And now:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 11:25:54 -0700
To: "Wild Rockies Alerts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Wild Rockies InfoNet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: A PIPELINE RUNS THROUGH IT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

From: "Judi Brawer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

A PIPELINE RUNS THROUGH IT

The proposed re-route of the Yellowstone Pipeline (YPL) threatens water quality, 
native fish, wetlands, old growth, roadless areas and wildlife.  Comments are due on 
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on Monday, November 22.  The proposal 
consists of two related actions:

1. Granting of a Special-Use Permit for the Yellowstone Pipeline Company for the 
construction and operation of a new pipeline segment between Missoula and Plains, 
Montana, to reconnect their Billings, Montana, to Moses Lake, Washington, YPL system.

2. Changes to the existing pipeline for renewal of a Special-Use Permit for a right 
-of-way easement across National Forest System lands between Missoula and Kingston, 
Idaho.

Why does YPL need to reconnect their pipeline?  Because the Confederated Salish and 
Kootenai Tribes kicked YPL off their land due to YPLs failure to clean-up spills that 
impacted water quality and native trout.

Why does YPL need changes to the existing pipeline for renewal of the permit?  Because 
the current pipeline is having chronic impacts on streams and fisheries habitat 
inconsistent with Forest Plans and the Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH).  Without 
changes, repairs and mitigation measures, the chronic damage will continue.

There are a total of six alternatives which propose different new routes and varied 
changes to the existing pipeline:

* The action proposed and favored by the Pipeline Company is the 67 mile Ninemile 
Valley East route that connects Missoula and Plains using a route following a portion 
of the Montana Rail Line Right of Way along Interstate 90 and through the eastern 
portion of the Ninemile valley.

* Two other alternatives impact the Ninemile valley, which contains significant 
wildlife and fisheries habitat.

* Another alternative follows I-90 all the way to Kingston Idaho, while another 
follows I-90 and then heads north at St. Regis to parallel the Clark Fork River and 
tie into the existing pipeline at Weeksville near Plains.

* Included is a "no action" alternative which would continue truck and rail transport 
of products between Missoula and Thompson Falls. The "no action" would also renew 
YPL's lease across National Forest Lands from Plains to Kingston without subjecting 
YPL to any new permit conditions.

The favored Ninemile East route requires:

* 71.2 miles of new pipe across almost 25 miles of federal land, 2 miles of state land 
and over forty miles of private land.

* 60 stream crossings, and the existing pipeline to be renewed has 104 stream 
crossings.

* Two major stream crossings on the Clark Fork River.  The pipeline to be renewed has 
5 existing stream crossings on the Clark Fork River and 20 crossings on the Coeur 
d'Alene river in Idaho.  The permit renewal proposal would eliminate 15 crossings of 
the Coeur d'Alene river.

* Over fifty miles of road reconstruction

POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND ISSUES

Wildlife:  Construction of the Right of Way (ROW) for the pipeline is similar to road 
construction, and would have similar impacts including habitat and migration corridor 
fragmentation and wildlife displacement.  The ROW would be maintained at 50 feet wide, 
clear of trees and brushy vegetation. Logging and soil disturbance are required to 
construct the ROW.  These impacts would be permanent and could severely fragment 
wildlife habitat, especially in portions of the undisturbed habitat in the Ninemile 
Valley.  In addition, the ROW may lead to increased and illegal off-road vehicle use.

* Potential significant impacts to wildlife from ROW construction and maintenance, 
spills, and clean-up activities include destruction of wolverine denning habitat, and 
removal of elk and lynx security habitat. The area of greatest sensitivity to impacts 
on the threatened gray wolves is along the Ninemile Valley East route.

* There is potential for the pipeline to result in a "take" on endangered, threatened 
or proposed species, or to lead to the listing of other wildlife species.  This is in 
violation of the Endangered Species Act.

* The pipeline may also impact hunting and wildlife viewing because of wildlife 
displacement, habitat and migration corridor fragmentation, and increased and illegal 
motorized use.

Wetlands:  Construction of any of the new pipeline routes could cause significant 
impacts on wetlands, including impacts from clearing of vegetation causing alteration 
of the wetland, creating conditions optimal for weed infestation, and increasing 
access to wetlands to livestock and other browsing wildlife.  Leaks and spills would 
have additional serious impacts.

Vegetation:  All of the routes through the Ninemile valley adversely affect whitebark 
pine stands, and all of the alternatives impact old growth forests.  This may have 
significant impacts on old growth-dependent wildlife species.

