjacent areas are currently utilized for agricultural purposes. Area 2. According to the NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2014), the entirety of Area 2 is underlain by prime farmland soils. The prime farmland soils include the Kanawha silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes. Figure 5 details the soils and prime farmland within the vicinity of Area 2 as mapped by the NRCS. The existing ROW within Area 2 does traverse both agricultural and residential areas. Area 3. According to the NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2014), Area 3 is not underlain by prime farmland soils or soils of statewide importance. Figure 5 details the soils within the vicinity of Area 3 as mapped by the NRCS. Additionally, neither the existing ROW nor the adjacent areas are currently utilized for agricultural purposes. 5#
Page 11Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to agricultural resources. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. Alternative 3 would result in temporary impacts to agricultural operations within Area 2 if the special permit is denied and a pipeline replacement is required. During construction, the ROW would not be available for agriculture purposes. Following construction Columbia Gas would restore the ROW and return the soils so that the ROW could be once again utilized for agricultural purposes during operation of the pipeline. 4.3 Air Quality Lawrence County, Ohio, is not in a nonattainment area as designated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA; USEPA 2014). The county is designated as being in maintenance status for particulate matter. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to air quality. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. For Alternative 3, there would be temporary air impacts due to the use of construction equipment and vehicles. No aboveground facilities such as compressor stations or meter stations would be required for a pipeline replacement; therefore, no operational impacts are anticipated for air quality. 4.4 Biological Resources The following subsections detail the biological resources associated with the Project. They are as follows: • Land Cover/Vegetation; • Wildlife; and • Federal and State Protected Species. 4.4.1 Land Cover/Vegetation Based on the site visit, vegetation at Area 1 is a maintained herbaceous ROW within a landscape consisting of a mixture of shrubland and adjacent deciduous forest. Area 2 is a maintained herbaceous ROW within a landscape consisting entirely of residential landscape and a small pasture. Area 3 is a maintained herbaceous ROW within a landscape consisting mostly of residential landscape with adjacent deciduous forest. Ornamental grasses such as Paspalum spp. dominate the herbaceous ROW within the residential areas. Species typically found in the deciduous forests include the following: boxelder (Acer negundo), red maple (Acer rubrum), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), red oak (Quercus rubra), white oak (Quercus alba), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), eastern black walnut (Juglans nigra), white ash (Fraxinus americana), eastern redbud (Cercis canadensis), black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), black cherry (Prunus serotina), and staghorn sumac (Rhus typhina). 6#
Page 12Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Shrubland species typically consist of boxelder (Acer negundo), black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), staghorn sumac (Rhus typhina), Canada goldenrod (Solidago canadensis), Alleghany blackberry (Rubus allegheniensis), raspberry (Rubus idaeus), American pokeweed (Phytolacca americana), wild grape (Vitus spp.), and multifora rose (Rosa multiflora). 4.4.2 Wildlife Typical wildlife species in Lawrence County include white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), eastern wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), American woodcock (Scolopax minor), bobcat (Lynx rufus), coyote (Canis latrins), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), eastern cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus floridanus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and the eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis). All species may be found along all of the areas. 4.4.3 Federal and State Protected Species A review United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)-designated critical habitat data, USFWS Endangered Species County Lists, and state natural heritage inventories was conducted to determine the federally and state protected species that could potentially occur along the project facilities. No USFWS-designated critical habitat is crossed by the areas. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.), was designed to prevent the extinction of native and foreign species of wild flora and fauna. The ESA defines an endangered species as any animal or plant in danger of extinction and a threatened species as any plant or animal likely to become extinct within the foreseeable future. This act makes it illegal to harass, harm, or kill listed species and to possess, transport, buy, or sell the species or parts thereof in the course of an interstate or foreign commercial activity. A permit authorizing any prohibited activity may be issued following a formal consultation with the USFWS. The Ohio Revised Code 1531.25 Protection of Species Threatened With Statewide Extinction provides the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), Division of Wildlife, the legal authority over Ohio’s state-listed threatened and endangered species. Table C-1 in Appendix C provides a summary of the federally listed species that could occur within the areas. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions. As such, there would be no impact to biological resources as a result of this project. Under Alternative 3, the pipeline replacement would have temporary impacts on vegetation and land use in the area of the replacement and any associated access roads or staging areas that could be required. In addition, under Alternative 3 there is the potential to impact the federally listed endangered Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis). Indiana bats utilize forested cover types in the summer for roosting habitat. If any trees greater than 5-inch diameter breast height (dbh) would need to be removed the USFWS would likely require 7#
Page 13Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Indiana bat surveys to determine if any trees to be removed are roosting trees for the Indiana bat. The construction of this pipeline replacement would likely be subject to seasonal restrictions in order to minimize impacts to this species. If this alternative was selected, further consultation with the USFWS would be required. 4.5 Climate Change The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to climate change. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. For Alternative 3, no aboveground facilities such as compressor stations or meter stations would be required for a pipeline replacement and, therefore, it would not likely result in impacts to climate change. 4.6 Cultural Resources A preliminary assessment of structures listed by the National Park Service (National Register of Historic Places [NRHP] 2014) on the NRHP within the vicinity of Areas 1, 2, and 3 was conducted. No listed structures are present at or near Areas 1, 2, and 3 (Figure 6). Columbia Gas maintains a Coordination Agreement (Memorandum of Understanding) with the Ohio Historical Preservation Office (OHPO). This agreement allows Columbia Gas to conduct minor activities in the existing and previously disturbed pipeline ROW without further consultation with the OHPO regarding cultural, archaeological, or paleontological resources. Columbia Gas provides a summary of activities and projects carried out during the preceding year under this agreement. The summary is due each year by January 31. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions. As such, there would be no impact to cultural resources. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. For Alternative 3, Columbia Gas would need to consult with the OHPO to determine if any potential work spaces for the pipeline replacement would be sited in areas not previously disturbed by the construction of the original pipeline. If so cultural resource surveys would likely be required to determine if there are any resources present and avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures if they are present. 4.7 Environmental Justice Areas 1, 2, and 3 are in U.S. Census Track 511, Group Block 5. The percent minority population near Areas 1, 2, and 3 is 4.1 percent. The population of Lawrence County was 62,450 in 2010 and the median household income was $40,244. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to the adjacent communities. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. For Alternative 3 the construction of the pipeline replacement would be a short term event and would not be expected to impact adjacent communities. 8#
