Enterprise Gas Processing, LLC Enterprise Well-Tie Yard Limited Impact Review

Submittal Item Tab 6 Land Suitability Analysis 4-502 (D)

The Land Suitability Analysis includes the following information: 1. Public Access to site – There is no Public Access to the site. Authorized vehicles must enter off County Road 215 onto Garden Gulch road, which is privately owned and maintained. All traffic must sign in at a guard shack for clearance, upon entering and exiting Garden Gulch Road. 2. Access to adjoining Roadways – Garden Gulch Road is the only adjoining roadway to the proposed site. 3. Easements – There are two existing Easements. One located outside the southern fence line running East-West, and one located outside the eastern fence line running North-South. 4. Topography and Slope – The project area lies at the head of a draw on a relatively flat surface. Elevation at the site is approximately 8,300 feet. Rolling ridgetops, bisected by draws dominate the landscape view in the area. 5. Natural Features – The proposed site was previously used and abandoned as a laydown yard by IXP Inc. There are no significant natural features on-site or off-site. 6. Drainage Features – The project area is located in the Parachute-Rhone watershed, on a ridge between Circle Dot Gulch and Sheep Kill Gulch, where topography is generally flat. These gulches drain into the West Fork of the Parachute Creek. Flows then ultimately proceed to the Colorado River. There are no existing man-made drainages or impoundments. 7. Water – A potable water supply is not proposed on the property since the land use is for storage of construction operation and construction materials only and no habitated structures are proposed on site. 8. Floodplain – The Site is not located in a geographic region that is affected by a flood plain or flood fringe. 9. Soils –Three soil types are found in the project area and include the following: 1)Northwater-Adel complex is a well drained soil with 5 to 50% Slope, 2) Parachute-Irigul-Rhone association is a well drained soil with 25 to 50% Slope and 3) Parachute-Rhone loam is a well drained soil with 5 to 30% slope. 10. Hazards – Geological hazards in the Piceance Basin include seismicity, landslides and ground subsidence. Seismicity-There are no known faults in the area. It is very unlikely that the activity in the project area would be affected by seismicity. Landslides-No landslide deposits were identified in the vicinity of the proposed Project. Ground Subsidence-There is no documented ground subsidence in the project area.

11. Natural Habitats – Vegetation is dominated by a mixture of mountain big sagebrush, Gamble Oak, service berry, snowberry, and aspen. A variety of grasses and forbs are distributed throughout the understory in the project area. A few common species include various wheatgrass species, bluegrass, western yarrow, dandelion, and lupine. No TESS plants were observed at the laydown yard during the survey. The terrain and soils found at the project site did not appear to be suitable habitat for these species. No federally listed threatened, endangered or candidate wildlife species are known to occupy the laydown yard and, thus, none of these species will be affected as a result of the proposed project. No State-listed wildlife species were observed during the survey of the project area. Sage Grouse sign was not observed within 200 feet of the site. The nearest active Sage Grouse lek to the project area is the Garden Gulch Lek which is located approximately 1.8 miles east of the laydown yard. Several raptor species nest, reside, forage, or pass through the general area of the laydown yard. Aspen groves within the project area are of sufficient height and density for tree nesting raptors. There is one known raptor nest within 0.25 miles of the laydown yard, belonging to any unknown species. There is potential for Brewer’s Sparrows to nest and forage in the sagebrush shrublands near the project area. The site is located within mule deer and American elk overall ranges and mule deer and elk summer ranges. CDOW “NDIS” mapping shows the project area to be within overall range for mountain lion and black bear. Mountain lion could travel through and hunt in the project area year round. The project area is not mapped by CDOW as a potential mountain lion conflict area. Black bear are a common resident mammal on the Roan Plateau. No mountain lion or black bear sign were observed on the site. Black bear sign was observed in an aspen grove north of the site, however. Common small mammal species that may be present on the project site include coyote, bobcat, golden-mantled ground squirrel, northern pocket gopher, mountain cottontail, white-tailed jackrabbit and least chipmunk. The project area does not lie within overall range for Wild Turkey, although it is possible that Wild Turkeys could occur in the area. The project area’s nearby shrublands, understory grasses, and nearby aspen trees provide nesting and foraging habitats for various other migratory and non-migratory bird species, depending on the season of the year. Sagebrush lizard, short-horned lizard, Western terrestrial garter snake, and racer are reptiles potentially occurring in the project area. Due to lack of water resources in the area, no amphibian species that are known to occur in Garfield County are present at the site. No potential jurisdictional COE crossings were observed during the survey conducted by WestWater Engineering. 12. Resource Areas – Grand River Institute (GRI) conducted a Class I cultural resource inventory for the proposed laydown yard site. Findings show that no previously recorded sites are located within the project area, and that no further consideration of cultural resources is recommended for the proposed project.

Thank you for your facilitation of this project. Please feel free to contact Alex Lopez with any questions.

Sincerely,

Alex Lopez EPCO, Inc. Land Representative P.O. Box 1298 Grand Junction, CO 81502 970-261-6305 Cell 713-803-9432 Fax [email protected] NOXIOUS WEED SURVEY ENTERPRISE WELL TIE YARD

Cover Photo: view of well tie yard.