Roadless Areas:  Two of the routes proposed through the Ninemile Valley would impact 
Inventoried Roadless Areas on the Lolo National Forest.  The proposed alternative 
would cross 1.5 miles of the North Siegel Roadless Area and parallels it for another 
five miles, along a road.  Another route proposed across the Ninemile Divide would 
cross eight miles of the Stark Mountain Roadless Area.

Potential impacts include wildlife displacement during construction and maintenance, 
increased access by motorized vehicles that will illegally use the ROW as a road, and 
disruption of the natural integrity and solitude of the roadless area. In the Ninemile 
Divide alternative the ROW cuts through the very center of the roadless area.  This 
could, in fact, impact the viability of several roadless sections by segmenting them 
from the main roadless area.

Groundwater Quality:  There is a high density of water wells along the pipeline routes 
in the Missoula Valley.  The beginning of the new route between Missoula and Huson 
would cross the Missoula Aquifer, a sole source aquifer that serves the City of 
Missoula and other surrounding areas.  There are also water wells along other portions 
of the pipeline that may be impacted by spills or leakage.

Surface Water Quality:  Impacts to water quality include increased sedimentation and 
the discharge of chemical contaminants into streams from construction and maintenance 
activities, and potential leaks and spills.  The Forest Service claims that 
construction impacts can be reduced to non-significant levels through the use of 
mitigation measures.  Significant and unavoidable impacts may occur from spills.

* The new route will cross from 28 to 34 streams that have been evaluated as so 
impaired that they could not sustain any further impacts.

* Within the newly constructed pipeline route, the miles of streams at high risk from 
spills ranges from 140 miles to over 190 miles. The "no action" alternative, which 
would continue truck and rail transport of products, will result in 290-over 310 miles 
of stream at high risk from spills.

* Three of the alternatives would locate portions of the pipeline adjacent to sections 
of the Clark For River proposed by the Lolo National Forest as suitable for 
"Recreation River" designations under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

Fisheries:  All alternatives adversely affect bull trout (a threatened species) and 
westslope cutthroat trout (sensitive and petitioned for listing as a threatened 
species under the Endangered Species Act).  Potential impacts are from construction, 
operation and maintenance, leaks and accidental spills which may cause increased 
sedimentation, increased pollutants, and loss of protective streamside riparian 
habitat.

* The new route will cross between 61 to 77 westslope cutthroat trout streams, and 20 
to 30 bull trout streams.  These crossings will have potentially significant impacts 
to these streams.  This may result in a "take" of the bull trout, in violation of the 
Endangered Species Act.

* None of the new route alternatives comply with the Inland Native Fish Strategy 
(INFISH), which amended the Forest Plans for certain National Forests to provide 
additional protections for bull trout and other inland native fish such as westslope 
cutthroat trout from habitat degrading activities in riparian areas.  There will be 
direct and significant impacts on Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas and all of the 
alternatives will retard the attainment of Riparian Management Objectives.  None of 
the alternatives were developed to avoid these impacts and comply with INFISH.

* In addition, none of the proposed revisions to the existing pipeline permit were 
designed to comply with the Forest Plans as amended by INFISH.

SPILL RECORD

Dating back to 1954 when the pipeline was first permitted, the pipeline has had 78 
spills.  For 64 of these spills there is no record of any emergency response to 
clean-up these spills which leaked hundreds of thousands of gallons of gasoline, 
diesel, oil, fuel, and kerosene into soils and surface water.  In fact, there is 
evidence of slow, or no response by YPL to clean-up their spills.

OTHER ISSUES

Why address re-permitting the YPL only from Missoula, Montana to Kingston, Idaho?  Why 
not address all federal lands crossed by the YPL on its route from Billings, Montana 
to Moses Lake, Washington?

CONCLUSION

The proposed construction of a new YPL route and the re-permitting of a portion of the 
pipeline may cause significant environmental impacts.  In fact, none of the 
alternatives are viable because they do not comply with water quality and land 
management laws such as the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act and the 
National Forest Management Act.  The Forest Service needs to go back to the drawing 
board and develop a range of alternatives that complies with federal and state laws 
and that will not adversely impact water quality, native fish and wildlife species, 
roadless areas, old growth, wetlands, and recreation opportunities.

Send comments to:
Deborah Austin
Lolo Forest Supervisor
C/o CAET: YPL
200 E. Broadway
P.O. Box 7669
Missoula, MT  59807


************************************************************************
This list is a public service provided by WIN: http://www.wildrockies.org


Reprinted under the Fair Use http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html doctrine 
of international copyright law.
                  <><<<<<>>>>><><<<<>
           Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit)
                   http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/       
                  <><<<<<>>>>><><<<<>
                              

Reply via email to