Page 14Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 4.8 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources According to the USEPA (USEPA 2012), Areas 1 and 3, and the southeastern half of Area 2 are in the Monongahela Transition Zone (70b) of the Western Allegheny Plateau (Ecoregion 70). Ecoregion 70 is mostly unglaciated, with 200 to 750 feet of local relief. Elevation is as high as 2,000 feet. The region is a dissected plateau composed of horizontally bedded sedimentary rock. The natural vegetation is Appalachian Oak Forest and Mixed Mesophytic Forest (primarily in the south). The Monongahela Transition Zone (70b) is one of three Level IV ecoregions within Ecoregion 70. It is made up of unglaciated hills, knobs, and ridges that are underlain by interbedded limestone, shale, sandstone, and coal of the Monongahela Group. Primary vegetation is Mixed Mesophytic Forest (Woods et al. 1999). Figure 7 depicts these ecoregions. The northwestern half of Area 2 falls within the Ohio/Kentucky Carboniferous Plateau (70f) of the Western Allegheny Plateau. This area is a mosaic of woodland, pastureland, and cropland with mixed deciduous-evergreen forests characterized by oaks and pines (Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources 2013). Historically, this area of Ohio has a low potential for seismic activity. According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Seismic Map (USGS 2008), there is a 2 percent probability in a 50-year period that an earthquake would occur near Areas 1, 2, and 3 at an intensity that exceeds V on the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale. An earthquake of this intensity would be felt by nearly everyone; many people would be awakened if it occurred at night. Windows and dishes would break, unstable objects would be overturned, and pendulum clocks may stop (USGS 2013). Figure 8 illustrates the USGS Seismic Map. According to the USGS Mineral Resources State Geologic Maps (USGS 2011), Areas 1, 2 and 3 are underlain primarily by siltstone and secondarily by shale formed during the Pennsylvanian geologic period. Figure 9 shows the geologic composition within the vicinity of Areas 1, 2, and 3 (USDA 2011). Area 1. The NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2014) shows that Area 1 may be underlain by Steinsburg- Shelocta association (SsF), very steep. The SsF are well-drained soils on shoulder slopes and side slopes on uplands. The Steinsburg soil is moderately deep and is on the upper side and the shoulder of slopes. The Shelocta soil is deep and is found on the mid and lower side of slopes (USDA 1998). Figure 5 shows the soils within the vicinity of Area 1 as mapped by the NRCS. According to the USGS Mineral Resources Data System (USGS 2012), there is one mineral resource (sand and gravel) within a one-mile radius of this area. Figure 10 shows mineral resources as mapped by the USGS nearest to Area 1. Area 2. The NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2014) shows that Area 2 may be underlain by Kanawha silt loam (KaB), 2 to 6 percent slopes. KaB is a deep, well-drained, generally sloping soil on fans along valley walls and terrace remnants at the heads of narrow stream valleys (USDA 1998). This soil is also 9#
Page 15Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 designated as prime farmland. Figure 5 shows the soils within the vicinity of Area 2 as mapped by the NRCS. According to the USGS Mineral Resources Data System (USGS 2012), there are no mineral resources within a one-mile radius of this area. Figure 10 shows mineral resources as mapped by the USGS nearest to Area 2. Area 3. The NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2014) shows that Area 3 may be underlain Kanawha silt loam (KaC), 6 to 12 percent slopes. KaC is a deep, well-drained, strongly sloping soil on fans located along valley walls and at the head of narrow stream valleys. Figure 5 shows the soils within the vicinity of Area 2 as mapped by the NRCS. According to the USGS Mineral Resources Data System (USGS 2012), there are no mineral resources within a one-mile radius of this area. Figure 10 shows mineral resources as mapped by the USGS nearest to Area 3. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to the geology, soils, or mineral resources in the area. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. For Alternative 3, there would be temporary impacts to geology and soils during construction associated with the replacement of the pipeline. Soils with the potential for steep slopes, high erosion factors, or prime farmlands would require mitigation or special soil & erosion plans. No impacts are anticipated on mineral resources as part of this alternative. Once construction is complete the ROW would be restored to preexisting conditions and permanent impacts to geology, soils, or mineral resources are not expected. 4.9 Hazardous Materials Construction and maintenance of the natural gas pipelines require the use of certain potentially hazardous materials such as fuels, oils, explosives, and herbicides. By definition, hazardous materials (substances and wastes) have the potential to pose a significant threat to human health and the environment if spilled or accidentally released, depending on their quantity, concentration, or chemical composition. When stored, used, transported, and disposed of properly as described below, the risks associated with these materials can be reduced and eliminated. The following descriptions provide examples of potential activities that may require hazardous materials management: • Refueling and Servicing. Construction vehicles (trucks, bulldozers, etc.) and equipment (pumps, generators, etc.) generally will be fueled and serviced in designated upland areas at least 100 feet from wetlands or waterbodies. Any hazardous waste materials resulting from refueling and servicing activities are containerized and disposed of properly. • Transportation of Hazardous Materials. Loading and transporting fuels and other hazardous materials will meet the minimum requirements established by the USDOT and other pertinent regulations. Prior to transporting hazardous materials, appropriate shipping papers shall be 10#
Page 16Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 completed. Vehicle drivers are trained to properly respond to and report spills, leakage, and/or accidents involving hazardous materials. All hazardous materials used for the Project will be properly containerized and labeled at all times, including during transportation. Smaller containers will be used on site to transport needed amounts of hazardous materials to a specific location. Transfer of materials from large to small containers will be accomplished using appropriate equipment including pumps, hoses, and safety equipment. These smaller (“service”) containers will also be clearly labeled. Special provisions would apply to the transportation of explosives. • Storage of Hazardous Materials. Materials will be stored only in designated material yards to be identified prior to the initiation of construction. Material yards will be located at least 100 feet away from wetlands, waterbodies, and sensitive areas and shall be able to contain the single largest quantity/unit stored at any one time, plus 10 percent. Cleanup materials, including absorbent spill pads and plastic bags, will also be stored in these areas. Hazardous materials will not be stored in areas subject to flooding or inundation. • Container Labeling. Labeling requirements for any container (including tanks) used on site to store accumulated hazardous wastes will comply with proper labeling as required in 22 CFR Section 66262.34(f). Hazardous wastes will be collected regularly and disposed of in accordance with all applicable laws and practices. Hazardous and universal wastes typically include used oil, used oil filters, used gasoline containers, spent batteries, and other items. The preferred alternative would not involve any construction activities or the need for storage of any hazardous materials; as such, there is no potential for a release of hazardous materials and there would be would be no impact. For Alternative 3, Columbia Gas would need to replace each segment of pipeline. Hazardous materials would be handled in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and Columbia Gas would prepare a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Plan in case there is a release. This plan would outline measures taken to avoid, minimize, and mitigate releases and would include any emergency contact information. By implementing this plan and these measures, Alternative 3 is anticipated to have no impacts from hazardous materials during the construction or operational phase of the project. 4.10 Indian Trust Assets According to the U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs (2010), there are no federally recognized Indian tribes or tribal reservations in Ohio. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to Indian Trust Assets or federally recognized Tribal Reservations. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. Alternative 3 would have temporary land impacts but as there are no currently identified Indian Trust Assets or federally-recognized Tribal Reservations in the three areas, no impacts are anticipated. 11#