Prepared for: Enterprise Gas Processing LLC

Prepared by: WestWater Engineering 2516 Foresight Circle #1 Grand Junction, CO 81505

September 2009 INTRODUCTION

WestWater Engineering at the request of Enterprise Gas Processing LLC (Enterprise), conducted a site survey to locate and identify noxious weeds that occur at the Enterprise well tie yard. The well tie yard is located in Section 2, Township 6 South, Range 97 West (Figure 1). The project site has been previously disturbed and is located near several developed oil and gas roads.

This report provides site specific noxious weeds observed at the Enterprise well tie yard, recommended treatments and management strategies for weed species observed at the site can be found in the Piceance Basin Field Wide Integrated Noxious and Invasive Weed Management Plan for Enterprise (WestWater 2009).

The Colorado Noxious Weed Act (State of Colorado 2005) requires local governing bodies to develop noxious weed management plans. Both the State of Colorado and Garfield County maintain a list of plants that are considered to be noxious weeds. The State of Colorado noxious weed list includes three categories. List A species must be eradicated whenever detected (none were found). List B species include weeds whose spread should be halted (2 species found). List C species are widespread, but the State will assist local jurisdictions which choose to manage those weeds (1 species found).

All observations were recorded using handheld Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers and locations were recorded as Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates (Datum: NAD 83, Zone: 12). Photographs were taken of the project site and weed-infested areas found during the survey.

LANDSCAPE SETTING

The project area lies at the head of a draw on a relatively flat surface. Elevation at the site is approximately 8,300 feet. Rolling ridgetops, bisected by draws dominate the landscape view in the area. Vegetation in the area is dominated by a mixture of mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata var. vaseyana), Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii), serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), snowberry (Symphoricarpos rotundifolius), and aspen (Populus tremuloides). Groves of aspen and prefer northern exposures where soil moisture and temperatures are suitable for these species. A variety of grasses and forbs are distributed throughout the understory in the lease area. A few common species include various wheatgrass species (Elymus spp. or Pascopyrum spp.), bluegrass (Poa spp.), western yarrow (Achillea lanulosa), dandelion (Taraxacum spp), and lupine (Lupinus spp). NOXIOUS WEEDS Colorado State listed noxious weeds found at the well tie yard site include: bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale), and cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). Other common annual weeds observed at the site include: prostrate knotweed (Polygonum aviculare), kochia (Kochia scoparia), Russian thistle (Salsola spp.), tumble mustard (Sisymbrium altissimum), lambsquarter (Chenopodium berlandieri), and pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Table 1 gives a brief description of noxious weed species observed at the project site.

WestWater Engineering Page 1 of 4 September 2009

Table 1. Enterprise well tie yard site list of noxious weeds and their estimated extent. Common Name*/ Scientific Type** General Locations and Comments USDA Symbol Name Cirsium Bull thistleB B Scattered throughout project site. vulgare CheatgrassC Bromus A Thinly scattered in sagebrush and near the tectorum project site. HoundstongueB Cynoglossum B One small patch in pastureland near south- officinale central portion of survey area.

* 8CCR 1203-19, Colorado Department of Agriculture, Bold type on Garfield County list; BState of Colorado “B” list, CState of Colorado “C” list,State of Colorado 2005,Whitson et al. 1996, Sirota 2004, NRCS 2009 ** A=Annual, B=Bi-Annual, P=Perennial, and CP=Creeping Perennial

A list of the GPS coordinates of Garfield County listed noxious weeds observed at the well tie yard can be found in Table 2.

Table 2. Garfield County listed noxious weeds observed on the Enterprise well tie yard.

Common Name Easting Northing BULL THISTLE 742477.2694 4381292.392 BULL THISTLE 742474.1928 4381312.301 BULL THISTLE 742470.9647 4381337.506 BULL THISTLE 742389.4186 4381324.934 BULL THISTLE 742387.2586 4381367.132 HOUNDSTONGUE 742466.5786 4381347.445 HOUNDSTONGUE 742391.894 4381367.613

WestWater Engineering Page 2 of 4 September 2009

WestWater Engineering Page 3 of 4 September 2009

REFERENCES

Colorado Weed Management Association (CWMA). 2009. Colorado Noxious Weed List. URL: http://www.cwma.org/nxwdid.htm#B%20List

NRCS. 2009. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, September 2009). National Plant Data Center, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490.

Sirota, Judith. 2004. Best management practices for noxious weeds of Mesa County. CSU Cooperative Extension Tri River Area, Grand Junction, Colorado URL: http://www.coopext.colostate.edu/TRA/PLANTS/index.html#http://www.coopext.colosta te.edu/TRA/PLANTS/bindweedmite.html

State of Colorado. 2005. Rules pertaining to the administration and enforcement of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act, 35-5-1-119, C.R.S. 2003. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Plant Industry Division, Denver, 78 pp.

WestWater Engineering. 2009. Integrated Noxious and Invasive Weed Management Plan, Enterprise Products Operating, LLC. WestWater Engineering, Grand Junction, CO.

Whitson, T.D. (editor), L. C. Burrill, S. A. Dewey, D. W. Cudney, B. E. Nelson, R. D. Lee, and Robert Parker. 1996. Weeds of the West. Western Society of Weed Science in cooperation with Cooperative Extension Services, University of Wyoming. Laramie, 630pp.

WestWater Engineering Page 4 of 4 September 2009

WILDLIFE AND SENSITIVE AREAS REPORT ENTERPRISE WELL TIE YARD GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO

Cover Photo: View of well tie yard.

Prepared for: Enterprise Gas Processing LLC.

