200b JUN - I A 9: 55

L7b -07744 Routing Analysis Siloam Springs to Chambers Spring 161-kV Transmission Line Benton County, An employee-owned company

Document No. 060039 PBS&J Job No. 441634

ROUTINGANALYSIS SILOAM SPRINGS TO CHAMBERS SPRING 161-KV TRANSMISSIONLINE BENTONCOUNTY, ARKANSAS

Prepared for:

Southwestern Electric Power Company

Prepared by:

PBS&J 6504 Bridge Point Parkway Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78730

May 2006

Printed on recycled paper

6504 Bridge Point Parkway Austin, TX. 78730 Telephone 512.327.6840 Fax 512.327.2453 - www.pbsj.com Contents

Page

...... iv ...... iv Acronyms and Abbreviations ...... 1.O PROJECT DESCRIPTION...... 1 1 .I PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT...... 1 1.2 AGENCY ACTIONS ...... 1 2.0 METHODOLOGY...... 3 3.0 RESULTS ...... 4 3.1 LAND USE AND SOCIOECONOMICS ...... 3.2 GEOLOGIC RESOURCES ...... 5 3.2.1 Physiography and Topography ...... 5 3.2.2 Geology 3.2.3 Soil Associations ...... 3.3 VEGETATION...... 3.3.1 Water Resources ...... 3.3.2 Surface Waters ...... 3.3.3 Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands ...... 3.4 FEDERALLY LISTED ENDANGERED AND/OR THR HABITATS OF CONCERN ...... 12 3.4.1 Invertebrates ...... 12 3.4.2 Fish ...... 3.4.3 Birds ...... 14 3.4.4 Mammals ...... 14 3.4.5 Plants...... 15 3.5 CULTURAL HISTORY ...... 3.5.1 Prehistoric B 3.5.1.1 3.5.1.2 Archaic Period.. 3.5.1.3 3.5.1.4 3.5.2 HISTORIC 3.5.3 RESULTS OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW/RECORDS SEARCH 4.0 IMPACTS ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND REQUIREMENTS ...... 19 4.1 LAND USE IMPACTS ...... 19 4.1 .I Environmental Justice ...... 4.2 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO PHYSIOGRAPHY/GEOLO 4.3 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE U.S.,INCLUDING WETLANDS ...... 25 4.4 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO FEDERALLY LISTED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED ...... 27 4.4.1 Protected Migratory Bird Species ...... 28

441 6341060039 ii Contents

Page

4.5 IMPACTS ON CULTURAL RESOURCES...... 4.5.1 Site 3BE32 ...... 4.5.2 Site 3BE33 ...... 29 4.5.3 Additional Cultural Resources Sites within 1,000 feet of Proposed Right of Way ...... 29 4.6 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS ...... 30 5.0 REFERENCES ...... 30

... 441 6341060039 111 Contents

Figures

Page

1-1 Proposed Line Route ...... map pocket) 1-2 Delta Braced Post, Steel ...... 2-1 Environmental and Land-Use Constraints within the Study Area 3-1 Population Projections for Benton County and th 3-2 Labor Force and Unemployment Rates for Bent

Tables

Page

3-1 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Species of Possible Occurrence in Benton County, Arkansas...... 4-1 Environment Alt ...... 20 4-2 Type of Structure and Distance to ROW ......

441 634/060039 iv Acronyms and Abbreviations

ADE Arkansas Department of Education ADEQ Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality AGC Arkansas Geological Commission AGFC Arkansas Game and Fish Commission amsl above mean sea level ANHC Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission APSC Arkansas Public Service Commission BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics BOC US. Bureau of the Census CCN Certificate of Convenience and Necessity DWS Department of Workforce Services EJ Environmental Justice EO Executive Order EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act FAA Federal Aviation Administration FCC Federal Communications Commission FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service IEA Institute of Economic Advancement kV kilovolt MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MW megawatt NARPC Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission NO1 Notice of Intent NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NW Nationwide Permit ROW right of way scs Soil Conservation Service SH State Highway SWEPCO Southwestern Electric Power Company SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan UALR - Little Rock USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFS U.S. Forest Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey

441 634/060039 V 1.o PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Southwestern Electric Power Company (SWEPCO) is proposing to construct approximately 7.5 miles of 161-kilovolt (kV) transmission line from the existing Siloam Springs Substation to the existing Chambers Spring Substation in Benton County, Arkansas. Currently, there are four proposed routes (routes A-D), all of which generally extend southeast from the Siloam Springs Substation to the Chambers Spring Substation (Figure 1-1). The new 161-kV transmission line will be constructed using direct embedded, steel single-pole structures with delta configuration (Figure 1-2).

1 .I PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT

Benton County, as well as surrounding counties in northwest Arkansas, is growing rapidly as commercial and residential development continues in the area. Construction and operation of the proposed Siloam Springs to Chambers Spring 161-kV line in northwest Arkansas will help achieve diversification of generation sources.

1.2 AGENCY ACTIONS

This route analysis has been prepared by PBS&J in support of SWEPCO’s application for a Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) with the Arkansas Public Service Commission (APSC). This report is in support of the filing requirements as specified in Section 7 of the APSC Rules of Practice and Procedure. This report may also be used in support of any other local, state, or federal permitting requirements, if necessary. Some additional approvals that may be required for this project include:

Coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Little Rock District regarding permit requirements for impacts to USACE jurisdictional waters of the U.S. that might result from proposed construction.

Cultural Resources clearance will be obtained from the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program for the proposed project right of way (ROW).

Depending on the location of the transmission line structures, floodplain development permits and road crossing permits may be required by state and/or county entities.

A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required by the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and a Notice of Intent (NOI) will be required prior to initiation of construction.

Threatened and endangered species clearance will be required from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Ecological Services Field Office in Conway, Arkansas.

Construction documents, specifications, or other instructions will indicate any special construction measures needed to comply with the regulatory requirements listed above.

441 634/060039 1 E I I IS I 11- Ill- I II I I I I I

Engineering mj - Environmental Consulting * Surveying I Figure 1-2 DELTA BRACED POST, STEEL

Source, American Electric Power Company, Inc. I I \pro~ec1s\hcl\aep\441634\cad\f1gurel-2.a1

23 2.0 METHODOLOGY

The APSC recommends adherence to the following criteria for electric transmission line routing analyses:

Cost of the facility

Health and safety

Engineering and technical concerns

EcologicaVenvironmental disruption

Disruption to or interference with existing manmade property uses

Disruption to or interference with planned manmade property uses

Aesthetic displeasure

While this list is not all-inclusive, it does encompass what the APSC has traditionally and historically considered when reviewing routing analysis reports.

Various published and nonpublished references were used in the preparation of this assessment. Baseline research was conducted for a predetermined study area encompassing the four proposed routes to assess the presence of potential habitat for federally listed endangered and threatened species, waters of the U.S. (including wetlands), and other potential environmental constraints.

Study area land use types were identified using the Gallatin, Rhea, Siloam Springs, and Watts, Arkansas, US. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle maps, aerial photographs, additional published data sources, and field reconnaissance. Field reconnaissance consisted of a “windshield survey” from public road ROW within the study area. Data collected from aerial photography review and field reconnaissance included land use types, number and type of habitable structures (residential buildings, commercial structures, etc.), location and type of future developments, such as recently surveyed or platted residential areas, and ecological variables, such as type of vegetation within the study area.

Study area topography and hydrology were described using information taken from the corresponding USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle topographical maps, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps, and Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS, formerly the Soil Conservation Service [SCS]) climatic data.

Study area surface and bedrock geology was characterized using the Geologic Map of Arkansas (USGS, 1976). Project area soil associations were described using information taken from the Soil Survey of Benton County, Arkansas (SCS, 1977).

441 634/060039 3 Study area vegetation was characterized using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Ecoregions of Arkansas, Level 111 and 1V maps and vegetation characteristic summaries (Woods et al., 2004).

Potential waters of the U.S. were identified using corresponding USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle topographic maps, the Benton County, Arkansas, Soil Survey, and aerial photography.

Threatened and endangered species information was collected from lists and data maintained by the FWS, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission (AGFC), and Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission (ANHC), and U.S. Forest Service (USFS). Formal coordination with the FWS will be conducted following the selection of a preferred route and ROW field surveys.

RESULTS

3.1 LAND USE AND SOCIOECONOMICS

The study area is characterized by rolling hills dissected by the River and its tributaries. The incorporated city of Siloam Springs is located northwest of the study area, and the unincorporated community of Norwood is found near the center of the study area. Land use within the study area varies between agricultural land dominated by poultry and egg production and pastureland, as well as areas of low density, single-family residential homes. As the population continues to increase within and adjacent to the project vicinity, agricultural land is rapidly being converted to residential uses. Areas of recent development exist near the Siloam Springs Substation, the intersection of State Highway (SH) 16 and Old Norwood Church Road, as well as Fisher Ford Road.

One public Federal Aviation Administration- (FAA) registered airport, Smith Field Airport, is located approximately 2.8 miles east of Siloam Springs and north of the study area. One private non-FAA- registered airport, Williams Field Airport, is located approximately 5 miles southeast of Siloam Springs and near the center of the project vicinity. This facility is west of the community of Norwood, along Old Norwood Church Road. The Arkansas Baptist Assembly, located at 3600 South Lincoln (SH 59), is approximately % mile south of the Siloam Springs Substation. A review of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) website identified one AM radio station (KUOA) in the area, which broadcasts from Siloam Springs. Several other communication and cell towers were identified during field reconnaissance, mostly south of Siloam Springs, in the rapidly urbanizing area along Fisher Ford Road. No public schools are located within the study area (Arkansas Department of Education [ADE], n.d.).