Page 17Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 4.11 Land Use The land cover/land use within and surrounding the areas were examined to assess any affects to land use within the areas in questions. The following subsections provide summaries for each of the areas. Area 1. Area 1 traverses maintained herbaceous ROW within a landscape of deciduous forest for the entirety of the segment. Immediately east of the ROW and outside Area 1 is grassy space/commercial development with several buildings. The Ohio River Scenic Byway (U.S. Highway 52) is approximately 250 feet from the eastern edge of Area 1. Figure 3 shows land use/land cover data within the vicinity of Area 1 (USDA 2011). Area 2. Area 2 traverses from west to east along maintained herbaceous ROW (residential yard), Lewis Fork Road, then a hay pasture, a driveway, and then again maintained herbaceous ROW (residential yard). Figure 3 shows land use/land cover data within the vicinity of Area 2 (USDA 2011). Area 3. Area 3 traverses from north to south along maintained herbaceous ROW through primarily hay/pasture and residential yards. There are residences located adjacent to this area. This segment of the ROW is surrounded by deciduous forest. Figure 3 shows land use/land cover data within the vicinity of Area 3 (USDA 2011). The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to land use. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. For Alternative 3, temporary impacts would be incurred to residential and agricultural land uses in Areas 2 and 3. These temporary impacts would occur during replacement of the pipeline. After construction, the ROW would be restored to its pre-existing conditions and no permanent impacts to land use are expected. 4.12 Noise The pipeline is buried and there are no existing aboveground facilities or valves contributing noise; therefore, existing noise levels in the vicinity of the areas are consistent with the land uses traversed such as deciduous forests and residential development. Additionally, there are no existing Columbia Gas compressor stations within 5 miles of each area. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to noise pollution. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. For Alternative 3, there would be a temporary increase in ambient noise levels surrounding each Area during construction of the pipeline replacement. There would be no permanent impacts on noise during the operation of the project because no new above-ground facilities would be needed and the pipeline would remain below ground. 12#
Page 18Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 4.13 Recreation Public lands, parks and recreational areas, golf courses, trails, and boat ramps were mapped in order to assess outdoor recreational opportunities in the vicinity of the project areas (Figure 4). The Ohio River Scenic Byway is located 250 feet south of Area 1 (USDOT 2014). No other areas traverse or are within 0.25 mile of any of recreational opportunities listed above. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to recreation. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. Under Alternative 3 there would be no impacts anticipated on recreation either. The area is near to the Ohio River Scenic Byway but would not traverse this byway. 4.14 Safety Would operation under a special permit change the risk of rupture or failure? Continued operation of the three identified areas of pipeline under the special permit would have no significant effect on the risk of pipeline failure or rupture. First, in order to be considered under the special permit, the pipeline must meet PHMSA’s threshold and other requirements for acceptance under a special permit. These requirements include pipeline location, coating, operating specified minimum yield strength, pressure testing, anomaly indications found by in-line inspection, and other pipeline features. The pipeline would also need to meet material and other requirements in order to be considered for acceptance under the special permit. Finally, should the areas in the special permit be renewed, those sections would be subject to numerous conditions to ensure safety and manage the operation, maintenance, design, and integrity threats for the pipeline on an on-going basis. If a failure occurred, would consequences and spill or release volumes be different if PHMSA granted the permit? Increase risk, decrease risk, no change? There would be no difference in the amount of natural gas released or any difference in any other consequences occurring as the result of PHMSA granting the inclusion of the additional pipeline areas into the existing special permit. There would be no physical change to the pipeline or the operating pressure of the pipeline as the result of the renewal of the special permit. If the renewal was not granted, the pipe in the subject areas would likely be replaced with pipe of the same diameter and would operate at the same operating pressure. The amount of natural gas released and failure consequences would be identical under either of these alternatives. Would the Potential Impact Radius (PIR) of a rupture change under the special permit? Would more people be affected by a failure if we granted the permit? 13#
Page 19Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 No. As there would be no physical change to the pipeline or the operating pressure of the pipeline as the result of the renewal of the special permit, the potential impact radius would not change. In addition, no additional people would be affected by a failure if the permit was renewed. Would operation under the special permit have an effect on pipeline longevity or reliability? Would there be any life cycle or maintenance issues? Continued operation of the three identified areas of pipeline under the special permit would not be expected to have an effect on the pipeline longevity or reliability, and would not cause any life cycle or maintenance issues. The pipe in the five identified areas being considered for inclusion into the special permit is characteristic of the other pipe on Line R-701. This pipe operates as a system. The maximum operating pressure and other factors would not change under the special permit; renewal of the special permit for the five areas would not impact the overall pipeline longevity or reliability and would not cause any life cycle or maintenance issues. 4.15 Socioeconomics The largest population center in close proximity to Areas 1, 2, and 3 is Charleston, West Virginia, which is to the east of these areas. Area 1 is located within a landscape of deciduous forest and is adjacent to a commercial building to the east. Areas 2 and 3 run through a residential neighborhood with deciduous forest on the east and west sides of the neighborhood. There are no schools, libraries, or hospitals on, or immediately adjacent to, either area. The county that comprises Areas 1, 2, and 3 is Lawrence County. Based on data from the USCB (2010), the population of Lawrence County was 62,450 in 2010 and the median household income was $40,244. The population density in 2010 in the vicinities of Areas 1, 2, and 3 is 453.37 individuals per square mile. The percent minority in the vicinity of Areas 1, 2, and 3 is 4.1 percent. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions; as such, there would be no impact to socioeconomics. Existing conditions would remain undisturbed. Under Alternative 3, construction activities would be temporary and small in scale. There is the potential for a negligible to small positive benefit to the local communities from the construction activities providing to the local economy through local purchases, hotel usages, etc. No impacts are anticipated during operation of the pipeline. 4.16 Topography According to the USEPA (2012), Areas 1 through 3 are in the Monongahela Transition Zone (70b) of the Western Allegheny Plateau (Ecoregion 70). The topography at Area 1 slopes steeply to the southeast, with elevations ranging from 597 to 680 feet above NGVD for mean sea level. The topography at Area 2 is relatively flat with a few gently rolling hills. Elevations range from 596 to 614 feet above NGVD for 14#