Prepared by: WestWater Engineering 2516 Foresight Circle #1 Grand Junction, CO 81505

September 2009

December 2008

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description At the request of Enterprise Gas Processing LLC. (Enterprise), WestWater Engineering (WWE) has prepared a Wildlife and Sensitive Areas Report for the Enterprise well tie yard. The 2.3 acre project site is located in Section 2, Township 6 South, Range 97 West (Figure 1). The project area lies within Garfield County, Colorado, and is located on private land. Access to the project area is currently available via County Road 215 to Garden Gulch Road and then approximately 10 miles along Garden Gulch Road to the site.

The primary use of the site and surrounding area is natural gas extraction/development, livestock grazing, and wildlife habitat. The general project area is currently undergoing natural gas development including the drilling of wells, and the construction of pipelines, compressors, and access roads.

1.2 General Survey Information In preparation for developing the following report, WWE biologists performed field surveys and assessments of wildlife, wildlife habitat, and habitat for sensitive plant species on the proposed project area. WWE conducted surveys on September 16, 2009, which is past the blooming period and nesting season for many species of concern that may potentially occur within or near the project area. The purpose of the surveys was to determine the wildlife and sensitive plant species that occupy the project area at varying periods during the year, and species that would potentially be impacted as a result of the layodwn yard and operational activities. Factors considered include: 1) soil type and texture; 2) existing land management; 3) absence or presence of wildlife and plant species including raptors, and other sensitive birds species; 4) special designations by Federal and State wildlife agencies; and 5) the existing natural vegetation community. This report provides written documentation that describes survey results and recommended mitigation measures.

2.0 LANDSCAPE SETTING

2.1 Vegetation Vegetation is dominated by a mixture of mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata var. vaseyana), Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii), serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), snowberry (Symphoricarpos rotundifolius), and aspen (Populus tremuloides). Groves of aspen prefer northern exposures where soil moisture and temperatures are suitable. A variety of grasses and forbs are distributed throughout the understory in the lease area. A few common species include various wheatgrass species (Elymus spp. or Pascopyrum spp.), bluegrass (Poa spp.), western yarrow (Achillea lanulosa), dandelion (Taraxacum spp), and lupine (Lupinus spp). The climate for the Roan Plateau is considered semi-arid with a wide range of temperatures and precipitation. The closest weather station is at the Altenbern Ranch on Roan Creek, which has provided reliable records to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) since 1948. The average annual precipitation at the ranch is 16.41 inches, with a record low temperature of minus 38 degrees Fahrenheit and a record high temperature of 104 degrees Fahrenheit (NOAA website: www.noaa.gov). The average annual precipitation at the upper elevations in the project area should equal, and likely exceed, that observed along Roan Creek. WestWater Engineering Page 1 of 14 September 2009

2.2 Soils Soil types include loams and clay loams. Soil types present in the project area are those commonly found along mountains and hill slopes throughout Garfield County. Mapped soil types, as published by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), were reviewed to determine the soil types and vegetation characteristics of the project site and surrounding property (NRCS 2009). Three soil types are found in the project area and include the following: 1. Northwater-Adel complex is a well drained soil with 5 to 50 percent slope. 2. Parachute-Irigul-Rhone association is a well drained soil with 25 to 50 percent slope. 3. Parachute-Rhone loam is a well drained soil with 5 to 30 percent slope.

2.3 Terrain

The project area lies at the head of a draw on a relatively flat surface. Elevation at the site is approximately 8,300 feet. Rolling ridgetops bisected by draws dominate the landscape view in the area.

3.0 WILDLIFE AND PLANT SURVEYS

3.1 Background Information Descriptions of critical habitats for federally listed threatened, endangered, and candidate fish and wildlife species were reviewed in the Federal Register, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Wildlife habitat (activities) maps, provided via the internet by the Colorado Division of Wildlife’s (CDOW) “Natural Diversity Information Source” (NDIS), were reviewed and incorporated into this report in reference to mule deer, elk, black bear, mountain lion, and state-listed threatened, endangered, and species of “special concern”(CDOW 2009a).

A list of Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and their habitats was reviewed. This list is published by the FWS through a Memorandum of Understanding with the BLM and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), which places high conservation priorities for BCC species (USFWS 2009). Not all of these BCC species occur regularly in Colorado, and some are present only as seasonal migrants. Of those known to breed in Colorado, only a portion are known or suspected to breed within the vicinity of the project area. Avian literature sources such as the “Birds of Western Colorado Plateau and Mesa Country” (Righter et al. 2004) and the “Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas” (Kingery 1998) were reviewed to determine the likelihood for species occurrence within the project area. Bird identification and taxonomic nomenclature are in accordance with that applied by the Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas Project (Kingery 1998). The determination of the presence/absence of suitable habitat for threatened, endangered, and “sensitive species” (TESS) plants was based on previous WWE observations of typical habitat occupied by BLM or USFS sensitive plants, the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) Rare Plant Field Guide (Spackman et al. 1997), and locations of species documented in the CNHP statewide database.

