Revegetation - OSM Technology Transfer - Office of Surface Mining

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2000 Billings Land Reclamation Symposium STATUS OF LAND CAPABILITY BASED PIPELINE RECLAMATION ASSESSMENT IN ALBERTA A.W. Fedkenheuer ABSTRACT Pipelines in Alberta, Canada, require a reclamation certificate be issued for them by the Alberta government upon abandonment in order for the operator to no longer be liable for further reclamation on the right-of-way. The only current exception may be for lines that are "plowed-in". For a reclamation certificate to be issued the right-of-way must be deemed to have land capability equivalent to that which existed prior to the area being disturbed for the pipeline. This requires a judgement by Alberta Environment personnel. Much discussion has taken place over time on the issue of what should be assessed and how it should be assessed. This paper discusses the work of a group of oil and gas industry and government personnel, along with non-oil and gas members, to develop an acceptable system for assessing the reclamation status of a pipeline right-of-way. The process and technical portions of the work, as well as the current status of the work is presented. ________________________ ALCLA Native Plant Restoration Inc., 3208 Bearspaw Drive N.W., Calgary, Alberta T2L 1T2
INTRODUCTION Concern about the environmental impacts from construction of pipelines has brought legislation governing their construction, operation and decommissioning even though most people are not aware of the presence of pipelines. They are generally buried and rarely are seen as the soil over them continues to support pre-disturbance activities such as agriculture, forestry and wildlife habitat. Within Alberta there was no legislated requirement for the reclamation of disturbed lands prior to 1963 when the Surface Reclamation Act was proclaimed (Brocke 1988). Ten years later, in 1973, the Land Surface Conservation and Reclamation Act was proclaimed. This new Act required that environmental protection and reclamation be part of the development planning (Landsburg and Fedkenheuer 1990). A review and approval system that included Environmental Impact Assessments and Development and Reclamation Approvals was subsequently implemented. Regulatory changes were made in 1983 and again in 1993 with the passage of the Alberta “Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act” (Alberta Environmental Protection 1994). The 1993 legislation contained a requirement to return land disturbed by pipeline construction to an equivalent land capability at the time of abandonment. Equivalent land capability is currently defined as, “The ability of the land to support various land uses after reclamation is similar to the ability that existed prior to any activity being conducted on the land, but that the individual land uses will not necessarily be identical” (Powter 1998). The requirement to have equivalent land capability at the time of application for a reclamation certificate brought the need to be able to measure equivalent land capability. Some documentation is required to enable the regulator to acknowledge that the area is suitably reclaimed and to release the proponent from further reclamation liability, as well as to assure the public that a suitable reclamation job has been done. This documentation has been difficult to obtain agreement on and it has been the subject of much discussion since the mid-1980s. The definition of reclamation success and how to measure it was the topic of a workshop in 1992 (Mahnic and Toogood 1992). Following the workshop, focus shifted to oil and gas wellsite reclamation criteria development for several years where a parameter based checklist was developed and used. For these areas, specific individual parameters are compared on and off the wellsite and each must pass or the site fails. There has been a desire by some to utilize this system for pipelines as well. Others have suggested using a capability rating system such as has been used in agriculture for many years. It is recognized that some modifications may be required to either system if they are to be applied to pipelines. In 1996, NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) offered to take the lead in working to develop a land capability rating system to demonstrate what it might contain and how it might work for pipeline reclamation assessment. This paper addresses the approach, the results, and the current status of the approach.
Page 1 and 2: 2000 Billings Land Reclamation Symp
Page 3 and 4: ock layers, the topography of the r
Page 5 and 6: Table 1. Comparision of Reference A
Page 7 and 8: generally greater on the revegetate
Page 9 and 10: growing season. Low and high precip
Page 11 and 12: Table 2. Comparison of Vegetation P
Page 13 and 14: REFERENCES CEC. 1998. Coors Energy
Page 17 and 18: METHODS Six mining companies submit
Page 19 and 20: NRCS derived standard. The NRCS der