Page 20Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 mean sea level. The topography in Area 3 is gently rolling with one steep hill located in the center of Area 3. Elevations range from 615 to 725 feet above NGVD for mean sea level. Figure 1 provides the USGS topographic maps for each area. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions. As such, there would be no impact to topography as a result of this project. Under Alternative 3, the ROW would be restored to pre-existing conditions once construction is complete. As such, no impacts would be anticipated. 4.17 Transportation Table 2 provides the nearest roads that can provide access to the individual areas in question for this EA. Figures 2a through 2c also depict the location of these roads in relation to the areas. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions. As such, there would be no impact to transportation as a result of this project. Under Alternative 3, Area 2 would potentially cause short term impacts to Lewis Fork Road as it is crossed by Area 2. Engineering design and consultation with Lawrence County would need to be completed to determine the crossing method and subsequent impact to transportation. No impacts are anticipated to the roads near Areas 1 or 3. Table 2. Nearest Existing Access Roads for Each Area Area Nearest Access Road Comments Area 1 U.S. Highway 52 Paved road that crosses the existing ROW approximately 300 feet south of Area 1. Area 2 Lewis Fork Road Paved road that crosses the existing ROW and Area 2. Area 3 Lewis Fork Road Paved road that is adjacent to the existing ROW and Area 3. 4.18 Floodplains Based on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate maps, Areas 1, 2, and 3 are outside of the 100-year and 500-year floodplains (FEMA 2006). The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions. As such, there would be no impact to floodplains as a result of this project. Additionally as no floodplains are crossed, Alternative 3 would not be expected to impact floodplains. 4.19 Water Resources High Quality Ohio Waters and Outstanding National Resource Waters. The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency identifies high quality waters and outstanding national resource waters as part of the state’s water quality antidegradation policy. Degradation of exceptional and outstanding waters can only be authorized under certain conditions. There are no exceptional waters, outstanding waters, or federally designated Wild and Scenic Rivers in the vicinities of Areas 1, 2, and 3. 15#
Page 21Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Sole Source Aquifers. A Sole Source Aquifer (SSA) is an aquifer designated by the USEPA as the "sole or principal source" of drinking water for a given service area. A sole source aquifer is one that is used to supply 50 percent or more of the drinking water for a particular area (USEPA 2011). There are no SSAs within the vicinity of Areas 1, 2, and 3. Regarding water wells, data could not be obtained to determine the proximity of Areas 1, 2, and 3 to water wells. However, no water wells were observed immediately adjacent to Areas 1, 2, and 3 during the site visit. Surface Waters. Wetlands are defined jointly by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the USEPA as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater, at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances, do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (40 CFR 230.3 and 33 CFR 328.3). Executive Order (EO) 11990 of May 1977 was enacted to slow the loss of the nation’s wetlands. This EO established a policy “…to avoid to the extent possible, the long-term and short-term adverse impacts associated with the destruction or modification of wetlands…” On August 13, 2014, qualified biologists visited Areas 1, 2, and 3 to document the presence of surface waters, including wetlands, streams, and ponds. Prior to the site visit, a preliminary desktop review was conducted to identify the potential for the presence of wetlands and other surface waters at the three areas. Sources reviewed include NRCS soils data, USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Maps, and available aerial photography. A desktop review indicated no wetlands, but one surface water was identified at Area 3. Figure 11 shows wetlands as mapped by USFWS NWI data and other surface waters near Areas 1, 2, and 3, respectively. During the site visit, it was found this surface water is an intermittent stream; areas additionally, this intermittent stream does have an emergent wetland fringe along its banks. Water Quality. Areas 1, 2, and 3 are in the Raccoon-Symmes Watershed Group as defined by the USEPA. The preferred alternative would involve no ground disturbance and no change in existing conditions. As such, there would be no impact to water resources as a result of this project. For Alternative 3 the pipeline replacement would likely cause temporary impacts to the intermittent stream and the associated wetland in Area 3. Upon completion of the construction, the ROW as well as the stream and wetland would be restored to pre-existing conditions. 5.0 Alternatives Considered and Environmental Impacts of Each Alternative 5.1 Alternative 1: Grant the Request with Conditions Under this alternative, PHMSA would grant a special permit to Columbia Gas to continue to operate Areas 1, 2, and 3 at their current MAOP. Approving Columbia Gas’s special permit request would avoid a disturbance to the environment, public roadways, businesses, and homes by eliminating the need for 16#
Page 22Burlington to Jackson PHMSA‐2008‐0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 construction activities/impacts required for pipeline replacement. In addition, an approval of this permit would not detrimentally affect delivery of service. i. ii. Potential Safety Risks Resulting From Grant of the Special Permit The safety risk with respect to this request for a special permit focuses on the integrity of the pipeline and its effect on the increased population in the event of a catastrophic failure of this pipeline. Granting of a special permit does not increase the Potential Impact Radius (PIR). However, Columbia Gas understands the risk to the increased human population around the pipeline must be adequately mitigated. Special permit PHMSA‐2008‐0345 contains numerous conditions to ensure safety and manage the operation, maintenance, design, and integrity threats for the covered pipelines. Renewal of the sections of pipeline under the special permit would subject these areas to these conditions. The special permit imposes stringent condition over not only the special permit segments (the areas identified in the permit where the class changes have occurred), but also an area corresponding to 25 miles on each side of the special permit segments or the closest upstream or downstream pig launcher/receiver. The aggressive assessment, review, and management of the length of pipeline covered under the special permit far outweighs the public safety benefit that would be obtained through the replacement of the relatively small sections of identified Class 3 pipeline. The actions specified in these special permits will help ensure pipeline and public safety to a much larger area than would be gained through pipe replacement. Potential Environmental Risks Resulting From Grant of the Special Permit As with any class location waiver, when one is considering operating a pipeline above the pressures allowed within the originally approved class designation, the environmental impacts should be examined and addressed as they relate to risks to humans, animals, and the environment. As previously discussed, there would be no impact to these resources as a result of this project. However, should a leak or failure take place, impacts to the resources above may occur. Any negative effect to environmental resources due to pipeline failure would be temporary in nature and would not pose a long‐term problem to such areas. This is so because of the nature of the product in the pipeline. The product is natural gas, which is in a gaseous state. If a leak would occur, there would be no significant contamination of any waterbody or soil. Should PHMSA renew this special permit, Columbia Gas understands increased surveillance and detailed analysis and remediation of the existing pipeline may be required by PHMSA to reduce the risk associated with failure of the pipeline. Remediation of anomalous areas along the pipeline may involve excavation to directly assess the pipeline. However, the extent of any earth disturbance resulting from these anomaly excavations is not anticipated to have a significant effect on any resources listed above. 5.2 Alternative 2: Deny the Request Resulting in the MAOP Reduction Another alternative is to require Columbia Gas to reduce the operating pressure of Areas 1, 2, and 3, namely the Columbia Gas 24‐inch Line R‐701 from its current MAOP to a level prescribed by Title 49 CFR Section 192 for the appropriate class location. This would reduce the capacity of this portion of the Columbia Gas pipeline system and render Columbia Gas unable to deliver tariff based and FERC 17#