3.2 Survey Methods WestWater Engineering Page 2 of 14 September 2009

A preliminary review of the project area using aerial photograph, was conducted to familiarize personnel with vegetation types and terrain and as an aid to help determine the likelihood of the presence of threatened, endangered, or sensitive wildlife and plant species. Field data, including general project location, boundaries, and reported features, were verified and/or recorded with the aid of a handheld global positioning system (GPS) receiver utilizing NAD83/WGS84 map datum, with all coordinate locations based on the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system. WWE biologists conducted pedestrian surveys of the area to identify and locate wildlife species, wildlife sign (tracks, fecal droppings, and vegetation disturbance), vegetation communities, and wildlife habitats. Vegetation types were determined through field identification of plants, aerial photography, and on-the-ground assessments of plant abundance. Identification of plant species was aided by using pertinent published field guides (Spackman et. al. 1997, Whitson et al. 2004, Weber and Wittman 2001, CWMA 2007, Kershaw et al. 1998). Visual searches for raptor and other bird species nests were focused on aspen stands and cliff nesting habitat within a 0.25 mile distance from the project site. Nest searches and bird identification were aided with the use of binoculars and song recognition, where needed. Photographs were taken of the general project location, surrounding vegetation, and terrain (Cover Photo).

4.0 RESULTS OF SURVEY

4.1 Threatened Endangered and Sensitive Species (TESS) of Plants Special status species of plants that may be present in the project area, and their habitats, are listed in Tables 1 and 2. There are two categories for TESS plant listing, 1) Federal Candidate Species (1 species) and 2) BLM Sensitive Species (5 species). Nomenclature and habitat descriptions are based on the CHNP literature (Spackman et al. 1997).

Table 1. Potential Federally-listed Threatened, Endangered and Candidate plant species Scientific Common Status* Habitat Preference Name Name Endemic to Garfield County with only five known Penstemon Parachute occurrences; sparsely vegetated, south facing, steep, white C shale talus in the Mahogany Zone of the Parachute Creek debilis penstemon Member of the Green River Formation. Elevation: 7,800- 9,000 ft E= Federal Endangered, T= Federal Threatened, C= Federal Candidate

WestWater Engineering Page 3 of 14 September 2009

Table 2. Potential listed sensitive plant species that may occur in the project area. Common Scientific Name Habitat Preference Name Gentianella Green River Formation; barren shale knolls and slopes; elevation Utah gentian tortuosa 8,500 to 10,800 feet. Lesquerella Piceance Shale outcrops of the Green River Formation; on ledges and parviflora bladderpod slopes of canyons in open areas; elevation 6,200 to 8,600 feet. Mentzelia Roan Cliffs Broken shale slopes of the Green River formation. Typically rhizomata blazingstar found on talus slopes below the Roan Cliffs. Broken shale slopes of the Green River formation. Typically Thalictrum Sun-loving found on talus slopes below the Roan Cliffs, often in habitat heliophilum meadowrue similar to Roan Cliff blazingstar. Sullivantia Hanging garden Occurs in and around waterfalls, wet cliff and boulders in shale hapemanii sullivantia geology on the Roan Plateau. var.purpusii

No TESS plants were observed at the well tie yard during the survey. The terrain and soils found at the project site did not appear to be suitable habitat for these species.

4.2 Federal Listed Threatened, Endangered, Candidate Wildlife Species

No federally listed threatened, endangered or candidate wildlife species are known to occupy the well tie yard and, thus, none of these species will be affected as a result of the proposed project. All perennial and ephemeral washes potentially affected by construction (silt loading) drain into Circle Dot Gulch which is tributary to Parachute Creek. Flows then proceed into a portion of the Colorado River that is designated critical habitat for the Federally endangered Colorado pikeminnow and razorback sucker (Maddux 1993).

4.3 State Listed Threatened, Endangered and Special Concern Wildlife Species WWE biologists determined that two state listed threatened, endangered or special concern species may occur within or be affected by development and are listed in Table 3 (CDOW 2008b).

Table 3. Potential State-listed Threatened, Endangered and Special Concern wildlife species State Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Preference Status Sagebrush dominated mountain steppe shrublands with rolling terrain. Large continuous areas of Centrocercus Greater Sage- sagebrush on flat or gently rolling terrain with urophasianus Grouse SC open areas in vicinity for leks. Nests in herbaceous areas within sagebrush. Confirmed breeder in Garfield County. Oncorhynchus clarki Colorado River SC Perennial mountain streams on the Roan Plateau in pleuriticus cutthroat trout drainages of Parachute and Roan Creeks. * E= State Endangered, T= State Threatened, SC = Species of Concern WestWater Engineering Page 4 of 14 September 2009

No State-listed species were observed during the survey of the project area. Sage Grouse sign (fecal pellets, feathers, cecal pellets, etc.) was not observed within 200 feet of the site during the surveys. The nearest active Sage Grouse lek to the project area is the Garden Gulch Lek which is located approximately 1.8 miles east of the well tie yard.

There were no perennial streams and no bodies of water large enough on the site to support Colorado River cutthroat trout.

4.4 Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) 4.4.1 Raptors Several raptor (birds of prey) species nest, reside, forage or pass through the general area of the well tie yard. Raptor species that are common to the area include Golden Eagle, Red-tailed Hawk, American Kestrel, Cooper’s Hawk, Sharp-shinned Hawk, Northern Harrier, Peregrine Falcon, Flammulated Owl, Long-eared Owl and Great Horned Owl. The aspen groves within the project area are of sufficient height and density for tree nesting raptors.

Raptor species that are listed as BCC within the project area are listed in Table 4. In addition to the BCC list, eight other species of raptors that could potentially be found nesting in the pipeline project area are also listed in Table 4.