The following section presents a brief summary of economic conditions for Benton County and the State of Arkansas. Literature sources reviewed include publications by the Arkansas Department of Workforce Services (DWS), Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), University of Arkansas - Little Rock (UALR) Institute of Economic Advancement (IEA), and the US. Bureau of the Census (BOC).

441 634/060039 4 As shown on Figure 3-1, Benton County is projected to grow at a cumulative rate that is more than five times the rate for the State of Arkansas (138.2% and 26.5%, respectively), during the next 30 years, according to the UALR IEA (2003). Benton County is expected to increase its population by 46.2%, 33.1%, and 22.4% during the next three decades, respectively (BOC, 2000). During the same time periods, the state is expected to increase its population by 8.4%, 17.4%,, and 7.7%, respectively (UALR IEA, 2003). Much of this growth can be traced back to Wal-Mart, headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas. As Wal-Mart continues to gain retailing market share, inore of the company’s suppliers are moving significant operations to the area to be in closer proximity to their largest customer.

From 2000 to November 2005, Benton County’s labor force experienced dramatic growth, from 76,650 to 100,725, an increase of 3 1.4%, while the State of Arkansas demonstrated more moderate growth of 9.2% (Figure 3-2) (DWS, 2006). Also, from 1990 to November 2005, Benton County’s unemployment rates have remained considerably lower than figures posted by the state throughout the same period (DWS, 2006). Benton County had an unemployment rate of 3.6% and 2.8% during the 1990s and 2000, respectively. The state’s unemployment rate was 6.8% and 4.2%, respectively, during the same time periods. In November of 2005, Benton County posted an unemployment rate of 2.4% and the unemployment rate at the state level increased slightly to 4.3% (DWS, 2006).

3.2 GEOLOGIC RESOURCES

3.2.1 Physiography and Topography

The project area is located in the Ozark Plateaus Physiographic Province in northwestern Arkansas. The Ozark Plateaus is an upland region occurring from southern Missouri to northern Arkansas, which also extends into southeastern and northeastern . The Ozark Plateaus is divided into three subprovinces: the Springfield and Salem plateaus, and the Boston Mountains (Arkansas Geological Commission [AGC], 1998).

The project is located in the Springfield Plateau, an upland area extending from northwestern Arkansas to northeastern Oklahoma and southwestern Missouri. This plateau is mostly gently rolling plains and hills except near main drainageways, like the Illinois River, which crosses the project area. Within the plateau, karst solution features such as caves, sinkholes, and valleys are rather common The valleys are characterized by their linear shape, uniform width and semicircular heads. Elevations within the Springfield Plateau range from about 1,700 feet (ft) above mean sea level (amsl) at its easternmost point to about 1,000 ft amsl at the Kansas border. Study area topography ranges from approximately 950 ft amsl within the Illinois River basin to nearly 1,225 ft amsl along the riverside hilltops. Surface water in the study area is primarily directed into the Illinois River through deeply dissected stream valleys that occur on either side of the river. Surface water near the northwest and southeast project terminus areas drains away from the river valley.

4416341060039 5 FIGURE 3-1 POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR BENTON COUNTY AND THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

400000

350000

300000 .-5 250000 Um 7- 200000 150000 Q 100000

50000

0 1980 1990 2000 2003 2010 2020 2030 Year

STATE OF ARKANSAS 4000

3500 Q 3000 0, 2500 ;z 2000 0 -'3m 1500 2, 1000 0 500

0 1980 1990 2000 2003 201 0 2020 2030 Year

Source UALR 2003. USBOC. 2000

441 6341060039 6 FIGURE 3-2 LABOR FORCE AND UNEMPLOYMENT RATES FOR BENTON COUNTY AND THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

BENTON COUNTY

I Labor Force -+- UnemDlovment Rate I 120000 - 4.0%

3.5% 100000 3.0% 5 a 80000 z 2.5% E 2 a U 60000 2.0% $ n -n m 1.5% 5 40000 c 1.0% = 20000 0.5%

0 0.0% 1990 2000 2005 Year November

STATE OF ARKANSAS

I -Labor Force +Unemployment Rate 1 1600 , 8.0%

7.0%

3 1200 -- 6.0% 3 d 5.0% E E 4.0% 2, -n 3.0% 5 C 2.0% =

1.O%

0.0% 1980 1990 2000 2005 Year November

Note Benton County labor force data was unavailable for 1980 Source DWS 2006

441 634/060039 7 3.2.2 Geology

Regionally, the Ozark Plateaus consists of Paleozoic-age strata divided into three plateau surfaces (AGC, 1998). The Salem Plateau (lowest and northern-most) is underlain by dolostones, sandstones, and limestones of Ordovician age. The Springfield Plateau consists of lower Mississippian-age limestones and cherts. The Boston Mountains (highest and southern-most) consists of Pennsylvanian-age shales, siltstones, and sandstones. All of these plateaus are deeply dissected by numerous streams throughout the area. The depositional environment of the strata located in the region is one of a shallow marine continental shelf that generally slopes toward the south. This shallow-water platform emerged many times during the Paleozoic age producing numerous unconformities throughout the sequence (AGC, 1998). The structural geology in the region consists of a few normal, northeast-southwest trending inactive faults displaying a nearly vertical displacement down on the southern side. In addition, strike-slip faults and very low amplitude folded beds can be present in the region.

Examination of the “Geologic Map of Arkansas” (USGS, 1976) indicates that the project area is situated primarily on an outcrop of the Early to Middle Mississippian Boone Formation, (Mb). The Boone Formation consists of gray, fine to coarse-grained fossiliferous limestone interbedded with chert. The cherts are dark in color in the lower part of the sequence and light in the upper part. The sequence includes an oolite member (Short Creek Member) near the top of the Boone Formation in western exposures and the generally chert-free St. Joe Member at its base. The Boone Formation is well known for dissolutional features such as sinkholes, caves, and enlarged fissures. The thickness of this formation ranges from 300 to 390 ft (AGC, 1998). Fossils (crinoids, clams, coral, mollusks, shark material and trilobites) are abundant in the Boone Formation.

Near the northwestern corner of the study area, geologic mapping indicates an outcrop of Pitkin Limestone, Fayetteville Shale, and Batesville Sandstone (Mpfb) strata. These Upper Mississippian deposits have been grouped together according to the USGS geologic map and basically consist of a mixed sequence of limestone, shale, and sandstone. Thicknesses range from 10 to 400 ft for each type of stratum.

Geologic mapping by the USGS indicates the existence of a continuous, normal fault that crosses thru the middle of the project area along the immediate northwest side of the Illinois River. Additionally, a series of shorter, discontinuous normal faults occur near the southeastern corner of the study area. Typically, bedrock joint fractures or lineaments can occur parallel or perpendicular to these faulted areas, producing higher densities of geologic karst features such as sinkholes, caves, or enlarged fissures.

Additional geologic hazards such as seismic or earthquake activity were reviewed for the study area. According to the USGS Earthquakes Hazards Program, the proposed project is located in an area that has minimal seismic activity. The nearest recorded seismic event is approximately 100 miles due east. The majority of recorded seismic events occur in northeastern Arkansas along the geologically active, New Madrid fault zone.

4416341060039 8 3.2.3 Soil Associations

According to the general soil map of Benton County, the study $rea is located within the Clarksville- Nixu-Noark, Tonti-Nixa-Captina, and Secesh-Britwater-Captinaassociations (SCS, 1977).

The Clarksville-Nixa-Noark association is on a highly dissected plateau that is dominantly cherty limestone. The association is characterized by long, narrow ridges that have moderately steep to steep sides and are separated by narrow valleys. The slope ranges from 3 to 50%, and most of this association is wooded. Cleared strips on the tops of ridges and in the valleys are used chiefly for pasture and meadow. This association has moderate to severe limitations for dwellings and other buildings, roads and streets, and other nonfarm uses because of slope, a high content of coarse fragments, and local flooding in the valleys (SCS, 1977).

The Tonti-Nixa-Captina occurs on top of a broad upland plateau that is rolling and slightly dissected. Typically, it is bounded on at least one side by the more strongly dissected areas of the Clarksville-Nixa- Captina association. Slope ranges from 1 to 12%. Most of this association is used for pasture or meadow. Only some areas are suited for cultivated crops, vineyards, and orchards, but all areas are suited for pasture. This association has slight to severe limitations for dwellings, other buildings, or roads and streets. The limitations are severe for septic tank absorption fields because of a slow percolation rate. The limitations are moderate to severe for solid-waste disposal systems because of soil depth (SCS, 1977).

The Secesh-Britwater-Captinu association is in valleys along the larger creeks and rivers. The slope ranges from 0 to 12%, and most of this association is used for pasture and meadow. A small portion is used for cultivated crops. Where a water supply is available, the association is generally suited to. sprinkler irrigation. The Britwater and Captina soils are suited to dwellings but have slight to moderate limitations for other buildings, roads, and other nonfarm uses because of the flood hazard (SCS, 1977).

According to the NRCS, two of the above listed soil associations have a specific soil series that are classified as prime farmland. The Captina silty loam (CnB) and the Secesh gravelly silt loam (Se) series are identified as prime farmland. In the project area, both of these series occur in the northwest uplands, the Illinois River basin, and the southeastern uplands. It should be noted that urban or built-up areas of these soils are not considered prime farmland (SCS, 1977).

3.3 VEGETATION

The study area is located in the EPA Level I11 ecoregion (39), Ozark Highlands. The predominant vegetation type on this dissected limestone plateau is forested oak (Quercus sp.) and hickory (Carpsp.), yet stands of oak and pine (Pinus sp.) are also common. Less than one fourth of the central portion of the Ozark Highlands region has been cleared for pasture and cropland, and beyond the central area, half or more is cropland and pastureland (Woods et al., 2004).