Page 23Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 enforceable commitments to its customers. Although the resulting environmental impacts would be less in this alternative than if the operator was required to replace the pipe, this alternative is not practicable due to the capacity reduction. Line R-701 supplies critical natural gas supplies to market. Lowering the MAOP of Line R-701 in these areas may adversely impact natural gas supplies especially during periods of peak demand. Reducing the maximum allowable operating pressure reduces the PIR. This affects all of the environmental criteria previously discussed and may lessen the risk to human and animal life. The impact on other criteria may be determined by whether the physical attribute is within the new reduced PIR. For those that are still within the PIR, the risk has not diminished. The risk to soils and vegetation, along with geologic effects, are unchanged. However, the impact will be reduced in geographic size. 5.3 Alternative 3: Deny the Request Resulting in Pipe Replacement PHMSA could deny the request for a special permit, requiring Columbia Gas to comply with the requirements of 49 CFR § 192.611, effectively forcing Columbia Gas to replace these sections of pipe. In the absence of a special permit, Columbia Gas would incur significant costs to replace the pipe in the class location change areas. Replacement of the pipe would involve excavation, potential removal of vegetation outside the existing ROW, and an impacted ROW during construction, which would certainly create impacts on the environment surrounding the pipeline ROW. Scenic views, agricultural operations, biological resources, land use, noise, air, transportation, and water resources may be temporarily impacted during construction, with limited impacts to areas surrounding the pipeline ROW. Denial of the permit would create an impact to soils and vegetation by excavation, and possibly disrupt natural gas service to the populations the pipeline serves in the vicinity of the areas and further downstream. Additionally, given the potential presence of the federally endangered Indiana bat (Myotis sodalist) in the affected counties, surveys and potential mitigation would be required if a replacement would have to be completed in order to offset any impacts to the species if forested areas adjacent to the ROW would have to be cleared for workspaces. Temporary impacts to the waterbodies and wetlands traversed by Area 3 would also be incurred by a pipeline replacement. Columbia Gas contends that the increased environmental impacts can be mitigated and greater benefits would occur should PHMSA grant the special permit with conditions, which would likely include enhanced integrity assessment for the entire special permit inspection area. 6.0 References Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2006. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM): Lawrence County, Ohio and Incorporated Areas. Map Number 39087C0366D: Panel 366 of 406. Effective Date: March 16, 2006. Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. 2013. Wildlife Action Plan: Appendix 1.11 Description of Level III and Level IV Ecoregions of Kentucky. http://fw.ky.gov/WAP/documents/1.11%20Ecoregions%20of%20Kentucky.pdf Accessed on August 18, 2014. 18#
Page 24Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2014. Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Accessed August 13, 2014. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). n.d. Guidance for Special Permit Applications on Providing Environmental Information. United States Census Bureau (USCB). 2010. State and County Quick Facts. Available online: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html. Accessed August 12, 2014. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2011. National Land Cover Database. Land Use/Land Cover Data. ______. 1998. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1998 Soil Survey of Lawrence County, Ohio. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA NRCS). 2014. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. Available online. Accessed August 19, 2014. United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs. 2010. Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible To Receive Services From the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 190. United States Department of Transportation (USDOT). 2014. Scenic Roads. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/byways/, accessed August 17, 2014. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2012. Ecoregions of Indiana and Ohio. http://www.epa.gov/wed/pages/ecoregions/ohin_eco.htm, accessed August 14, 2014. ______. 2014. Ohio Nonattainment/Maintenance Status for Each County by Year for All Criteria Pollutants. Revised July 2, 2014. http://www.epa.gov/airquality/greenbk/anayo_oh.html United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2008. “US Seismic-Hazard Maps for the Conterminous United States.” Last revised: August 14, 2012. Available at: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/apps/map. Accessed on August 15, 2014. ______. 2011. Combined Geologic Map data for the Conterminous US. http://tin.er.usgs.gov/geology/state/ accessed on August 13, 2014. ______. 2012. Mineral Resources Geologic Maps. http://mrdata.usgs.gov/mrds/, accessed August 13, 2012. ______. 2013. Earthquake Hazards Program. http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/shakemap/, accessed August 18, 2014. 19#
Page 25Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Woods, Alan, James Omernik, and Douglas Brown. 1999. Level III and IV Ecoregions of Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. USEPA. 20#
Page 26Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Appendix A Figures#
Page 27Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_project_location.mxd Date: 8/19/2014 Area - 3 Lawrence County, Ohio Area - 2 Lawrence County, Ohio Ohio Area - 1 Lawrence County, Ohio 500 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Figure 1 Project Location Special Permit Segment Columbia Gas Pipeline System Source- NiSource 2014, NatGeo 2014, USGS/ESRI 2014 Jackson to Burlington Lawrence County, Ohio#
Page 28Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_aerial_area1.mxd Date: 8/19/2014 Lawrence Area 1 Wayne US-52 25 0 50 100 Feet Figure 2a Area 1 Aerial Imagery Special Permit Segment Columbia Gas Pipeline System Source- NiSource 2014, ESRI 2012 Jackson to Burlington Lawrence County, Ohio#
Page 29Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_aerial_area2.mxd Lewis Fork Rd 25 0 50 100 Feet Special Permit Segment Columbia Gas Pipeline System Source- NiSource 2014, ESRI 2012 Date: 8/19/2014 Area 2 Lawrence Wayne Figure 2b Area 2 Aerial Imagery Jackson to Burlington Lawrence County, Ohio#
Page 30Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_aerial_area3.mxd Lewis Fork Rd 100 0 200 400 Feet Special Permit Segment Columbia Gas Pipeline System Source- NiSource 2014, ESRI 2012 Date: 8/19/2014 Area 3 Lawrence Wayne Figure 2c Area 3 Aerial Imagery Jackson to Burlington Lawrence County, Ohio#
