2.1 Overview of the Proposed Project - Keystone XL pipeline - US ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact StatementKeystone XL ProjectThis Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Supplemental EIS) also describes andaddresses the impacts of three actions, which are separate from the proposed Project and not partof the Presidential Permit application submitted by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP(Keystone). Those actions have been determined to be connected actions for the purposes of thisreview, consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) as defined by Title 40 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 1508.25(a)(1) and are described in Section 2.1.12,Connected Actions.2.1.1 Pipeline RouteThe proposed Project would extend from an oil supply hub near Hardisty, Alberta, Canada, andextend to the U.S. border pursuant to an alignment that has been approved by the Government ofCanada. The proposed 875-mile-long pipeline route in the United States that is the subject of thisSupplemental EIS is similar to the original Steele City Segment evaluated in the August 2011Keystone XL Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) in that it would enter theUnited States near Morgan, Montana; traverse Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska; andterminate at a delivery point at Steele City, Nebraska (see Figure 2.0-1).The proposed Projectroute in Montana and South Dakota is largely unchanged from that presented in the Final EISexcept for relatively minor route modifications to improve constructability and in response toagency and landowner comments (see Table 2.1-2).Table 2.1-2BeginMPPipeline Route ModificationsEndMPBaseRouteLength(Miles)RerouteLength(Miles)MaximumPerpendicularDistance fromCenter Line(Feet) Reason for Route Change aCountyMontanaPhillips 25.17 25.67 0.54 0.51 229 To accommodate an HDD throughFrenchman Creek as opposed to the originalopen-cut method.McCone 108.10 110.31 2.19 2.21 209 To avoid paralleling a creek and to eliminatetwo creek crossings.South DakotaHarding 296.22 297.72 1.46 1.49 2,307 To avoid constructability issues (roughterrain, large hill, multiple drop-offs, side hillconstruction, etc.) and future pipelineintegrity issues. Landowner prefers this moresoutherly route.Harding 315.09 315.75 0.66 0.67 260 To shift CL and TWA away from a sideslope and avoid difficult construction andrestoration.Harding 331.94 332.92 0.97 0.99 356 To avoid crossing drainage multiple times, toavoid paralleling drainage, and to avoid onedrainage entirely.Harding 350.84 351.58 .073 0.74 370 To shift CL and TWA away from a pond.Harding 354.62 355.27 0.64 0.65 313 To avoid approximately 350 feet of difficultterrain features.Butte/Perkins361.76 362.44 0.67 0.68 251 To avoid a hill finger that would requireadditional soil handling and TWA.Project Description 2.1-2 March 2013
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact StatementKeystone XL ProjectBaseRouteLength(Miles)RerouteLength(Miles)MaximumPerpendicularDistance fromCenter Line(Feet) Reason for Route Change aHaakonCountyBeginMPEndMPPerkins 366.31 366.82 0.49 0.51 234 To avoid multiple creek crossings. Wouldalso eliminate two of the three current creekcrossings.Perkins 370.18 370.82 0.59 0.64 701 To shift CL and TWA away from a potentialunmarked grave site and to a moreconstructible creek crossing locale.Meade 380.56 381.20 0.64 0.65 214 To avoid laying pipeline along drainagefeature and eliminate one of the two currentcreek crossings.Meade 388.26 388.90 0.62 0.64 244 To avoid a well and levee.Meade 398.24 400.78 2.55 2.54 733 To avoid multiple stream crossings and moredifficult construction.Meade 424.03 426.52 2.44 2.50 2,225 To shift CL and TWA to avoid ridgelines,rough terrain, and drop-offs, and eliminatethe one HDD.Meade/ 426.83 436.12 9.00 9.29 1,980 To avoid ridgelines, rough terrain, and dropoffs,and eliminate two HDDs. Also toimprove the current HDD crossing locationof the Cheyenne River and straighten theroute to allow the use of HDD at twolocations south of the Cheyenne Rivercrossing.Haakon 447.16 448.77 1.59 1.61 788 To avoid a creek crossing that is too close toa road and to avoid impacting a wetland areaand tree removal.Haakon 449.61 450.13 0.51 0.52 270 To avoid laying pipeline along a drainagefeature.Haakon 452.01 453.00 0.98 0.99 343 To relocate the CL crossing at Highway 73 toa narrower area of state-road ROW, reducethe crossing length, and avoid steep slopes athighway’s edge. Also relocates the pipelineaway from the side slope of a meanderingwaterbody.Haakon 455.22 456.75 1.56 1.53 635 To eliminate a PI and straighten the route.Haakon 461.83 462.26 0.45 0.43 315 To eliminate a PI and straighten the line,place MLV-19A on higher ground, and moveCL/TWA away from an existing culvertsouth of current CL.Haakon 475.48 477.77 2.27 2.29 630 To avoid difficult construction and save costof reclamation by avoiding routing along adrainage feature and have a better crossinglocation at a creek. Also avoids three creekcrossings and moves CL away from a pond.Project Description 2.1-3 March 2013
Page 1: Draft Supplemental Environmental Im
Page 5 and 6: Draft Supplemental Environmental Im
Page 23: Draft Supplemental Environmental Im
Page 52 and 53:
Draft Supplemental Environmental Im
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88:
show all

2.1 Overview of the Proposed Project - Keystone XL pipeline - US ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?