441634/060039 9 The Ozark Highlands region is subdivided further into two EPA level IV ecoregions: (39a) and (39b). The level IV ecoregion that encompasses the project area is the (39b) Dissected Springfield Plateau-Elk River Hills ecoregion. The potential natural vegetation of this ecoregion includes oak-hickory-pine forests and oak-hickory forests. Native upland vegetation is characterized by oak-woodland, mixed deciduous forest, or mixed deciduous-pine forest containing black oak (Quercus velutina), white oak (Quercus alba), blackjack oak (Quercus marilandica), post oak (Quercus stellata), hickories (Carya spp.), and shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata). Native vegetation on north-facing slopes and in ravines include mesic forests containing sugar maple (Acer saccharum), white oak, northern red oak (Quercus rubra), and beech (Fagus sp) (Woods et al., 2004).

3.3.1 Water Resources

The study area is located within the northeast portion of the Illinois River Basin, which encompasses areas of both northeastern Oklahoma and northwestern Arkansas. Mean annual total precipitation within the region ranges from 44-46 inches per year (NRCS, 1999).

3.3.2 Surface Waters

The Illinois River is the major perennial surface water in the study area as noted on USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle topographic maps. Each of the proposed routes crosses the Illinois River. According to lists maintained by the Little Rock District of the USACE, the Illinois River is not considered a “navigable” water, and therefore, not regulated under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. All perennial and intermittent tributaries as well as ephemeral drainages occurring within the study area are sourced to the Illinois River.

3.3.3 Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands

Waters of the U.S., which are regulated by the USACE under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, include, but are not limited to, territorial seas, lakes, rivers, streams, oceans, bays, ponds, and other special aquatic features including wetlands. The USACE uses the regulatory phrase “ordinary high water mark” in describing the jurisdictional boundaries of a stream. This phrase refers to the established line on the bank or shore indicated by the fluctuation of water, and an average width is determined. Wetlands have been defined in a broad sense as transitional areas (ecotones) between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the ground surface, or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin et al., 1979). The USACE and the EPA jointly define wetlands as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation that is typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas” (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). The USACE-approved methods and techniques for the determination and delineation of wetlands are those methods and techniques outlined in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual Technical Report Y-87-1 (Environmental Laboratory, 1987).

441 6341060039 10 Efforts were conducted to determine what areas crossed by the proposed routes most likely meet the criteria of wetlands by reviewing and comparing information provided by floodplain maps, local soil surveys in conjunction with the National List of Hydric Soils (NRCS, 2005), topographic maps, and recent aerial photography. Once areas crossed by the proposed routes were determined to likely meet wetland criteria, they were identified as either potential “forested” wetlands or as potential “nonforested” wetlands. These potential wetland areas were then measured for route comparisons.

According to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FEMA, 1991), the Illinois River lies within an area designated as Zone A. Zone A is an area of 100-year flooding where no base elevations are determined. This area, referred to as the “Illinois River 100-year floodplain,” is characterized as relatively flat lands adjacent to the Illinois River channel that extend outward and typically end at a dramatic increase in topographic elevation. Aerial photography depicts this area as mostly nonforested, with occasional occurrences of forest vegetation concentrating immediately adjacent to the Illinois River channel and at the confluence of some intersecting tributaries.

According to the Benton County Soil Survey (SCS, 1977) and the National List of Hydric Soils, the soil mapping units associated with the Illinois River 1 00-year floodplain and areas adjacent to tributaries in the study area represent soils listed as “hydric.” This does not imply that these areas are wetlands, only that the mapping units assigned for these areas meet certain criteria that reflect soils that are likely to meet the definition of hydric soils resulting in a strong likelihood of indicating a wetland.

Information from these sources suggests that all areas within the Illinois River 100-year floodplain and riparian areas adjacent to stream crossings are likely to meet the criteria of a wetland. All areas where the proposed routes cross the Illinois River 100-year floodplain and riparian areas adjacent to streams were identified and measured as potential jurisdictional wetlands.

A review of aerial photography (Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission BARPC], 2004), the USGS 7.5-minute Benton, Arkansas, topographic quadrangle, and the Benton County Soil survey, was used to identify bottomland ripariadwoodlands. Bottomland riparian areas are characterized as areas of descending elevations adjacent to stream crossings. All of these areas within the study area have corresponding hydric soil mapping units. These areas represent areas likely to meet the criteria of jurisdictional wetlands. Those bottomland/riparian areas exhibiting woodland vegetation, as represented by aerial photography, and crossed by each route were identified and measured as potential “forested wetlands.” Areas crossed by each route exhibiting the same conditions, but with the absence of forest vegetation, were identified and measured as potential “nonforested” wetlands.

A summary of lengths measured are listed in the ecology section of Table 4-1, and further discussed in Section 4.3.

441 634/060039 11 3.4 FEDERALLY LISTED ENDANGERED AND/OR THREATENED SPECIES AND/OR HABITATS OF CONCERN

According to lists maintained by ANHC and FWS, 13 federally and/or state-listed endangered, threatened, and candidate species potentially occur within Benton County (Table 3- 1). Inclusion on this list does not imply that a species is known to occur in the project area, but only acknowledges the potential for its occurrence. FWS affords complete protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) only to those species federally listed as endangered or threatened.

TABLE 3-1

ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE SPECIES OF POSSIBLE OCCURRENCE IN BENTON COUNTY. ARKANSAS’

status3 Common Name’ Scientific Name’ FWS Status State Status INVERTEBRATES Cave crayfish Cambarus aculabrum E I NV Neosho mucket Lampsilis rafinesqueana C I NV American burying beetle Nicrophorus americanus E I NV FISH Ozark cavefish Amblyopsis rosae T INV Arkansas darter Etheostoma cragini C INV BIRDS Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus T (PDL) I NV MAMMALS Gray myotis Myotis grisescens E INV bat Myotis sodalis E INV PLANTS Forked aster Aster furcatus NL ST Opaque prairie sedge Carex opaca NL SE Small-headed pipewort Eriocaulon komickianum NL SE Ovate-leaf catchfly Silene ovata NL ST Royal catchfly Silene regia NL ST ’According to Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission (Updated May 14, 2002). ’Nomenclature follows FWS, ANHC, and AOU (1998, 2000, and 2002). ’FWS - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; ANHC -Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission; E = Endangered; T = Threatened; C = Candidate Species; PDL = Proposed for Federal Delisting; SE = State-Listed Endangered; ST = State-Listed Threatened; INV =Inventory Element (ANHC is currently conducting active inventory work on these species); NL = Not listed.

3.4.1 lnvertebrates

According to FWS and AGFC, there are two federally endangered crayfish listed for Benton County that are commonly referred to as “cave crayfish” (Cambarus aculabrum and C. zophastes). There is little known about these two species and neither have been assigned a common name. According to AGFC,

441 634/060039 12 C. actilabrum exists in only two caves in northwest Arkansas, including Logan Cave National Wildlife Refuge, while C. zophanastes lives in a single cave in Stone County owned and protected by the ANHC. Like so many cave animals, these crayfish are albinos with no pigments. They live in cave streams and are extremely rare. No more than six C. aculabrum have been seen at one time. The population of C. zophunastes is estimated at fewer than 50 individuals. Groundwater contamination is the major threat to these crayfish (AGFC, 2006).

The Neosho mucket (Lampsilis raJinesqueana) is a “candidate” freshwater mussel species endemic to the Illinois and Neosho river drainages. This species currently has no protection under the ESA, but future protection may be warranted. It is found in second-order or larger streams with moderately flowing water, over fine to medium gravel substrates. This species is showing decline across its range. The primary threats to the Neosho mucket are impoundments and land development for urban and agricultural land uses. Land development causes sedimentation and loss of habitat from alteration to stream channels (USFS, 2005).

The federally endangered American burying beetle (Nicrophorus americanus) is a carrion insect species that exhibits broad vegetational tolerances, though natural habitat may be mature forests. The USFS (2005) has recorded this species from grasslands, old fields, shrub land, and hardwood forests. Soil characteristics are important to the beetle’s ability to bury carrion. Extremely xeric, saturated, or loose sandy soils are unsuitable for these burying activities. Although the USFS has recorded only two occurrences on the Magazine Mountain District of the Ozark National Forest in Logan County, Arkansas, potential habitat could include any lands throughout the insect’s historical range that are not rock covered or covered in water. Habitat fragmentation, insecticides, soil disturbance, and interspecific competition are major threats to this species (USFS, 2005).

3.4.2 Fish

A true obligate cave dweller, the federally threatened Ozark cavefish (Amblyopsis rosae) is known in 28 sites distributed over 6 counties (including Benton County) in 3 states. Potential habitat is limited to karst (cave) habitats. The greatest threats to this species are removal by collectors and pollution (especially through the degradation of groundwater quality) (USFS, 2005).

The Arkansas darter (Etheostoma cragini) is listed by FWS as a “candidate” species in Benton County. This species currently has no protection under the ESA, but future protection may be warranted. This species occurs most often in sand- or pebble-bottomed pools of small spring-fed streams and marshes with cool water and aquatic vegetation. Water depletion in required habitats has been one of the greatest threats facing the Arkansas darter. The species is considered a poor competitor and appears to thrive in streams with low fish diversity. In Arkansas, the species was unknown until 1979. Since then, it has been found in spawning runs during the spring months at nine locations in the Illinois River drainage in northwestern Arkansas (F WS, 2004).

441 6341060039 13 ~~ ~~~

3.4.3 Birds

According to FWS and AGFC, the only federally endangered or threatened avian species listed for Benton County is the bald eagle (Huliueetus Zeucocephulus). The bald eagle has recovered sufficiently to be downlisted to “threatened” throughout its range, and the FWS has proposed to delist the species in the near future (64 FR 36453-36363, July 6, 1999).