Page 31Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_lulc.mxd Area 3 Lawrence County, Ohio Area 2 Lawrence County, Ohio Area 1 Lawrence County, Ohio 1,000 0 2,000 4,000 Feet Special Permit Segment Barren Land Columbia Gas Pipeline System Cultivated Crops Deciduous Forest Developed, Open Space Developed, Low Intensity Developed, Medium Intensity Developed, High Intensity Emergent Herbaceuous Wetlands Evergreen Forest Hay/Pasture Herbaceuous Mixed Forest Open Water Shrub/Scrub Woody Wetlands Source- NiSource 2014, USDA 2011 Date: 8/19/2014 Figure 3 Land Use/Land Cover Jackson to Burlington LawrenceCounty, Ohio#
Page 32Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_rec.mxd Date: 8/21/2014 Area - 3 Lawrence County, Ohio Area - 2 Lawrence County, Ohio Area - 1 Lawrence County, Ohio Ohio River Scenic Byway 500 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Figure 4 Recreational Opportunities Special Permit Segment Columbia Gas Pipeline System Scenic Byway /Highway Surface Waterbody Source- NiSource 2014, USDOT 2014, ESRI 2014 Jackson to Burlington Lawrence County, Ohio#
Page 33Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_soils.mxd Date: 8/21/2014 SbD SaB LhD No Ps LaD WaB Ps WaB Ps WmB LaD SaB Ps WaB Ps EmB LaD Ps EkB WmB WeA WmB WmB WaB LaD SaB EkE EmB WmC2 EmB EmB W SaB EkE UsB 500 0 1,000 2,000 Feet UgD UgD UgD VaD3 VaD3 SsF UgF UgC KaB UgD KaB KaB Area 2 UgD UgD UgF KaC Lawrence County, Ohio Area 3 UgD SsF UgD KaC LaD UgD KaC WmB EkB KaB VaD3 EkB BdD UgD No EkE UgD UgD KaB Cg SsF KaB KaB KaB UgD KaB SsF UgD SsF KaB Lawrence County, Ohio KaB KaB UgD UgD KaB UgF UgD Area 1 Lawrence County, Ohio WeA Pe KaB EmB KaB WeA EmB KaC KaC Traversed Soils Figure 5 SSURGO Soils Special Permit Segment Columbia Gas Pipeline System All Areas are Prime Farmland Source- NiSource 2014, SSURGO and ESRI 2014 KaB - Kanawha silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes KaC - Kanawha silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes SsF - Steinsburg-Shelocta association, very steep Jackson to Burlington LawrenceCounty, Ohio#
Page 34Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_cultural.mxd Area 2 LawrenceCounty, Ohio 0.25 0 0.5 1 Miles Special Permit Segment Source- NiSource 2014, NRHP 2014, ESRI 2014 Columbia Gas Pipeline System National Register of Historic Places Area 3 LawrenceCounty, Ohio Area 1 LawrenceCounty, Ohio Date: 8/21/2014 Figure 6 Cultural Resources Jackson to Burlington LawrenceCounty, Ohio#
Page 35Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_ecoregion.mxd Area - 2 Lawrence County, Ohio 500 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Special Permit Segment Columbia Gas Pipeline System Source- NiSource 2014, EPA 2012, ESRI 2014 Monongahela Transition Zone Ohio/Kentucky Carboniferous Plateau Area - 3 Lawrence County, Ohio Date: 8/21/2014 Area - 1 Lawrence County, Ohio Figure 7 Ecoregions Jackson to Burlington Lawrence County, Ohio#
Page 36Date: 8/21/2014 Columbia Gas West Gallipolis Ferry 4-6 Transmission™ Portsmouth OHIO Portsmouth Shawnee State South Portsmouth Vhe elersburg 274 m. Ohio Fore st KENTUCKY Shultz Fore st i Area - 3 Lawrence County, Ohio GREENUP thington Fraziers Flat Ironton Bottom House Red Winfield Homet •Prong Lake State Greenbo «Bar Gun Ent Resort Par 68 LAWRENCE Scott Proctorville NitroA Huntington Barbe Alban: Saint OING Upp Hill 8-10 Area - 2 Fall Lawrence County, Ohio Area - 1 titc he ns-Ra Lawrence County, Ohio Rd Gray son Pons or 338m par State Wayne 380 m LINCOLN ELLIOTT rt Gay 353 mi • Burge Ro 320 mr Sandy Hook. 2.5 Miles Special Permit Segment % Ground Acceleration* 6-8 Figure 8 Columbia Gas Pipeline System 4-6 8-10 Seismic Hazard 2008, NatGeo 2014, ESRI 2014 Source- NiSource 2014, USGS *This laver displays probabilistic ground motion for year probability of exceedance. Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) with a 2% in 50 Lawrence County, Ohio Jackson to Burlington#
Page 37Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_geology.mxd Date: 8/21/2014 Area - 3 Lawrence County, Ohio Area - 2 Lawrence County, Ohio Area - 1 Lawrence County, Ohio 500 0 1,000 2,000 Feet Special Permit Segment Columbia Gas Pipeline System Source- NiSource 2014, USGS 2011, ESRI 2014 Unit Age, Primary & Secondary Rocktype Pennsylvanian - Shale - Siltstone Pennsylvanian - Siltstone - Shale Figure 9 Geology Pleistocene to Holocene - Sand - Silt Quaternary - Alluvium - Jackson to Burlington LawrenceCounty, Ohio#
Page 38Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_mineral_resources.mxd Armco Steel/ Ashland, Ky. - Unknown Jerrys Sand and Gravel Pit - Past Producer Area 2 LawrenceCounty, Ohio Ashland Oil/ Catlettsburg, Ky. - Status Unknown 0.25 0 0.5 1 Miles Special Permit Segment Columbia Gas Pipeline System Mineral Resources Source- NiSource 2014, USGS 2012, ESRI 2014 Area 3 LawrenceCounty, Ohio Area 1 LawrenceCounty, Ohio Burlington Pit - Past Producer Date: 8/21/2014 Figure 10 Mineral Resources Jackson to Burlington LawrenceCounty, Ohio#
Page 39Document Path: C:\VPN_WORK\active_projects\Columbia_Pipeline_Inspection\maps\mxds\report_figures\oh_water_resources.mxd 700 Area 3 Lawrence County, Ohio 800 k W illow Cre e 700 800 700 800 900 Soli d a Cree k 800 700 600 800 800 Area 2 Lawrence County, Ohio R2UBH O hio River 700 1,000 0 2,000 4,000 Feet Special Permit Segment Columbia Gas Pipeline System Source- NiSource 2014, USGS 2012 NHD, NWI, FEMA and ESRI 2014 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone Surface Waterbody Wetland Elevation Contour (100 foot interval) Elevation Contour (20 foot interval) Date: 8/21/2014 B uff a lo C r e ek Haines B ranch C h arley Cr e e k S andusky C reek Area 1 Lawrence County, Ohio 700 700 600 Ankrims Ru n 600 R2UBH Figure 11 Water Resources Jackson to Burlington LawrenceCounty, Ohio#
Page 40Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Appendix B Site Reconnaissance Report#
Page 41Site Reconnaissance Report Columbia Gas Transmission Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 Special Permit Segments August 13, 2014 Introduction On August 13, 2014, a field team consisting of two qualified biologists (Rebecca Dutton and Tiara Thanawastien) visited the PHMSA Special Permit Segments associated with Special Permit No. PHMSA- 2008-0345 to document environmental resources on or immediately adjacent to the areas. This was done as part of the effort to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the renewal of this special permit. Overall Site Description The Line R-701 natural gas transmission pipeline originates near Burlington, Ohio, and terminates near McArthur, Ohio. This special permit request involves three areas along the pipeline in Lawrence County, Ohio. Table 1 details the locations of each. Table 1. Special Permit Segment Areas Pipeline Description County, State Length (feet) Begin Station End Station MAOP Area 1 Line R-701 Route 52 Lawrence, OH 148 28+34 29+82 900 Area 2 Line R-701 Lewis Fork Road 1 Lawrence, OH 544 133+06 138+50 900 Area 3 Line R-701 Lewis Fork Road 2 Lawrence, OH 2,211 152+85 174+96 900 Site Characterization Area 1. Area 1 includes a 148-foot section of the Line R-701 pipeline. This area is located north of Burlington, Ohio, on the north side of the U.S. Highway 52. The area is a maintained herbaceous right-of-way (ROW) within a landscape consisting of shrubland, deciduous forest, and commercial development. The topography at Area 1 slopes to the southeast, with elevations ranging from 597 to 680 feet above National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) for mean sea level. Area 2. Area 2 includes a 544-foot section of the Line R-701 pipeline. This area is located approximately 1.3 miles northeast of South Point, Ohio, and along Lewis Fork Road. The area is a maintained herbaceous ROW within a landscape consisting entirely of residential landscape, and a small pasture. The topography is relatively flat with a few gently rolling hills, with elevations ranging from 596 to 614 feet above the NGVD for mean sea level. B-1#
Page 42Area 3. Area 3 includes a 2,211-foot section of the Line R-701 pipeline. This area is located approximately 1.5 miles northeast of South Point, Ohio, and along Lewis Fork Road. The area is a maintained herbaceous ROW within a landscape consisting mostly of residences, with adjacent deciduous forest. An Intermittent stream runs along the edge of the deciduous forest and crosses the ROW repeatedly. The stream is 4 feet wide, with bank height of 4 feet, and 12 feet wide from top of bank. Clear water was present flowing south. The intermittent stream has some fringe emergent wetland along its stream banks. The topography is gently rolling with one steep hill located in the center of Area 3, elevations range from 615 to 725 feet above NGVD for mean sea level. B-2#
Page 43Area 1. Photo number 100_0793/GPS point PH-017: Overview photo of right-of-way (ROW) in Area 1 facing west. Area 1. Photo number 100_0794/GPS point PH-018: Overview photo of ROW in Area 1 facing east. B-3#