Page 21 and 22: SUMMARY Production, diversity and s
Page 23 and 24: SUCCESSFUL RECLAMATION TECHNIQUES A
Page 25 and 26: May, 24, 1975 (LQD Rules and Regula
Page 27 and 28: Bond release requirements for the R
Page 29 and 30: The bond release area blended well
Page 31 and 32: y the planting of the native seed m
Page 33 and 34: References Final bond release crite
Page 35 and 36: It is familiar that many succession
Page 37: soils of the NA and PCT areas (Tabl
Page 40: In the SMT and NA areas, the correl
Page 43 and 44: All the grasses performed better on
Page 45 and 46: We believe that our findings relati
Page 47: for the life spans of the dominant
Page 51 and 52: Following agreement on the systems
Page 53 and 54: land with respect to whether it is
Page 55 and 56: Environmental Concerns in Rights-of
Page 57 and 58: INTRODUCTION North Dakota enacted i
Page 59 and 60: eality by lessening the impact of a
Page 61 and 62: compared to show the relationship o
Page 63 and 64: the last quarter of the 19 th Centu
Page 65 and 66: DISCUSSION The PDSI has several adv
Page 67 and 68: Mock, C. J. 1991. Drought and preci
Page 71 and 72: size delineation is approximately t
Page 73 and 74: Table 1. Comparison of Williams & B
Page 75 and 76: least 2 of the 3 years that product
Page 79 and 80: This reclaimed mineland study was d
Page 81 and 82: surface traffic which followed the
Page 83 and 84: Another factor that may have contri
Page 85 and 86: since the plots were only fertilize
Page 89 and 90: successive pit is then placed on to
Page 91 and 92: gave the trees moisture retaining s
Page 93 and 94: INTRODUCTION While numerous studies
Page 95 and 96: In desert ecosystems of North Ameri
Page 97 and 98: Physically, the reconstructed soil
Page 99 and 100:
small percentage of inhibitory soil
Page 101 and 102:
INTRODUCTION In order to address co
Page 103 and 104:
areas by soil depth were also gathe
Page 105:
T52N Powder River Coal- Rawhide T50
Page 108 and 109:
Table 2. Study Area Compared to Bre
Page 110 and 111:
2000 Billings Land Reclamation Symp
Page 112 and 113:
STUDY AREA The study area is Seneca
Page 114 and 115:
Plant competition did not significa
Page 116 and 117:
Tilman, D. and D. Wedin. 1991. “D
Page 118 and 119:
INTRODUCTION The Montana Strip and
Page 120 and 121:
livestock. The environmental charac
Page 122 and 123:
In Montana, as well as much of the
Page 124 and 125:
REFERENCES Econ, Inc. 1983. Vegetat
Page 126 and 127:
INTRODUCTION In 1996, owners of a s
Page 128 and 129:
Table 1. Physical and chemical char
Page 130 and 131:
surface soils collected from both b
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
The Book Cliffs lie within the Pric
Page 136 and 137:
Rock Outcrop Rubbleland Topsoil Sto
Page 138 and 139:
pinyon/juniper, Douglas fir/Rocky M
Page 140 and 141:
Construction and Reclamation Sequen
Page 142 and 143:
LEGEND: Cap Layer Material Excess I
Page 144 and 145:
Step 7: LEGEND: Cap Layer Material
Page 146 and 147:
A North Slope Rock, rubble Sideslop
Page 148 and 149:
Approximate Original Contour Restor
Page 150 and 151:
Regulatory Concerns with the Experi
Page 152 and 153:
Nyenhuis, J. H. 1997. Soil resource
Page 154 and 155:
INTRODUCTION Management of soils on
Page 156 and 157:
Soil samples were collected from th
Page 159 and 160:
situ soil. Data from the Irigaray R
Page 162 and 163:
The data on soil microbial biomass
Page 164 and 165:
Page 167 and 168:
Coal Basin is characterized by uniq
Page 169 and 170:
A problem developed the summer foll
Page 171 and 172:
delivered to the DMG over one thous
Page 173 and 174:
A variety of containerized shrubs (
Page 175 and 176:
TABLE 3. OUTSLOPE SEED MIXTURE SPEC
Page 177 and 178:
INTRODUCTION Hard rock mines in the
Page 179 and 180:
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Coversoil an
Page 181 and 182:
Table 2. Effect of coversoil thickn
Page 183 and 184:
Brady, Nyle C. and R.R. Weil. 1996.
Page 185 and 186:
2000 Billings Land Symposium SUCCES
Page 187 and 188:
Traditional approaches to revegetat
Page 189 and 190:
Table 1. Survival and mean vigor ra
Page 191 and 192:
Survival (%) 100 80 60 40 20 0 �
Page 193 and 194:
Seven planting sites were evaluated
Page 195 and 196:
Table 5. Summary survival and parti
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
SPECIES SELECTION Once the NPS made
Page 201 and 202:
There is some question as to how mu
Page 203 and 204:
Restoration within Yellowstone and
Page 205 and 206:
Altitude Revegetation Workshop, No.
Page 207 and 208:
INTRODUCTION The legacy of Montana
Page 209 and 210:
METHODS AND MATERIALS The project d
Page 211 and 212:
elt seeder based on a seeding rate
Page 213 and 214:
Table 2. Anaconda Initial Evaluatio
Page 215 and 216:
Planting begins with seedbed prepar
Page 217 and 218:
REFERENCES Bradshaw, A.D.; McNeilly
show all

Revegetation - OSM Technology Transfer - Office of Surface Mining

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

Delete template?

Save as template?