Two subspecies are currently recognized based on size and weight: the northern bald eagle and the southern bald eagle. The northern population nests from central and the Aleutian Islands through Canada into the northern U.S. The southern population primarily nests in estuarine areas of the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, northern California to Baja California, , and (Snow, 1981). Wintering ranges of the two populations overlap. The bald eagle inhabits coastal areas, rivers, and large waterbodies as fish and waterfowl comprise the bulk of their diet. Nests are seldom far from a river, lake, bay, or other waterbody. Nest trees are generally located in woodlands, woodland edges, or open areas, and are frequently the dominant or co-dominant tree in the area (Green, 1985).

According to AGFC, the first successful bald eagle nesting since 1930 was reported in Arkansas in 1982. In 1995, 18 pairs of Arkansas eagles successfully fledged young from the nest. An eagle hacking program started by the AGFC in 1982 contributed to this resurgence. Young eagles from Minnesota and were brought to the state, raised in “hacking” facilities and released in hopes they will return to raise their young in Arkansas. Arkansas ranks in the top ten states in the number of winter bald eagle sightings. Over one thousand bald eagles are counted each winter, nearly triple the 368 recorded in 1979 (AGFC, 2006).

3.4.4 Mammals

Roosting habitat for the federally endangered gray bat (Myotis grisescens) is restricted entirely to caves or cave-like habitats. During the summer months, the bats are highly selective for caves providing specific temperature and roost conditions. Usually these caves are all located within a kilometer of a river or reservoir. In winter, they utilize only deep, vertical caves having a temperature of 6 to 11 degrees Celsius. Consequently, only a small proportion of the caves in any area is, or can be, used regularly (USFS, 2005). The population is estimated at more than 1.5 million; however, about 95% hibernate in only eight caves- two caves in , three in Missouri, and one each in Kentucky, , and Arkansas. This makes the population extremely vulnerable. Human disturbance of hibernation and maternity colonies present one of the greatest threats. Other factors in the species’ decline include vandalism, cave commercialization, pesticide poisoning, natural calamities such as flooding and cave-ins, loss of caves due to inundation by man-made impoundments and possibly a reduction of insect prey over streams that have been degraded by excessive pollution and siltation (AGFC, 2006).

In Arkansas, federally endangered Indiana bats (Myotis sodulis) are found in 10 caves scattered over northwestern parts of the state. Eight of the known caves serve, or have served historically, as winter hibernacula from November through March on the Ozark National Forest. The Indiana bat is also known to hibernate at Devil’s Den State Park. Less than 1% of the caves and mines within the range of the

441 634/060039 14 species offer suitable winter hibernating conditions. Available information on summer habitat suggests they disperse, roost, forage, and bear young in riparian as well as upland sites. No summer maternity colonies have been located in Arkansas, although single males have been caught in mist nets near winter hibernacula during the summer. Most reported summer maternity roost sites have been reported in Missouri and southern (USFS, 2005).

3.4.5 Plants

There are currently no federally listed plant species for Benton County, Arkansas; however, the AGFC lists two state-listed (endangered), and three state-listed (threatened) plant species. Although these species are not protected under the ESA, they may be afforded certain levels of protection under Arkansas state law.

The forked aster (Asterfurcatus) is generally a woodland plant endemic to the upper Midwest states and is associated with low, wet areas. It has large white flowers that bloom from July to October. Preferred habitat consists of nitrogen rich, alkaline soils of woodland slopes and wet calcareous woods. This species can also be found in microhabitat conditions such as woodland edges, disturbed woodlots, railroad ROW, and dry oak-hickory woods (Center for Plant Conservation, 2006).

Little information is available concerning the Opaque prairie sedge (Carex opaca). This sedge was recently raised to species status and was formerly recognized as a variety (C. bicknellii var. opaca). The original species, C. bicknellis was segregated, based upon chromosomal differences, into three new individual species (C. missouriensis, C. shinnersii, and C. opaca.). All three species are known to occupy hydric habitats. C. opaca has a narrow distribution mostly limited to the periphery of the Ozark Mountain System (Rothrock and Reznicek, 2001).

The small-headed pipewort (Eriocaulon kornickianum) is found in or near permanently moist to wet seepage areas (particularly upland sandstone glade seeps), bogs, and prairie stream banks. The pipewort is intolerant of shade. This species is an early successional, and oftentimes long persistent species. The margins of pipewort populations are often shortleaf pine, eastern red-cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and winged elm (Ulmus alata), all of which are early successional organisms among the woody plant assemblage. A few sites show evidence of some soil disturbance, such as provided by occasional to frequent vehicle traffic through the edge of the population. The species appears to require full sun for its best development. Development of later seral stages in vegetation development probably shades out the pipewort (USFS, 2005).

The ovate-leaf catchfly (Silene avata) is primarily restricted to the Appalachian Physiographic Region. Favorable habitat would include talus slopes beneath sandstone bluff lines. It has also been reported from such vague habitats as “rich woods” and “woodlands” (Basinger, 2002).

The Royal catchfly (Silene regia) is a Midwestern endemic of tallgrass prairie habitats, now with relatively few, scattered populations caused by continued destruction of habitat. Apparently most

441 634/060039 15 abundant in Missouri, extirpated from Kansas and Tennessee, and considered quite rare in all other states throughout its range. Many remaining population remnants are found along roadsides where they are vulnerable to construction or to changes in management of roadside vegetation (USFS, 2005).

3.5 CULTURAL HISTORY

3.5.1 Prehistoric Background

The general prehistoric cultural sequence in the Ozarks region has been previously addressed in numerous syntheses including Chapman (1 975, 1980), Davis (1 994), O’Brien and Wood (1 998), Sabo (1 986), Sabo et al. (1982, 1990), and Spears et al. (1975). The following is a brief summary of the Paleoindian, Archaic, Woodland, and Mississippian cultural periods as they relate to the study area.

3.5.1.1 Paleoindian Period

The Paleoindian period (10,000-7,500 B.C.) is represented by only a few sites and small artifact collections. Paleoindian sites occur in the uplands or on high terraces, and occasionally, in basal cultural deposits of bluff shelters, generally representing short-term habitations by small, highly nomadic groups. During the early part of the Paleoindian, assemblages are characterized by distinctive lanceolate-shaped fluted points known as Clovis. During the later Paleoindian, project points are basally thinned lanceolate forms. Both early and late assemblages contain scrapers and burins. The Dalton point type is representative of the end of the Paleoindian, ca. 8,500-7,500 B.C., and often assigned to a separate period. Dalton site inventories often includes adzes. The paucity of sites in the Ozark highlands, particularly those dating to the Paleoindian period, may be due to the relatively low population density and limited use. It has been suggested that Paleoindian populations specialized in hunting large Pleistocene game, however, recent evidence suggests a variety of forest and prairie plant and animal resources were also exploited. Precipitated by vegetational shifts associated with the Pleistocene-Holocene transition, subsistence had certainly shifted from big-game hunting to exploitation of a more diverse animal and assemblage emphasizing deer and possibly elk as well as nuts by late Paleoindian or Dalton times.

3.5.1.2 Archaic Period

The Archaic period is traditionally distinguished from the previous Paleoindian period by an increased emphasis on diversification of subsistence resources and increased used of plants and small animal, especially rabbit and squirrel, as food sources as well as a proliferation of point types. Based on current information, it appears that Archaic sites are located mainly in the valleys and upland margins bordering the major stream valleys. Assemblages of the Early Archaic (7,500-5,000 B.c.) include comer-notched point type varieties like Rice Lobed as well as full grooved axes and Celts. Middle Archaic period (5,000- 3,000 B.C.) point forms include Jakie stemmed, Big Sandy/White River Side-Notched, and other early notched forms.

441 634/060039 16 Early Archaic and Middle Archaic complexes have been poorly defined for this portion of the Ozarks. The limited evidence for Early and Middle Archaic occupations is likely due to a combination of factors, including a lack of geomorphological research for detecting buried sites, the very limited site inventory at hand, inadequate definition of Early Archaic and Middle Archaic diagnostic artifacts, and the continuation of low population densities.

The Late Archaic period (3,000-1,000 B.c.) has traditionally been distinguished from the later Woodland period by the absence of ceramics, the bow and arrow, elaborate burial practices, and food production. However, recent information has accumulated to indicate that the beginnings of ceramic production, elaborate burial practices, and food production were manifested in some parts of the Midwest by at least the middle Late Archaic period, or earlier. Late Archaic assemblages include a variety of stemmed and notched projectile points and extensive use of ground stone implements including adzes, axes, plummets and bannerstones.

Late Archaic sites appear to be very common in the Ozarks, a likely reflection of substantial regional population growth. Late Archaic sites are sometimes characterized by large quantities of lithic debris and chipped stone tools, mostly produced from locally available materials. The Late Archaic period represents the culmination of intensive exploitation of various forest resources with increasing localization of resource procurement and settlement strategies. As a result, the material assemblages contain more varied tool forms than for the earlier periods. Artifacts found at Late Archaic sites, for example, may include basal-notched and straight-stemmed projectile points/knives, lanceolate pointdknives, a variety of drills, piano-convex gouges, rectanguloid digging tools, chopping tools, hammerstones, manos, celts, three- quarter grooved axes, and worked hematite.

3.5.1.3 Woodland Period

The Woodland (1,000 B.C.- A.D. 9000) was a time of substantial technological change including, among others, the widespread production of ceramics and later, the introduction of the bow and arrow. It is a stage marked by changes in ideology, by elaborating settlement and sociopolitical systems, and by an overall shift from mixed foraging and horticultural economies to those emphasizing agricultural production. Lifeways during the early Woodland was largely a continuation of seasonal migration with limited horticulture of the preceding Archaic period, by the Middle Woodland (500 B.C.- A.D. 400) and Late Woodland (A.D. 400-900), aboriginal groups were largely sedentary. The Middle Woodland period represents a time of active trade and burial mound construction, although the central Ozarks may have remained peripheral to these major riverine developments. The Late Woodland is marked by substantial reductions in trade, but also a time of continual population growth and economic efficiency. The bow and arrow was introduced into the southern Ozarks around A.D. 500-600, or during early Late Woodland times.