Page 44Area 2. Photo number 100_0792/GPS point PH-016: Overview photo of ROW in Area 2 facing south. Area 3. Photo number 100_0786/GPS point PH-013: Overview photo of ROW in Area 3 facing south. B-4#
Page 45Area 3. Photo number 100_0787/GPS point SS-008-1: Intermittent stream facing south. Area 3. Photo number 100_0788/GPS point WW-008-1: Emergent wetland along stream SS-008 facing southeast. B-5#
Page 46Area 3. Photo number 100_0789/GPS point PH-014: Overview photo of ROW in Area 3 facing north. Area 3. Photo number 100_0790/GPS point PH-014: Overview photo of ROW in Area 3 facing south. B-6#
Page 47Area 3. Photo number 100_0791/GPS point PH-015: Overview photo of ROW in Area 3 facing north. B-7#
Page 48Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Appendix C Federal and State Protected Species#
Page 49Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Table C-1. Federal and State Protected Species Known to Occur in Lawrence County, Ohio Common Name Scientific Name Federal Listing State Listing Summary of Habitat Requirements Potential Habitat in the Vicinity of Project Areas Birds Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus - ST Peregrines traditionally nested on natural structures, mainly rock outcrops, and trees, but have adapted to bridges, towers, utility poles, skyscrapers, and even abandoned ships. The nesting sites, known as eyries, are usually located well above an open area to maximize the peregrine's aerial hunting success. Yes Mammals Indiana bat Myotis sodalis E SE Indiana bats hibernate during winter in caves or, occasionally, in abandoned mines. For hibernation, they require cool, humid caves with stable temperatures, under 50° F but above freezing. After hibernation, Indiana bats migrate to their summer habitat in forested areas where they roost under the loose tree bark of dead or dying trees. Indiana bats also forage in or along the edges of forested areas. Yes Bobcat Lynx rufus - ST Bobcat habitat varies widely from forests and mountainous areas to semi-deserts and brush land. A habitat dense with vegetation and lots of prey is ideal. Bobcats are excellent hunters, stalking prey with stealth and patience, then capturing their meals with one great leap. Usually solitary and territorial animals, females never share territory with each other. Male territories, however, tend to overlap. Yes Amphibians and Reptiles Green Salamander Aneides aeneus - SE The green salamander is most commonly found in damp crevices in shaded limestone or sandstone rocky outcrops. It may also be found in caves, under loose bark or logs in forests, or in the cracks of dead or standing trees at elevations between 460 and 4,400 feet. No Eastern Spadefoot Scaphiopus holbrookii - SE Spadefoot toads are extremely fossorial, spending most their life buried underground and are explosive breeders. Heavy rains, occurring at nearly any time of year, cause them to emerge in large numbers and congregate at breeding in wetlands or ephemeral pools created by the rain. This species prefers dry habitats with sandy soils but can be found in almost any habitat. Yes Mud Salamander Pseudotriton montanus - ST Mud salamanders seldom stray far from muddy, mucky habitats such as lowland seeps, wetlands, swampy pools, floodplain forests, and muddy streams. These salamanders are often found in burrows or under cover objects. No C- 1#
Page 50Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Table C-1. Federal and State Protected Species Known to Occur in Lawrence County, Ohio Common Name Scientific Name Federal Listing State Listing Summary of Habitat Requirements Potential Habitat in the Vicinity of Project Areas Fish Paddlefish Polyodon spathula - ST A freshwater fish (although capable of surviving in brackish water) that generally inhabits slow-flowing water of large rivers, usually at depths greater than 4.3 feet. Access to areas with sand or gravel bars is required during migratory breeding events. No Shortnose Gar Lepisosteus platostomus - SE The shortnose gar can be commonly found in many lakes, oxbows and other sluggish habitats, but may be somewhat better adapted for living in the main streams of large, muddy rivers, though it definitely prefers quiet sand or mud bottomed pools and backwaters. No Channel Darter Percina copelandi - ST In lakes, they are found in gravel and coarse sand beach areas. In large river systems, they are typically found in gravel and cobble shoals and riffles. In small- to medium-sized rivers, they are typically found in the riffles and pools. No Aquatic Invertebrates Ebonyshell Fusconaia ebenus - SE The ebonyshell mussel primarily inhabits large rivers in sand or gravel. They spend most of their lives buried in the bottom sediments of permanent water bodies, and often live in multi- species communities called mussel beds No Pink mucket Lampsilis abrupta E SE This mussel is found in mud and sand and in shallow riffles and shoals swept free of silt in major rivers and tributaries. This mussel buries itself in sand or gravel, with only the edge of its shell and its feeding siphons exposed. No Elephant-ear Elliptio crassidens - SE This species inhabits muddy sand, sand, and rocky substrates in moderate currents, and is also an inhabitant of channels. Most common in large creeks to rivers with moderate to swift currents primarily on sand and limestone or rock substrates. No Pocketbook Lampsilis ovata - SE This species is found big rivers at depths of 15 to 20 feet and in small streams in less than two feet of water. The most suitable substrate consists of a mixture of gravel and coarse sand mixed with some silt or mud. No Black Sandshell Ligumia recta - ST The black sandshell is found in rivers, lakes, and large streams, usually in riffles or raceways with good current. Substrates it inhabits include sandy mud, firm sand, or gravel. No Washboard Megalonaias nervosa - SE The washboard is typically a large river species, inhabiting the main channel areas of a stream. Suitable habitat consists of slow current areas with substrates composed of sand, gravel, or mud. No C- 2#
Page 51Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Table C-1. Federal and State Protected Species Known to Occur in Lawrence County, Ohio Common Name Scientific Name Federal Listing State Listing Summary of Habitat Requirements Potential Habitat in the Vicinity of Project Areas Threehorn Wartyback Obliquaria reflexa - ST The three-horn wartyback is found in medium to large rivers. Substrates it inhabits include gravel, gravel-sand, or gravel-mud, with moderate current. No Sheepnose Plethobasus cyphyus E SE The sheepnose has historically inhabited large rivers such as the Mississippi, Ohio, and Tennessee. Suitable substrates for this species are sand and gravel in water depths up to 15 ft. No Ohio Pigtoe Pleurobema cordatum - SE The Ohio pigtoe is generally found in large to medium-sized rivers and prefers habitats with mud, sand, gravel or cobble substrates. The Ohio pigtoe is usually found within the first few miles of the river upstream of its mouth No Monkeyface Quadrula metanevra - SE Monkeyface are found in habitats dominated by stable substrates in water over 6.6 feet deep. They spend most of their lives buried in the bottom sediments of permanent water bodies, and often live in multi-species communities called mussel beds. No Little Spectaclecase Villosa lienosa - SE The Little Spectaclecase is typically found in sand or gravel substrate adjacent to flow refugia such as stream banks or in association with stable, entrained woody debris. No Plants Bushy Broom-sedge Andropogon glomeratus - SE Moist areas and early successional openings in full sun. Yes Blunt-leaved Milkweed Asclepias amplexicaulis - SP Open, dry, chiefly sandy or gravelly soils in fields, prairies, old sand dunes, meadows and pastures. Yes White Milkweed Asclepias variegata - SP Sandy or rocky soil in moist or dry upland woods, thickets and wooded roadsides Yes Sparse-lobed Grape Fern Botrychium biternatum - SE A variety of moist, shaded situations; low woods, mesic ravines, wooded floodplains, thickets. Yes Pale Straw Sedge Carex albolutescens - SP A variety of wet, open situations, often in sandy soil; fields, borders, ditches, clearings, fens, prairies, bogs. Yes Reznicek's Sedge Carex reznicekii - SE Dry woods on sandy soils Yes Lined Sedge Carex striatula - SE Mesic woods; shaded alluvial situations Yes Fringe-tree Chionanthus virginicus - SP A variety of dry to mesic situations in both openings and wooded areas on calcareous to acidic soils. It grows and flowers best in open areas, however. Yes Carolina Thistle Cirsium carolinianum - ST Dry, open to semi-open situations, usually in acid, often sandy, soil: upland woods, bluffs, ravines, and thickets. Yes Butterfly-pea Clitoria mariana - SP In open to semi-open situations in dry to moist soil: upland woods, borders of prairie openings, and barrens. Yes Spring Coral-root Corallorhiza wisteriana - SP In semi-shade in a variety of mesic deciduous woods. Yes C- 3#