Table 4. Raptor species that may be present in the project area Common Scientific BCC Habitat & Breeding Records Name Name Cooper’s Accipiter Cottonwood riparian to spruce/fir forests, Hawk cooperii N including piñon/juniper woodlands. Nests most frequently in pines and aspen. Sharp- High density young, or even-aged, stands of shinned Accipiter N coniferous forest and deciduous forests of Hawk striatus aspen or oak brush with small stands of conifers. Diverse habitats including grasslands, piñon- Red-tailed Buteo juniper woodlands and deciduous, coniferous Hawk jamaicensis N and riparian forests. Nests in mature trees (especially cottonwood, aspen, and pines) and on cliffs and utility poles. Grassland, shrubland, agricultural areas, and Northern Circus marshes. Nests in areas with abundant cover Harrier cyaneus Y (e.g., tall reeds, cattails, grasses) in grasslands and marshes. Also known to nest in high- elevation sagebrush. Northern Accipter N Typically in high elevation coniferous or aspen Goshawk gentiles forest. Can occur in piñon-juniper habitat. Peregrine Falco Piñon-juniper woodlands and coniferous and Falcon peregrinus Y riparian forest near cliffs. Nests on ledges of high cliffs away from human disturbance.

WestWater Engineering Page 5 of 14 September 2009

Table 4. Raptor species that may be present in the project area Common Scientific BCC Habitat & Breeding Records Name Name Grasslands, shrublands, agricultural areas, Golden Eagle Aquila Y piñon-juniper woodlands, and ponderosa chrysaetos forests. Prefers nest sites on cliffs and sometimes in trees in rugged areas. American Falco Coniferous and deciduous forests and open Kestrel sparverius N terrain with suitable perches. Nests in cavities in trees, cliffs and buildings. Swainson’s Buteo Y Nests in oak brush in shrubland and woodland Hawk swainsoni communities on the Roan Plateau. Flammulated Otus Y Found commonly on the Roan Plateau, nests in Owl flammeolus aspen groves above 7,000 ft. Great Horned Bubo Occupies diverse habitats including riparian, Owl virginianus N deciduous and coniferous forests with adjacent open terrain for hunting. Northern Aegolius Mountain and foothills forest and canyon Saw-whet acadicus N country. Significant use of piñon-juniper Owl woodland and Douglas-fir. Occupies mixed shrublands. Nests and roost in Long-eared Asio otus N sites in dense cottonwoods, willows, scrub oak, Owl junipers, tamarisk and dense forest of mixed conifers and aspens.

There is one known raptor nest within 0.25 miles of the well tie yard, belonging to an unknown species. Though no active raptor nests were observed, the survey was conducted past the nesting season for raptor species in Colorado. Unoccupied raptor nests within 0.25 miles of the project area are shown in Figure 1.

4.4.2 Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) other than raptors In addition to the raptors discussed above, WWE biologists surveyed the project area for the presence of the sensitive BCC and their habitat that could be present in the project area. BCC habitat and nesting records, as described in the Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas (Kingery 1998), Colorado Birds (Andrews and Righter 1992), and Birds of Western Colorado Plateau and Mesa Country (Righter et al. 2004) in the vicinity of the project area, are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3. BCC species that may be present in the project area Common Scientific Name Habitat & Breeding Records Name Black Rosy Leucosticte High elevation woodlands and shrublands Finch atrata

WestWater Engineering Page 6 of 14 September 2009

Table 3. BCC species that may be present in the project area Common Scientific Name Habitat & Breeding Records Name Brewer’s Spizella breweri Sagebrush shrublands. Confirmed breeder in Garfield County. Sparrow

Brown-capped Leucosticte High elevation woodlands and shrublands. This species is a Rosy-Finch australis confirmed breeder in Garfield County. (Kingery 1998)

No BCC were observed during the survey, however the survey was conducted outside the migratory bird breeding and nesting season. There is potential for Brewer’s Sparrows to nest and forage in the sagebrush shrublands near the project area.

4.5 Terrestrial Species 4.5.1 American Elk and Mule Deer The site is located within mule deer and American elk overall ranges and mule deer and elk summer ranges. The site is also situated within an elk production area as mapped by CDOW “NDIS” (Figure 1). According to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission’s amended rules, effective April 1, 2009, elk production areas are included in the new rules as sensitive wildlife habitat (COGCC 2008 and 2009). No development activity should take place between May 15 and June 15 to meet the CDOW and COGCC standards for the protection of elk production areas surrounding the project area. During the survey, deer and elk droppings were observed throughout the project area.

Elk and mule deer utilize the summer range extensively on the Roan Plateau, following the snow line to higher elevations in the spring. Mule deer rely on the existing sagebrush and shrubs for their primary food source, while elk rely primarily rely on available grasses for food. Adjacent areas of aspen and scattered oakbrush/serviceberry copses provide necessary forage and production areas as well as escape, thermal, and loafing cover for deer and elk, particularly during the summer period.

4.5.2 Black Bear and Mountain Lion

CDOW “NDIS” mapping shows the project area to be within overall range for mountain lion and black bear.

Mountain lion typically follow migrating deer herds in search of deer as the primary food source. Mountain lion have large territories and are highly mobile as they search for food or new territories. Mountain lion prefer to hunt in rocky terrain near woodland habitats. These habitat conditions occur near the project area. Mountain lion could travel through and hunt in the Dry Hollow project area year-round. The project area is not mapped by CDOW as a potential mountain lion Water Facility conflict area.