441 6341060039 17 3.5.1.4 Mississippian Period

The Mississippian period (A.D. 900-1700) is not well represented in most of the Ozarks, including the study area. Outside of the Ozarks, the Mississippian period is marked by the development of chiefdom- level political groups consisting of a central town surrounded by smaller villages, hamlets, and farmsteads. Central towns and larger villages had platform mounds that temples and elite residences occupied. Shell-tempered pottery, typical of Mississippian sites is occasionally found in the Ozarks, but it usually does not survive in open sites.

Archaeological evidence of the protohistoric and early historic Indian presence in northwestern Arkansas has proven to be illusive. Chapman et al. (1960) report that in most instances it was not possible to separate late Mississippian, protohistoric, and early historic components in the region.. McDowell Cave in , Barry County is one documented site in the Ozarks that yielded historic trade goods mixed with Mississippian artifacts (Adams, 1941).

3.5.2 HISTORIC BACKGROUND

The first recorded European incursion into Arkansas was made by the De Soto expedition in 1541, but Euro-American impacts were probably extremely minimal until the early eighteenth century when lands west of and drained by the River were controlled by the French and non-aboriginal artifacts begin to occur in aboriginal assemblages. This Louisiana Territory was ceded to the Spanish in 1762, but was returned to France in 1800.

At the time of their first contacts with Europeans, the Osage Indians claimed all of the land west of the Mississippi River to the Rocky Mountains and south of the Missouri River to the Arkansas River. It is not

known just where the tribe originated or how long they had occupied the territory. In 1803 the Ozarks ,~ region became part of the United States when it was bought from France in the Louisiana Purchase. Some of the earliest settlers in the Ozarks were hunters and herders but by the 183Os, the economy had shifted to subsistence agriculture and husbandry. Arkansas was organized into a territory in 1819. In 1828, Osage Indians that occupied northeastern portion of Arkansas were forced to move west into the Oklahoma Territory, opening the land for Euro-American settlement. Soon after the Osage removal, County was created, and when Arkansas became a state in 1836, Benton County was created from part of Washington County. Both Benton County and the county seat of Bentonville were named in honor of U.S. Senator Thomas Hart Benton of Missouri, who championed westward expansion and was instrumental in helping the Arkansas Territory achieve statehood (Goodspeed, 1889).

The earliest permanent Euro-American settlers of present Benton County arrived during the late 1820s and early 1830s, settling first in the northern part of the county in the area around present day Mayville, Bentonville and Garfield. However settlement did not occurred in the southern part of the county, including the study area until the late 1830s and early 1840s. By the early 1840s, the first apple orchards in the county were planted. The county saw significant activities during the Civil War, including in 1862 the Battle of Pea Ridge (Elkhorn Tavern), the largest battle fought west of the Mississippi River. Much of

441 634/060039 18 the county seat, Bentonville was burned in 1862 during Civil War actions. By the late nineteenth century, Benton County produced more apples than any other county in the United States. The area’s economy continued to center around agriculture until the mid-twentieth century. Today, much of the area is geared toward the commercialization, much of it associated with the operation and exploitation of area lakes and the location of Wal-Mart’s corporate offices in the county.

3.5.3 RESULTS OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW/RECORDS SEARCH

A literature review and records search was conducted for the study area. This investigation was designed to determine the density and type of previously recorded cultural resources that might be expected within the study area and to assist in the evaluation of alternative routes to lessen the potential impact to cultural resources.

4.0 IMPACTS ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND REQUIREMENTS

The following section provides general impacts assessments at a broad “study area” scale based on collected and available information for the project area. The section also provides a general description of each alternative route as well as comparative merits and detriments of each route as it relates to certain criteria. Multiple variables were used for the comparative evaluation of potential routes to aid in the process of selecting a preferred alternative (Table 4-1).

4. I LAND USE IMPACTS

From a land use and socioeconomic perspective, the preferred route will be the route that causes the least disruption to or interference with existing or planned manmade property uses and creates the least aesthetic displeasure to the surrounding environment. As such, in addition to identifying current residential, commercial, and industrial development in the study area, future planned development is also important to examine. Proximity to habitable structures is a major constraint in route selection followed by proximity to churches, schools, cemeteries, and communication towers. For instance, the Arkansas Baptist Assembly is located approximately 0.5 mile south of the Siloam Springs Substation. However, the Assembly is situated at a lower elevation than the substation and is shrouded from view by SH 59 as well as dense vegetation adjacent to the Assembly.

Another important step in the determination of land-use impacts involves an analysis of the various land- use types (cropland, grazingland, etc.) that each alternative route traverses. To perform this analysis, land- use calculations were determined based upon best available information obtained electronically from thg NARPC (2004).

The proposed transmission line facilities could have some potential effect on aviation operations within the study area. Structure heights will average 85 ft, and variations will depend upon structure design and

441 634/060039 19 TABLE 4-1

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA USED IN ALTERNATIVE ROUTE EVALUATION

Alternative Routes Land Use A B C D 1 Length of alternative route 39,269 36,936 33,065 37,720 2 Length of ROW parallel and adjacent to existing transmission line ROW 0 0 0 12,000 3 Length of ROW parallel to other existing ROW (highways, pipelines, railways, etc.) 0 1,000 0 0 4 Length of ROW through parkslrecreational aread 0 0 0 2,640 5 Number of additional parkslrecreational aread within 1,000 ft of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 6 Length of ROW through cropland 10,250 7,000 2,350 2,750 7 Length of ROW through grazingland 12,500 13,300 11,500 13,750 8 Length of ROW across gravel pits, mines, or quarries 0 0 0 0 9 Number of transmission line crossings 0 0 0 0 10 Number of US. and State highway crossings 2 2 4 2 11 Number of private airstrips within 10,000 ft of ROW centerline 1 1 1 1 12 Number of heliports within 5,000 fl of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 13 Number of FAA-listed airfields within 20,000 ft of ROW centerline 1 1 1 1 14 Number of commercial AM radio transmitters within 10,000 fl of ROW centerline 1 1 1 1 15 Number of FM radio transmitters and other electronic installations within 2,000 ft of ROW 1 1 1 2 16 Number of angles greater than 30 degrees 13 11 4 8 17 Number of angles less than 30 degrees 0 0 0 0 Aesthetics 18 Estimated length of ROW within foreground visual zone' of U.S. and State highways 12,250 20,390 32,065 20,920 19 Estimated length of ROW within foreground visual zone' of parks/recreational areas 0 0 0 7,920 20 Estimated length of ROW within foreground visual zone' of churches, schools, cemeteries 2,800 5,250 3,000 0 Ecology 21 Length of ROW through upland woodlands 8,875 7,625 9,208 13,250 22 Length of ROW through bottomlandlriparian woodlands (including forested wetlands) 5,375 2,000 3,563 3,750 23 Length of ROW across potential non-forested wetlands 3,250 2,313 1,750 7,000 24 Number of streamlriver crossings 6 3 5 9 25 Length of ROW parallel (within 100 ft) to streams 0 500 0 1,000 26 Length of ROW across 100-year floodplains 3,875 2,500 2,250 4,500 Cultural Resources 27 Number of recorded historic or prehistoric sites crossed 2 1 0 0 28 Number of recorded historic or prehistoric sites within 1,000 ft of ROW centerline 10 3 1 0 29 Number of National Register listed or determined eligible sites crossed 0 0 0 4 30 Number of National Register listed or determined eligible sites within 1,000 ft of ROW centerline 0 1 0 0 31 Length of ROW through areas of high archaeologicaVhistorical site potential 20,600 17,450 19,900 27,800

'Residences, businesses, schools, churches, hospitals, nursing homes, etc. 'Defined as parks and recreational areas owned by a governmental body or an organized group, club, or church 'One-half mile, unobstructed.

Note: All length measures in feet.

441 6341060039 20 location. According to Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 77, notification of the construction of the proposed transmission line will be required if structure heights exceed the height of an imaginary surface extending outward and upward at a slope of 100 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 20,000 ft from the nearest point of the nearest runway of a public or military airport having at least one runway longer than 3,200 ft. If a runway is less than 3,200 ft, notification will be required if structure heights exceed the height of an imaginary surface extending at a slope of 50 to 1 for a distance of 10,000. According to PBS&J’s preliminary calculations, construction of the proposed transmission line along any of the alternative routes would fall under the above criteria with respect to notification of the FAA. Each alternative route will be located between 9,000 ft and approximately 14,500 ft of Smith Field Airport and will likely trigger the FAA criteria. Following APSC approval of a route for the proposed transmission line, SWEPCO will make a final determination of the need for FAA notification. The result of this notification, and any subsequent coordination with the FAA, could include changes in line design and/or potential requirements to mark and/or light the line.

Route A was selected as a possible route as it encounters the fewest total number of habitable structures (17), the fewest number of habitable structures within 150 ft of the ROW centerline (4), and the fewest number of habitable structures between 150 and 300 ft of the ROW centerline (13) (Table 4-2). In addition, Route A is within the foreground visual zone of Davis Cemetery, located approximately 2,000 ft north of this proposed route, for approximately 2,800 ft, and within the foreground visual zone of U.S. and state highways for approximately 12,250 ft, the second shortest and shortest distances of all the routes, respectively (see Table 4-1).

The FAA-registered Smith Field Airport is approximately 14,500 ft north of proposed Route A. While all proposed routes are within 20,000 ft of this public facility, routes A and B are the farthest from the Smith Field Airport, and thus recommended over routes C and D. The Williams Field Airport facility is approximately 3,000 ft north of proposed Route A. Route A is the second farthest of all proposed routes from this private facility. Route A is approximately 3,400 ft south of the northern cell tower along Fisher Ford Road and approximately 500 ft south of the southern tower. Route A ranks as the second closest proposed route to both cell towers when an average distance from both towers is calculated.