Page 52Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Table C-1. Federal and State Protected Species Known to Occur in Lawrence County, Ohio Common Name Scientific Name Federal Listing State Listing Summary of Habitat Requirements Potential Habitat in the Vicinity of Project Areas Dwarf Hawthorn Crataegus uniflora - SP In full sun in well-drained openings, usually on calcareous substrates. Yes Cuspidate Dodder Cuscuta cuspidata - SE Growing on Aster spp. and other hosts in openings along creeks and streams. Yes Five-angled Dodder Cuscuta pentagona - ST In full sun in a variety of dry situations. Yes Reflexed Umbrella- sedge Cyperus refractus - SE A variety of open, dry situations, usually in sandy soil; fields, open woods, clearings, barrens. Yes Tennessee Bladder Fern Cystopteris tennesseensis - SP Calcareous sandstone and shale, limestone and dolomite outcroppings. Yes Northern Panic Grass Dichanthelium boreale - SP Open woods, fields, shores. Usually on damp, acid (pH 5-6) soils, but it can also be found in dry woods. Yes Villous Panic Grass Dichanthelium villosissimum - ST Dry soil in a variety of habitats; open woods, openings, dunes. Yes Spotted Panic Grass Dichanthelium yadkinense - SP Moist soil in a variety of habitats, including rich woods, bottomlands, thickets, swamps. No Little Whitlow-grass Draba brachycarpa - SE Dry, open situations, usually in sandy soil: fields, pastures, open woods, roadsides, and waste ground. Yes Rattlesnake-master Eryngium yuccifolium - SP A variety of moist or dry, open situations; usually in sandy soil, occasionally in acid clays, also in limey soils; open woods, thickets, prairies, bogs, savannas, and dry banks. No Pink Thoroughwort Fleischmannia incarnata - SP In Ohio, most material has been collected on a variety of well- drained acidic soils in open areas. Most manuals list moist woods as a habitat type, but this is apparently not the situation in southeastern Ohio. No Sampson's Snakeroot Gentiana villosa - SE Mesic woodlands, pinelands, dry ravines, and roadsides. Yes Round-fruited Hedge-hyssop Gratiola virginiana - ST Wet places of many types: stream margins, pools, ditches, swamps; generally in shade or semi-shade. Yes Mud-plantain Heteranthera reniformis - SE Submersed or floating in ponds, ditches or rivers, or creeping on their muddy margins. No Small-flowered Alum-root Heuchera parviflora - ST In Ohio, this species appears to be confined to moist, shaded to semi-shaded sandstone exposures, either directly on the rock face or in soil directly adjacent to the rock. No Hairy Alum-root Heuchera villosa - SE In Ohio, this species is known to grow on both sandstone and dolomite exposures, either directly on the rock face or in soil directly adjacent to the rock. It is generally found on moist shaded rocks, but is also known to grow in drier open exposures. No C- 4#
Page 53Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Table C-1. Federal and State Protected Species Known to Occur in Lawrence County, Ohio Common Name Scientific Name Federal Listing State Listing Summary of Habitat Requirements Potential Habitat in the Vicinity of Project Areas Crested Coral-root Hexalectris spicata - SP In semi-shade in well-drained woodlands, often in mixed oak communities; has been reported both from acid and alkaline soils. Yes Dwarf Iris Iris verna - ST Oak woods and openings of ridgetops in well-drained, acidic soils. Yes Krigia virginica Virginia Dwarf- dandelion Ligusticum canadense - ST Dry, open to semi-open situations, usually in acid, sandy soil: open woods, prairie remnants, dunes, meadows, and fallow fields. Yes Hairy Tall Lettuce Lactuca hirsuta - ST Dry open woods, woodland clearings, and fields Yes Wild Pea Lathyrus venosus - SE In dry sandy soil in open upland woods and prairies. Yes American Lovage - SE A variety of mesic woods and ravines; occasionally in drier oak woods. Yes Green Adder's- mouth Malaxis unifolia - SP In acid humus of a variety of forest communities, including, but not limited to, oak-pine, oak-hickory, mixed mesophytic, and beech- hemlock; tolerant of deep shade. No Common Prickly Pear Opuntia humifusa - SP In full sun on well-drained soils; rocks, sand barrens, sandy fields and hillsides. Yes Balsam Squaw-weed Packera paupercula - ST Usually on calcareous soils; especially cliffs, quarries and rocky shores near Lake Erie. No Riverbank Paspalum Paspalum repens - ST Shallow water or wet muddy soils; margins of temporary pools, riverbanks and riverine woodlands Yes Maypop Passiflora incarnata - SP In dry soils in usually open situations: open woods, thickets, rocky open riverbanks; also fields, roadsides, and railroad banks. Yes Gray Beard-tongue Penstemon canescens - ST Dry open fields and roadsides. Yes Downy White Beard- tongue Penstemon pallidus - ST Fields, roadsides, and open woods. Yes Blue Scorpion-weed Phacelia covillei - SE In sun or semi-shade in a variety of moist or well-drained woods and thickets. Yes Wild Kidney Bean Phaseolus polystachios - SP Dry to moist open woods and thickets; roadside banks. Yes Black-seeded Needle Grass Piptochaetium avenaceum - SE Dry grasslands, forests, savannas, and outcrops Yes Little Gray Polypody Pleopeltis polypodioides - ST In a variety of periodically moist situations in sun or shade; in much of its range it is epiphytic on tree branches; walls, rock exposures, roadbanks; usually on calcareous or neutral substrates. All known Ohio populations are on dolomite or sandstone. No Spanish Oak Quercus falcata - ST Usually in dry upland woods, less frequently in alluvial woods. Yes Blackjack Oak Quercus marilandica - SP On dry, sterile, usually sandy soil in open upland woods and barrens. Yes C- 5#
Page 54Burlington to Jackson PHMSA-2008-0345 DRAFT Environmental Assessment August 2014 Table C-1. Federal and State Protected Species Known to Occur in Lawrence County, Ohio Common Name Scientific Name Federal Listing State Listing Summary of Habitat Requirements Potential Habitat in the Vicinity of Project Areas Pinxter-flower Rhododendron periclymenoides - ST A variety of areas on acidic soils in full sun to moderate shade, including oak woods, woods borders, shrub borders of bogs. Yes Tubercled Nut-rush Scleria oligantha - SP A variety of open habitats in sun or semi-shade on calcareous substrates; fields, prairies, and woodland openings. Yes Tall Nut-rush Scleria triglomerata - SP A variety of dry to moist, open habitats in sandy soils. Yes Rock Skullcap Scutellaria saxatilis - ST In semi-shade; most Ohio collections are from dry woods; occasionally in moist areas along streams. Yes Virginia-mallow Sida hermaphrodita - SP Open to semi-open disturbed situations in sandy soils along rivers. All of the southern Ohio plants grow either along or very near the bank of the Ohio River. No Compass-plant Silphium laciniatum - SE In full sun on well-drained, clay or calcareous substrates: pastures, dry prairies, railroad embankments. The Ohio population occurs on a steep, grazed slope subject to landslips. Yes Sweet Goldenrod Solidago odora - ST It occurs in sandhills, open xeric hammocks, and similar thin dry woodlands, as well as on oldfields and disturbed sites. Yes False Goldenrod Solidago sphacelata - SE Open woods and rocky slopes, often on calcareous shale; full sun to semi-shade. Yes Smooth Buttonweed Spermacoce glabra - SP Swamps, wet woods and openings; in Ohio found mostly on muddy shores and low banks of the Ohio River. No Feather-bells Stenanthium gramineum - SP Moist rocky woods, rich wooded slopes; most frequent on acid soils. Yes Running Buffalo Clover Trifolium stoloniferum E SE Mesic habitats with partial to filtered sunlight including woodlands and mowed lawns Yes Yellow Crown-beard Verbesina occidentalis - SE A variety of open to semi-open situations, often in disturbed areas: open woods, woods borders, thickets, clearings, pastures, fields, roadsides, and waste ground. Yes Key: E – Federally Listed Endangered T – Federally Listed Threatened SE – State Listed Endangered ST – State Listed Threatened SP – State Listed Potentially Threatened C- 6#
This material provides agency context. It does not replace binding regulatory text, and its legal effect depends on the underlying authority and facts.