WestWater Engineering Page 7 of 14 September 2009

Dry Hollow Water Facility

Black bear are a common resident mammal on the Roan Plateau. Black bears are omnivorous and the diet depends largely on what kinds of food are seasonally available, although their mainstay is vegetation. In spring, emerging grasses and succulent forbs are favored. In summer and early fall, bears take advantage of a variety of berries and other fruits. In late fall, preferences are for berries and mast (acorns), where available. When the opportunity is present, black bears eat a diversity of insects, including beetle larvae and social insects (ants, wasps, bees, termites, etc.), and they kill a variety of mammals, including rodents, rabbits, and young or unwary ungulates. The Roan Plateau provides important habitat to black bear during the late spring, summer and fall months with its abundance of berry and mast producing plants including serviceberry, chokecherry and Gambel oak. Black bear are in hibernation from mid-November through May.

No mountain lion or black bear or their sign were observed on the site. Black bear sign was observed in an aspen grove north of the site, however.

4.5.3 Small Mammals Common small mammal species (small game, furbearers, non-game) that may be present on the project site include coyote (Canis latrans), bobcat (Lynx rufus), golden-mantled ground squirrel (Spermophilus lateralis), northern pocket gopher (Thomomys talpoides), mountain cottontail (Syvilagus nuttallii), white-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus townsendii), and least chipmunk (Tamias minimus). None of these species were observed during the survey. 4.5.4 Other Bird Species The project area does not lie within overall range for Wild Turkey (Merriam’s - Meleagris gallopavo merriami), although it is possible that Wild Turkeys could occur in the area.

The project area’s nearby shrublands, understory grasses, and nearby aspen trees provide nesting and foraging habitats for various other migratory and non-migratory bird species, depending on the season of the year. Bird species observed during the survey include: Mountain Bluebird (Sialia currucoides) and Common Raven (Corvus corax). Other bird species that may occur on the project site include; Black-billed Magpie (Pica pica), Vesper Sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus), Tree Swallows (Tachycineta thalassina), and Turkey Vulture (Cathartes aura).

4.5.5 Reptiles

No reptiles were observed on the site. Sagebrush lizard (Sceloporus graciousus), short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi), Western terrestrial garter snake (Thamnophis elegans), and racer (Coluber constrictor) are reptiles potentially occurring in the project area.

4.6 Aquatic Species 4.6.1 Amphibians The following amphibian species that are known to occur in Garfield County are not present at the project site, due to lack of water sources: northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens), Great Basin spadefoot (Spea intermontana), tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum), and chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata). WestWater Engineering Page 8 of 14 September 2009

4.7 Army Corp of Engineers (COE)

WWE biologists also attempted to locate any Army Corps of Engineers (COE) potential jurisdictional Waters of the United States (WOUS) during the survey. No potential jurisdictional COE crossings were observed during the survey. 4.8 Cultural Resources

At the request of Enterprise, Grand River Institute (GRI) conducted a Class I cultural resource inventory for the Enterprise well tie yard and is a separate document which is attached at the end of this report (GRI 2009). Findings show that no previously recorded sites are located within the project area, and that no further consideration of cultural resources is recommended for the proposed project.

5.0 AFFECTS TO WILDLIFE

5.1 Wildlife Impact Assessment The proposed project area will affect site-specific native vegetation and wildlife habitat adjacent to the project site. Because the area has already been disturbed, the project will minimally affect wildlife. The project will contribute to the overall cumulative impacts to the wildlife populations in the area that are experiencing gradual habitat loss, fragmentation, alteration, and displacement through increased development.

5.1.1 Terrestrial Species 5.1.1.1 Elk and Mule Deer Potential affects include the temporary loss of a small amount of elk and mule deer overall ranges, summer ranges, and a portion of an elk production area. Human presence and activities during the project may create a direct disturbance for elk and deer populations within and immediately adjacent to the project area. This disturbance may add stress to these species during critical times of the year and may also cause avoidance of the area.

5.1.1.2 Birds

Passerine Species: The affects to foraging and nesting habitat to a small number of bird species is expected to be minimal. If the project should require any clearing of vegetation beyond the boundaries of the existing disturbance, affects to local bird species would be more significant should vegetation clearing occur during the breeding/nesting season. Raptors: No occupied raptor nests were observed within 0.25 miles of the project site. Raptors may be indirectly affected by disturbance associated with the proposed project, due to equipment and human presence. The project may also cause minimal loss of raptor foraging and hunting grounds in the area.

WestWater Engineering Page 9 of 14 September 2009

5.1.1.3 Mountain Lion and Black Bear Due to the large home range of mountain lions and black bears, and because of the extensive amount of available habitat for these species, no significant affects from this project for these species are expected.

5.1.1.4 Small Mammals The amount of available habitat for small mammals, including bats, should not be affected significantly by the well tie yard. 5.1.1.5 Reptiles The amount of available habitat for reptiles should not be impacted significantly by the proposed well tie yard.

5.1.2 Aquatic Species 5.1.2.1 Amphibians Downstream individuals would be most susceptible in the event contaminants were introduced to surface water during construction or operational activities. Amphibians should not be impacted by the project, because there is no habitat for amphibians at the project site.

5.1.2.2 Endangered Fish The Colorado pikeminnow and the razorback sucker are both federally-listed fish species that occur in the Colorado River. Potential impacts from the well tie yard includes: sedimentation of tributaries to the Colorado River, spills of chemicals and fuels from equipment.