Route A traverses the greatest amount of cropland of all the proposed routes (approximately 10,250 ft), but also traverses the second to least amount of grazingland of all proposed routes (approximately 12,500 ft). In addition, Route A is similar with Route C in terms of encountering the least amount of ROW parallel (within 100 ft) to streams (see Table 4-2). Overall, Route A’s length (39,269 ft or 7.5 miles) and number of angles (13) is the greatest of all routes considered; however, the benefits of encountering the fewest interferences with existing buildings and minimizing aesthetic displeasure outweigh this disadvantage. Based on best available data, Route A ranks as the preferred route when considering the APSC’s routing criteria for least amount of disruption to existing man-made property uses and minimizing overall aesthetic displeasure.

441 6341060039 21 TABLE 4-2

TYPE OF STRUCTURE AND DISTANCE TO ROW

Alternative Routes Land Use A B C D 1 Length of alternative route 39,269 36,936 33,065 37,720

2 Total number of habitable structures within 50 fl of ROW centerline 0 1 5 0 3 Total number of habitable structures within 150 fl of ROW centerline 4 11 21 7 4 Total number of habitable structures between 150 and 300 fl from ROW centerline 13 16 18 16

5 Number of residences within 50 fl of ROW centerline 0 1 5 0 6 Number of residences within 150 fl of ROW centerline 4 11 20 7 7 Number of residences between 150 and 300 fl from ROW centerline 11 14 15 16

8 Number of existing subdivisions traversed by each route 0 1 2 1 9 Number of existing subdivision lots traversed by each route 0 3 20 3

10 Number of outbuildings within 50 ft of ROW centerline 2 2 3 1 11 Number of outbuildings within 150 fl of ROW centerline 4 8 8 5 12 Number of outbuildings between 150 and 300 fl from ROW centerline 4 14 18 19

13 Number of commercial facilities within 50 fl of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 14 Number of commercial facilities within 150 fl of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 15 Number of commercial facilities between 150 and 300 ftfrom ROW centerline 0 0 1 0

16 Number of industrial facilities within 50 fl of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 I7 Number of industrial facilities within 150 fl of ROW centerline 0 0 1 0 18 Number of industrial facilities between 150 and 300 fl from ROW centerline 2 2 2 0

19 Number of cemeteries within 50 fl of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 20 Number of cemeteries within 150 fl of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 21 Number of cemeteries between 150 and 300 fl from ROW centerline 0 1 0 0

22 Number of schools within 50 fl of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 23 Number of schools within 150 fl of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 24 Number of schools between 150 and 300 fl from ROW centerline 0 0 0 0

25 Number of churches within 50 ft of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 26 Number of churches within 150 fl of ROW centerline 0 0 0 0 27 Number of churches between 150 and 300 fl from ROW centerline 0 0 0 0

Outbuildings include barns, storage sheds, garages, and other auxiliary buildings Note: All length measures in feet.

4416341060039 22 Route B, approximately 36,936 ft or 7.0 miles in length, was selected as a possible route as it is a shorter alternative to Route A and has fewer angles (1 1). However, the reduction in length of the route is offset by greater interference with existing habitable structures within 50 fi of the ROW centerline (l), number of existing habitable structures within 150 ft of ROW centerline (1 l), and number of existing habitable structures between 150 and 300 ft of the ROW centerline (1 6), for a total of 28 habitable structures within 300 ft of the ROW centerline (see Table 4-2). Also, planned residential development at the intersection of Old Norwood Church Road and SH 16 increases the potential for adverse impacts to land use if Route B is selected as the preferred alternative. Route B is located closest to the Davis Cemetery (approximately 250 ft southwest of the proposed ROW), placing the route within the foreground visual zone of the cemetery for approximately 5,250 ft, and is within the foreground visual zone of U.S. and state highways for the greatest length (20,390 ft), resulting in the third to greatest aesthetic displeasure of all routes.

Like proposed Route A, FAA-registered Smith Field Airport is approximately 14,500 ft north of proposed Route B. Thus, Route B may also be recommended over routes C and D based on its proximity to this public facility. However, Route B is the closest of all the proposed routes (approximately 850 ft north) to the Williams Field Airport facility and not recommended based on proximity to this private facility. Also, Route B is approximately 3,400 ft south of the northern cell tower along Fisher Ford Road and approximately 1,500 ft south of the southern tower. For average distance from both cell towers the proposed Route B ranks as the third closest proposed route.

Route B traverses the least amount of ROW through upland woodlands and bottomland/riparian woodlands (including forested wetlands). In addition, routes B and C have similar lengths of ROW across 1 00-year floodplain (see Table 4-1).

Route C was selected as the straightest possible route between substations, resulting in the shortest route (approximately 33,065 ft or 6.3 miles) with the fewest angles (4) (see Table 4-1). However, Route C will disrupt the greatest number of existing habitable structures because no attempt has been made to avoid subdivisions or commercial, industrial, and other developments (see Table 4-2). Route C has the greatest total number of habitable structures within 300 ft of ROW centerline (44): 5 within 50 ft of ROW centerline, 21 within 150 ft of ROW centerline, and 18 between 150 and 300 ft of ROW centerline (see Table 4-2). In addition to the disruption of manmade property uses, Route C is within the foreground visual zone of Davis Cemetery, located approximately 2,000 ft south of this proposed route, for approximately 3,000 ft, the second longest distance of all the routes (see Table 4-1). As Route C generally follows the same northwest-southeast path as SH 16, Route C is within the visual foreground zone of a U.S. or state highway for the greatest length of any proposed route.

The FAA-registered Smith Field Airport is approximately 14,000 ft north of proposed Route C. Since proposed routes A and B are farther from this public facility, this proposed route is not recommended. In addition, Route C is second closest of all the proposed routes to the private Williams Field Airport facility (approximately 2,750 ft south), and it is not recommended. Route C is approximately 1,000 ft south of the

4416341060039 23 northern cell tower along Fisher Ford Road and approximately 1,250 ft north of the southern tower. For average distance from both cell towers, Route C ranks as the proposed route closest to both towers.

Route C traverses the least amount of cropland and potential, nonforested wetlands of all the proposed routes. In addition, routes B and C have similar lengths of ROW across 100-year floodplain (see Table 4- 1). Since Route C would potentially encounter the greatest number of habitable structures and cause the greatest amount of aesthetic displeasure, it is not a recommended route.

Route D, the only route located north of SH 16, was selected as a possible route as it is relatively successful at avoiding habitable structures. Route D is approximately 37,720 ft (7.4 miles) in length and encounters approximately 23 total habitable structures within 300 ft of the ROW centerline (see Table 4- 2). Specifically, Route D encounters 0 habitable structures within 50 ft of the ROW centerline, 7 habitable structures within 1 SO ft of the ROW centerline, and 16 habitable structures between 150 and 300 ft from ROW centerline (see Table 4-2). Route D ranks as second to Route A in terms of avoiding disruption to manmade property uses, which is possible by utilizing more angles than routes B and C (see Table 4-1). The Davis Cemetery, a constraint for routes A, B, and C, is more than 5,500 ft from Route D, beyond the foreground visual zone of Route D, and not considered a constraint. Also, Route D traverses privately owned land within the congressional boundary of the Ozark National Forest for approximately 2,640 A and is within the foreground visual zone of the national forest for approximately 7,920 ft. Route D is the only line to cross the national forest which results in an element of aesthetic displeasure not realized among the other possible routes.

The FAA-registered Smith Field Airport is approximately 9,000 ft north of proposed Route D. Since proposed routes A and B are farther from this public facility, this proposed route is not recommended. However, Route D is the farthest of all proposed routes to the Williams Field Airport facility (approximately 5,000 ft) and is the preferred route based on its proximity to this private facility. Route D is approximately 1,000 ft north of the northern cell tower along Fisher Ford Road and approximately 4,500 ft north of the southern tower. For average distance, proposed Route D is the farthest from both towers.

Route D traverses the least amount of grazingland; however, Route D has the greatest length of ROW through upland woodlands, potential nonforested wetlands, parallel (within 100 ft) to streams, and across 100-year floodplains (see Table 4-1).

4.1 .I Environmental Justice

This section was prepared in compliance with EO 12898, Federal Action to Address Environmental Justice (EJ) in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, which requires the determination of whether a proposed project would have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on low-income populations and minority populations. The EO, signed on February 1 1, 1994, requires all federal agencies to address the impact of their programs with respect to EJ. The EO requires that low-income and ethnic minority populations not receive disproportionately high

441 634/060039 24 adverse human health or environmental impacts and requires that representatives of any low-income or minority populations that could be affected by the proposed project be involved in the community participation and public involvement process.

4.2 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO PHYSlOGRAPHYlGEOLOGYlSOlLS

Construction of the proposed transmission line is not anticipated to have a significant impact on the topography or geological resources of the study area. The erection of transmission line structures will require the removal and/or disturbance of small amounts of near-surface materials, but will have no measurable impacts on geological features or mineral resources along any alternative routes. Impact potential from geologic faulting or earthquakes along the alternative routes is considered to be minimal. Mineral resources within the study area primarily consist of an extensive limestone formation that is not actively quarried. This lithologic unit, the Boone Formation, is located throughout the project area. This carbonate formation is prone to dissolution and readily forms subsurface cavities (Le., karst features). These karstic characteristics may provide a structural concern for structure installation.

_* In the event that geologic karst features, such as sinkholes, caves, enlarged fissures, or interstitial voids, are encountered, these features would be spanned and no structures would be installed in these geologic areas. Any unanticipated geologic karst feature encountered during construction should be managed according to applicable federal, state, and local regulations and/or guidelines. However, avoidance is the key.