It is not likely that endangered fish will be affected by this project, due to both the project size and its location from the Colorado River. Appropriate application of stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Spill Prevention Counter Control (SPCC) measures will also help reduce any potential impacts to aquatic species.

6.0 AFFECTS TO TESS PLANT SPECIES

No TESS plants and/or their habitats were found during surveys, and therefore no affects on TESS plants are expected.

7.0 MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations for mitigation are presented for maintenance and improvement of wildlife habitat, quality, and prevention of human-caused impacts to resources.

7.1 Maintenance and Restoration of Habitat Sagebrush communities in the project area have declined over the years and continue to do so as a result of development and loss of habitat. Noxious weeds and invasive plant species have now invaded many habitats due to construction and ground clearing of native vegetation.

WestWater Engineering Page 10 of 14 September 2009

Woodlands, sagebrush, and native grasses are key food sources for elk and mule deer, and provide nesting and foraging habitat for a variety of migratory birds and small mammals. Reclamation plans should include efforts to restore these vegetation communities, particularly the sagebrush community for sage-obligate species.

Reclamation recommendations include the following: 1. Seeding of native Wyoming and big basin sagebrush should be added to the re-vegetation plan. Local, ecologically adapted sagebrush seed from the existing sagebrush vegetation near the project area should be used in reclamation.

2. Ongoing control of noxious and invasive weeds is recommended as an additional method to maintain native vegetation communities and favorable wildlife habitats.

7.2 Planning for Sensitive Time Periods and Areas 7.2.1 Mule Deer and Elk Disturbance associated with construction equipment and personnel may cause elk and mule deer to select habitats in more secluded areas away from the site. Any construction and/or operational activities during the summer months will impact deer and elk summer range as mapped by the CDOW “NDIS”. According to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission’s amended rules, effective April 1, 2009, elk production areas are included as sensitive wildlife habitat (COGCC 2009). No development activity should take place between May 15 to June 15 to meet the CDOW and COGCC standards for the protection of elk production areas. The project location is located within an elk production area, but the site has been previously disturbed. The amount of available habitat for elk calving is limited and fragmented in the area due to oil and gas development. Because the project site and nearby area is heavily developed it is highly unlikely that elk would use the site during calving. 7.2.2 Migratory Birds In order to comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act by showing a good faith effort to reduce potential impacts on nesting birds, if any brush/tree clearing is necessary, it should take place outside of the nesting seasons. Nesting season is generally considered between May 1 and July 31 in this area for most species. June 1 to July 15 is the peak period when most incubation and brood rearing takes place. If brush/tree clearing can occur prior to May 1, most affected birds will relocate to alternate nesting sites. After mid-to-late July, most fledging has occurred and brush/tree clearing impacts would be minimized.

Pinyon Jays are an exception to typical nesting periods in this area and are known as an early nester. Records show nests with eggs as early as March 23. Often, young birds have fledged by May 15. Because suitable Pinyon Jay habitat is not present at the project site, the pre-May 1 vegetation clearing recommendation is acceptable and adequate to avoid destruction of any potentially active migratory bird nests.

WestWater Engineering Page 11 of 14 September 2009

7.2.4 Raptors Activities associated with the well tie yard are not likely to impact raptor populations, and therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary.

7.3 Other Mitigation Practices

7.3.1 Erosion Efforts to control soil erosion within the project area should be implemented. Disturbed soils within the project area are susceptible to erosion and downstream water quality could be negatively affected by increased soil erosion. In addition to stormwater management around the project site, other current factors (noxious weeds, livestock grazing, other natural gas development) affecting soil erosion should be managed and remedial measures implemented.

8.0 REFERENCES

Andrews, R., and R. Righter. 1992. Colorado Birds: A Reference to Their Distribution and Habitat. Denver Museum of Natural History, Colorado. CDOW. 2009a. Colorado Division of Wildlife. Natural Diversity Information Source. http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/wildlife.asp. CDOW. 2009b. Colorado Division of Wildlife. Wildlife Species of Concern. Threatened and Endangered List. CDOW Web Home Page: http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeSpecies/SpeciesOfConcern/ThreatenedEndangeredList. COGCC. 2009. Amended Rules. Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Department of Natural Resources. Denver, CO. CWMA. 2007. S. Anthony, T. D’Amato, A. Doran, S. Elzinga, J. Powell, I. Schonle, and K. Uhing. Noxious Weeds of Colorado, Ninth Edition. Colorado Weed Management Proposed Association, Centennial. Building Site GRI (Grand River Institute). 2009. Report of the Class I Cultural Resource Inventory for a Limited Impact Review for a Proposed Laydown Yard on Private Lands in Garfield County, Colorado for EPCO, Inc. Grand River Institute. Grand Junction, CO. Suarez Subdivision Lot 44 - Grass Mesa Kershaw, Linda, A. MacKinnon, and J. Pojar. 1998. Plants of the Rocky Mountains. Lone Pine Publishing, Auburn, Washington. Kingery, H. E. 1998. Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas. Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver. Maddux, H., L. Fitzpatrick, and W. Noonan. 1993. Colorado River Endangered Fishes Critical Habitat. Biological Support Document. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Utah/Colorado Field Office, Salt Lake City, Utah, 225 pp.