The construction and operation of transmission lines normally create very few long-term adverse impacts on soils. Soil erosion is generally greatest during the initial clearing, and areas are typically revegetated immediately following construction. The project is not expected to have a significant impact on prime farmland soils due to the physical occupation of small areas by the base of the support structures.

4.3 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE U.S., INCLUDING WETLANDS

Executive Order (EO) 11990 - Protection of Wetlands, provides guidance to agencies and leadership for the minimization of the loss, destruction, or degradation of wetlands and to preserve and enhance the natural beauty and beneficial values of wetlands in carrying out various agency functions. The EO does not apply to the issuance by Federal agencies (e.g., USACE) of permits, licenses, or allocations to private parties for activities involving wetlands on non-federal property. However it does provide conditions for the avoidance of long and short-term impacts associated with the destruction or modification of wetlands under j urisdictional authority.

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344, see 33 CFR Part 323) regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into any waters of the US.,including wetlands. Any supporting structure, which would be placed within jurisdictional waters of the U.S., and where certain functions and values of waters of the US. are permanently adversely affected, such as the conversion of a “forested” wetland to an

441 634/060039 25 “herbaceous” wetland for a permanently maintained utility line ROW, would require some level of permitting and mitigation to reduce the adverse effects of the proposed project to the minimal level. PBS&J recommends avoidance and/or minimization of any impact to jurisdictional waters of the U.S., including wetlands.

Nationwide Permit 12 (NWP 12) (Utility Line Activities) and NWP 25 (Structural Discharges) are appropriate permits should any unavoidable impacts to wetlands occur by the construction of the proposed transmission line and utility ROW in accordance with NWP general conditions, as enforced by the Little Rock District Corps of Engineers. NWP 12 authorizes discharges associated with the construction, maintenance, and repair of utility lines and associated facilities in waters of the U.S., such as those associated with utility lines and utility line substations, foundations for overhead utility line towers, poles, and anchors, and access roads for the construction and maintenance of utility lines, where there is no more than 0.5 acre of permanent loss of waters of the U.S. NWP 25 allows for the discharge of material that would be used as a structural member for standard pile supported structures, such as transmission line footings, including the excavation of bottom material from within the form prior to the discharge of concrete, sand, rock, etc.

EO 11988 - Floodplain Management, provided guidance for agencies and the leadership to take action to reduce the risk of flood loss; to minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health and welfare; and to restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by floodplains in carrying out designated responsibilities. The EO designates agency responsibilities for the evaluation of the potential effects of any actions in floodplains. Such actions should consider whether planning programs and budget requests consider flood hazards and floodplain management and to prescribe procedures to implement the policies and requirements of the EO.

As discussed in Section 3.4.3, areas within the Illinois River floodplain and riparian areas adjacent to streams have the highest potential of meeting jurisdictional wetland criteria. Therefore, a preferred route based upon avoidance of, or minimized impacts to, waters of the U.S., including potential jurisdictional wetlands, would be a route that consists of the fewest number of stream crossings as well as the shortest length across the Illinois River’s 100-year floodplain. Potential wetland areas and surrounding forest vegetation, known as bottomland/riparian woodlands, were identified from review and analysis of the most recent and best mapped information. These areas have the highest potential of meeting the criteria of “forested wetlands.” All other areas exhibiting potential of meeting the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland, but are not indicated by aerial photography of having “forest or woodland” vegetation, were identified as potential “nonforested” wetlands. Due to permitting and mitigating factors, should wetland impacts be unavoidable, it is preferable that the preferred route avoids impacts to potential “forested” wetlands over potential “nonforested” wetlands. However, all potential wetland impacts will be minimized through proper design and construction of the preferred route, such as spanning sensitive areas and strategic structure placement.

441 6341060039 26 Route A crosses three perennial waters including the Illinois River and three intermittent streams for a total of six crossings; Route B crosses two perennial waters, including the Illinois River, and one interinittent stream for a total of three crossings; Route C crosses one perennial water (the Illinois River) and four intermittent streams for a total of five crossings; and Route D has the most water body crossings with three perennial waters, including the Illinois River, and six intermittent streams for a total of nine crossings.

Routes that have the greatest lengths through potential jurisdictional wetlands characterized as bottomlandhiparian woodlands are most likely to cross areas that meet the criteria of “forested” wetlands. According to aerial photography, Route B has the shortest length through bottomlandhiparian woodlands with 2,000 ft. Route A has the greatest length through bottomlandhparian woodlands with 5,375 ft. Routes C and D have similar lengths through bottomlandhiparian woodlands of 3,563 and 3,750 ft, respectively.

Route C has the shortest length across the Illinois River 100-year floodplain at 2,250 ft. Route B has the second shortest length at 2,500 ft. Routes A and D have the longest lengths across the Illinois River 100- year floodplain at 3,875 and 4,500 ft, respectively.

While areas inside the Illinois River 100-year floodplain represent a majority of areas that are likely to meet the criteria of “nonforested” wetlands, other areas outside of the floodplain also have potential of meeting the criteria of “nonforested” wetlands. The following lengths represent the total lengths of all potential “nonforested” wetlands crossed by each route, including areas inside and outside of the floodplain. Route D has the greatest length across potential “nonforested” wetlands with a total length, including areas inside the floodplain, of 7,000 ft. Route A has the second longest length of 3,250 ft. Routes B and C have the shortest lengths across potential “nonforested” wetlands (including areas inside the floodplain) with 2,3 13 and 1,750 ft, respectively.

Routes B and C cross the least number of stream crossings and have the shortest lengths across the lllinois River 100-year floodplain; therefore, routes B and C cross the least amount of areas that are most likely to meet the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland. Routes B and C also encounter the least number of areas with wetland potential that are forested, therefore having the greatest potential for avoidance, and/or minimized impacts to potential “forested wetlands.” Based upon available information, routes B and C are preferred routes over routes A and D from a waters of the US. (including wetlands) perspective.

4.4 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO FEDERALLY LISTED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES

Federally listed species that have potential to occur within the project area are discussed in Section 3.5 as obtained from existing literature and published data gathered by PBS&J ecologists of the project area.

All four of the proposed routes are located within the same ecoregion, and according to recent aerial photography, cross different lengths of the same habitats (i.e., improved pastures, old fields, bottomland

441634/060039 27 hardwoods, Illinois River, streams, etc.). By crossing the same typical habitats, no route has a distinguishing advantage over the other when considering potential impacts to threatened and/or endangered species. The presence of karst habitats such as caves, sinkholes, etc. could provide potential habitat for cave dwelling listed species. Evidences of karst features mentioned in Section 4.2 would be a dominant determining factor in deciding upon a preferred route from a threatened and endangered species perspective; however, there are no discerning geologic characteristics indicating specific possible locations of caves, sinkholes, etc., or records available to the public indicating specific known or unknown species locations, or evidence of specific potential species habitat within the study area. Without proper field studies to confirm the presence or absence of species and to specifically characterize potential or nonpotential habitats, no discernment can be made for any of the preferred routes from a threatened and endangered species perspective based upon available published information.

4.4.1 Protected Migratory Bird Species

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) (16 USC 703-711, EO 13186) implements various treaties and conventions between the U.S., Canada, Japan, Mexico, and the former Soviet Union for the protection of migratory birds. Under the act, the taking, killing, or possessing of migratory birds is unlawful. Unless permitted by regulations, the act provides that it is unlawful to pursue, hunt, take, capture, or kill; possess, offer to sell, barter, purchase, deliver, or cause to be shipped, exported, imported, transported, carried, or received any migratory bird, part, nest, egg, or product, manufactured or not. Nests of ground nesting migratory birds could be in areas where ground-disturbing activities may occur. PBS&J recommends taking care not to disturb any active migratory bird nests during construction activity.

It should be noted that although delisting is anticipated in the near future, the bald eagle is afforded additional protective actions under the Bald Eagle Protection Act (16 USC 668-668d, June 8, 1940, as amended 1959, 1962, 1972, and 1978).

4.5 IMPACTS ON CULTURAL RESOURCES

Only two cultural resource sites occur within the currently proposed area of potential effects. The two sites are described below.

4.5.1 Site 3BE32

Site 3BE32 consists of a medium-sized scatter of lithic debris, tools, and ceramic sherds on the floodplain of the Illinois River about 200 meters south-southeast of the present river channel. The site was recorded by avocational archaeologist Dwight Morris in 1960. The age of the site is unknown but the range of artifacts suggests a possible Woodland period occupation. The site has been impacted by past cultivation and a large wash which bisects the site. The depth of deposits is unknown and the site's potential eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is currently unevaluated. The site is bisected by the proposed ROW of Route A. However, through proper design and construction of the

441 634/060039 28 proposed route through spanning and/or strategic placement of structures, potential impacts can be avoided.

4.5.2 Site 3BE33

Site 3BE33 consists of a large scatter of lithic debris and tools on the floodplain of the Illinois River. It is situated on a natural levee adjacent to and southeast of the present river channel and is subject to frequent flooding. The site was recorded by avocational archaeologist Dwight Morris in 1960. The age of the site is unknown but the range of artifacts suggests a possible Woodland period occupation. The site has been impacted by past cultivation and a large, deep wash which bisects the site. The depth of deposits is unknown and the site’s potential eligibility for the NRHP is currently unevaluated. The site is bisected by the proposed ROW of Route A. However, through proper design and construction of the proposed route through spanning and/or strategic placement of structures, potential impacts can be avoided.

4.5.3 Additional Cultural Resources Sites within 1,000 feet of Proposed Right of Way

Cultural resource evaluations for transmission line routing analyses normally occur within 1,000 ft of the proposed ROW centerline for the following reasons: (1) by reviewing a large area, cultural resource specialists can better evaluate the potential for the occurrence of sites in a project area, and understand the type of sites as well as typical locations in which sites might occur; (2) previously recorded sites often were only recorded within the confines of a past project area, yet the previously recorded sites may be much larger and may extend into the proposed project area; and (3) projects that fall under federal regulations need to consider the “visual impact” of the proposed project on significant cultural resources. A visual impact could occur to a cultural resource beyond 1,000 ft, but this is an arbitrary distance within which most impacts could be contained.

Thirteen cultural resource sites are located within 1,000 ft of the proposed ROW alternatives. Sites 3BE29, 3BE30, 3BE31, 3BE34, 3BE191, 3BE192, 3BE193, 3BE194, 3BE448, and 3BE584 are prehistoric sites and sites 3BE480, 3BE481, 3BE482 and 3BE584 are historic in nature. None of these sites are known to have been evaluated with regard to potential eligibility for the NRHP although site 3BE584 was recommended as not eligible by its recorder.

Sites 3BE30, 3BE31, 3BE34, 3BE191, 3BE192, 3BE193, 3BE194, and 3BE448 are located within 1,000 ft of Route A. Sites 3BE30, 3BE31, 3BE191, 3BE192, and 3BE448 are located within 1,000 ft of Route B. Site 3BE29 is located within 1000 ft of Route C. Sites 3BE480, 3BE481, 3BE482, and 3BE584 are located within 1,000 ft of Route D. Although no direct impact is anticipated to these 13 sites from the proposed project, increased indirect impact could be surmised because of the project’s proximity. However, following construction, additional indirect impact from transmission line ROW maintenance and increased access along the maintained ROW will likely be negligible.

441 634/060039 29 4.6 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS

Based on land-use and ecology calculations, review of mapped information, as well as aerial photography and field reconnaissance, PBS&J recommends the following routes based on criteria found in tables 4- 1 and 4-2. From a land-use perspective, routes A and D impact the fewest numbers of habitable structures, and from an aesthetics perspective, Route A is preferred over routes B, C, and D based on certain aesthetic criteria. From an ecology perspective, Route D is the least preferred, while routes A, B, and C all rank as the preferable routes among certain criteria. However, from a cultural resources perspective, Route C is the most preferred, and Route A is the least preferred of all possible routes. Sensitive ecological and cultural resource areas may be avoided using proper design and construction of the preferred route, such as spanning these areas and strategic placement of structures. Overall, based on findings contained in this report and available measures to avoid potential impacts, Route A is the preferred alternative route.

5.0 REFERENCES

Adams, L.M. 1941. Rockhouse Cave. The Missouri Archaeologist 7: 18-27. Arkansas Department of Education (ADE). No Date. Public Schools. http://arkedu.state.ar.us/schools/ schoolsgublic.html. Accessed March 8,2006. Arkansas Geological Commission (AGC) Information Circular 36. 1998. Stratigraphic Summary of Arkansas, compiled by J.D. McFarland. . 1998. Stratigraphic Summary of the Ozark Plateaus Region. http://state.ar.us/agc/ozark.htm. Accessed January 20,2006. Arkansas Game and Fish Commission (AGFC). 2006. Critters; Threatened & Endangered Species. http:// www.agfc.state.ar.us/critters2006angered~species.html. Accessed January 18-20,2006. Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission (ANHC). 2006. Arkansas Rare Species. http://www. naturalheritage.com/program/rare-species/.Accessed January 18-20, 2006. Basinger, Mark A. 2002. Distribution and Habitat Characteristics of Silene ovutu Pursh (Caryophyllaceae) Populations in Illinois. Transactions of the Illinois Academy of Science (2002), Volume 95, #1, pp. 11-1 9. http://www.il-st-acad-sci.org/transactions/PDF/9502.pdf. Center for Plant Conservation (CPC). 2006. Center for Plant Conservation National Collection Plant Profile. http://www.centerforplantconservation.org/ASP/CPC_NCList_Find.asp. Accessed March 2006. Chapman, C.H., R.A. Marshall, R.T. Bray, W.R. Wood, D.R. Henning, R.B. Pangbum, C.M. Keller, and B.B. Keller. 1960. Archaeological Investigations in the Table Rock Reservoir Area. Report to National Park Service, Midwest Research Center, Lincoln, . Cotten, C. 2006. Seven criteria for transmission line routing in the State of Arkansas. Personal communication with M. Hettenhausen, March 9,2006. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/3 1. Performed for Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of Interior.

441 634/060039 30 Cross, F.B. 1967. Handbook of fishes of Kansas. University of Kansas Museum of Natural History., MISC. Publ. 45:l-357. Quoted in FWS 2004. Department of Workforce Services (DWS). 2006. Covered Employment and Earnings. http://www. discoverarkansas.net/. Accessed January 13,2006. Distler, D.A. 1972. Observations on the reproductive habits of captive Etheostomu cragini Gilbert. Southwestern Naturalist 16:439-44 1. Quoted in FWS 2004. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Vetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y- 87- 1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). n.d. AM, FM, and TV Database Query. Accessed February 16, 2006. http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/amg.html. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 1991. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Benton County, Arkansas and Incorporated Areas. National Flood Insurance program. Washington, D.C. Hargrave, C.W. and J.E. Johnson. 2003. Status of the Arkansas darter, Etheostoina cragini, and least darter, E. microperca, in Arkansas. Southwestern Naturalist 48:89-92. Quoted in FWS 2004. Goodspeed. 1889. Biographical and Historical Memoirs of Western Arkansas. Goodspeed Publishers, Chicago, Illinois. Green, N. 1985. The Bald Eagle. In: A.M. Enos and R.L. DiSilvestro (editors), Audubon wildlife report 1985. Pp. 508-53 1. National Audubon Society, . Moss, R. 198 1. Life history information of the Arkansas darter (Etheostoma crugini). Kansas Nongame Wildlife Advisory Council, Contract No. 38. 15 pp. Quoted in FWS 2004. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 1998. Prime farmland of Benton County, Arkansas. http://www.ar.nrcs.usda.gov/soils/soil-data.html.Accessed January 20, 2006. . 1999. Arkansas Annual Precipitation Map. USDA-NRCS National Cartography & Geospatial Center, Fort Worth, Texas. . 2003. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States: Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 5.01, 2003. In cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Lincoln, Nebraska. http://soils.usda.gov/use/hydric/. . 2005. National List of Hydric Soils By State. Revised August 2005. http://soils.usda.gov/use/ hydric/. Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission. 2004. Mapping - Aerial Imagery. http://www. nwarpc.com/maps.htm. Accessed February 16,2006. O'Brien, M.J., and W.R. Wood. 1998. The Prehistory of Missouri. University of Missouri Press. Pigg, J. 1987. Survey of Fishes in the Oklahoma panhandle and Harper County, northwestern Oklahoma. Procedures Oklahoma Academy of Science 64:45-59. Quoted in FWS 2004. Robison, H.W., G.A. Moore, and R.J. Miller. 1974, Threatened fishes of Oklahoma. Procedures Oklahoma Academy of Science 67:45-59. Quoted in FWS 2004. Rothrock, Paul E. and Reznicek, A.A. 2001. The Taxonomy of the Carex bicnellii Group (Cyperaceae) and New Species for Central North America. Novon: A Journal for Botanical Nomenclature: Vol. 11, No.2, pp. 205-228. http://apt.allenpress.com/aptonline/?request=get-abstract&issn=l055- 3 1 77&volume=O 1 1&issue=02&page=0205.

441 634/060039 31 Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1977. Soil Survey of Benton County, Arkansas. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Washington, D.C. Snow, C. 1981. Southern Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus leucocephalus) and Northern Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus alascanus). Habitat management series for endangered species, Report No. 5 Bureau of Land Management, Denver . T-N-171. 58 pp. Taber, C.A., B.A. Taber, and M.S. Topping. 1986. Population structure, growth and reproduction of the Arkansas darter, Etheosoma cvagini (Percidae). Southwestern Naturalist 3 1 :207-2 14. Quoted in FWS 2004.

University of Arkansas at Little Rock - Institute for Economic Advancement. 2003. Population Estimates and Projections. http://www.aiea.ualr.edu/research/demographic/population/estS0~3O.xls.Accessed January 16,2006. U.S. Bureau of Census (BOC). 1990 American Factfinder. 1990 Summary Tape of U.S. Census Data. http://www.factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DatasetMainPageServlet?_program=DEC&_lang=en. Accessed January 16,2006. . 2000 American Factfinder. Census 2000 Summary File. http://www.factfindercensus,gov/ servlet/DatasetMainPageServlet?grogram=DEC&_lang=en.Accessed January 1 6, 2006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Ecoregions of Arkansas. http://www.epa.govfwed/pagesf ecoregiondar-eco.htm. Accessed January 12,2006. US. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 1997. Federally listed as threatened and endangered species of Arkansas, county by county. US. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Office, Conway, Arkansas. ,2004.Species Assessment and Listing Priority Assignment Form. US. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 6, Lakewood, Colorado. U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 2005. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Revised Land and Resource Management Plan Ozark-St. Frances National Forests. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Russelville, Arkansas. US. Geological Survey (USGS). 1976. Geologic Map of Arkansas. US. Dept. of the Interior, Washington, D.C. . 1990-2001. Seismicity of Arkansas. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. hap:// www.neic.usgs.gov/neis/states/arkansas.Accessed January 20, 2006. Woods A.J., T.L. Foti, S.S. Chapman, J.M. Omernik, J.A. Wise, E.O. Murray, W. L. Prior, J.B. Pagan, Jr., J.A. Comstock, and M. Radford. 2004. Ecoregions of Arkansas (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, US.Geological Survey (map scale 1 : 1,000,000).

441634/060039 32 MAPS OR CHARTS IN THIS DOCKET CAN BE VIEWED AT THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION SECRETARY’S OFFICE.

PLEASE CALL (501) 682-5782 DURING REGULAR BUSINESS HOURS.