NDIS. 2007. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, 6060 Broadway, Denver, Colorado: http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/index.html

WestWater Engineering Page 12 of 14 September 2009

NRCS. 2009. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Righter, R., R. Levad, C. Dexter, and K. Potter. 2004. Birds of Western Colorado Plateau and Mesa Country. Grand Valley Audubon Society, Grand Junction, Colorado. Spackman, S., B. Jennings, J. Coles, C. Dawson, M. Minton, A. Kratz, and C. Spurrier. 1997. Colorado Rare Plant Field Guide. Prepared for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program. USFWS. 2009. Birds of Conservation Concern 2009. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. Weber, W. A., and R. C. Wittman. 2001. Colorado Flora Western Slope, Third Edition. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.

Whitson, T. D. (editor), L. C. Burrill, S. A. Dewey, D. W. Cudney, B. E. Nelson, R. D. Lee, and Robert Parker. 2004. Weeds of the West, Ninth Edition. Western Society of Weed Science in cooperation with Cooperative Extension Services, University of Wyoming. Laramie.

WestWater Engineering Page 13 of 14 September 2009

WestWater Engineering Page 9 of 14 September 2009

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT Geology and Hazard Effect on Groundwater and Aquifer Recharge Area Environmental Effects: Radiation Hazard Evaluation

JACKRABBIT LAYDOWN YARD ENTERPRISE WELL-TIE YARD GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO

Prepared for: Enterprise Gas Processing LLC.

Prepared by: WestWater Engineering 2516 Foresight Circle #1 Grand Junction, CO 81505

October 2009

GEOLOGY AND HAZARD (GEOLOGIC HAZARDS)

The project area is in the southern part of the Piceance Basin in northwestern Colorado. The Piceance Basin is an asymmetric Laramide basin that trends northwest to southeast, formed during the Laramide Orogeny, the mountain building event at the end of Cretaceous and early Tertiary that began the uplift of the Rocky Mountains. The elevation in the area is about 8,200 feet ASL.

The project area resides in the main body of the Uinta Formation (Hail and Smith 1994), where intertonguing with the Green River Formation is common, and the unit may be as much as 1000 feet thick. Structurally, the project area lies on the northern flank of the Crystal Creek Anticline. There are no faults in the area.

The Uinta is mostly brown weathering interbedded dolomitic marlstone, shale, oil shale, mudstone and claystone. There are some sandstone beds. The Green River formation consists of tongues in thee area that includes sandstone and siltstone. Both formations have been known to contain fossils.

Since the activity in the project area does not include disturbing bedrock, there should be no effects to the geology in the area.

Geological hazards in the Piceance Basin include seismicity, landslides and ground subsidence. These are described below:

• Seismicity. There are no known faults in the area. There is little earthquake activity in the general vicinity; however, no earthquakes greater than 6.0 magnitude have been recorded within a 60-mile radius of the site (Frankel et al, 1997). It is very unlikely that the activity in the project area would be affected by seismicity.

• Landslides. No landslide deposits were identified in the vicinity of the proposed Project (Hail and Smith 1994).

• Ground Subsidence. The major causes of ground subsidence in Colorado are solution of evaporate rocks, collapsible soils, and subsidence over mined out areas (Colorado Geological Survey 2001). None of the geological conditions for these subsidence hazards are present at the site, and there is no documented ground subsidence in the Project area.

According the to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Committee (COGCC 2009) there are over a dozen oil and gas well permits in a one mile radius of the vicinity. The activity in the project area, such as traffic, would add to effects of activity associated with any of these permits that are active.

RADIATION

There are no uranium deposits or tailings in the area, and therefore there should be no potential radiation hazards as defined by the state or County Health Departments. Furthermore, the equipment that would be stored in the Laydown Yard does not have any known radioactive components.

EFFECT ON GROUNDWATER AND AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS

General Information

The project area is located in the Parachute-Roan watershed (HUC 1401006) (EPA 2009). The area is located on a ridge between Circle Dot Gulch and Sheep Kill Gulch, where topography is generally flat. These gulches drain into the West Fork of the Parachute Creek. Flows then ultimately proceed to the Colorado River. There will be no grading or dirt moving on the Laydown Yard, and it is already an existing storage area. Therefore, the new use of the area would not affect any washes with sedimentation that would drain into the nearby gulches.

There should be no effects to surface water in the area, as no liquids will be stored on site. Any equipment stored on site would be properly maintained as to avoid leaks or spills.

Groundwater

Groundwater in the project area has not been explored; however, groundwater occurrence is expected to reflect the general conditions found throughout the Piceance Creek Basin. Three primary aquifers occur in the project area; the alluvial aquifer, and the upper and lower bedrock aquifers in the Uintah Formation and Parachute Creek Member of the Green River Formation.

Table 4: Summary of Hydrogeologic Units in the Piceance Basin Hydrogeologic Thickness Approx. Conductivity Yield Transmissivity Storage Unit (ft) Ave. (ft/day) (gpm) (ft2/day) Coefficient Depth (ft) Alluvium 30 to 140 70 50 to 200 (3) <50 to 2,700 to 0.20 (2) 300 20,000 (2) Upper 0 to <0.2 to >1.6 1 to 900 8 to 1,000 (2) 10-2 to Aquifer 1,400(1) 700(1) (1) (1) 10-3 (2) Lower 0 to <0.1 to >1.2 1 to 8 to 1,940 (2) 10-4 (2) Aquifer 1,870(1) 2,800(1) (1) 1,000 (1) (1) Topper, et al 2003; (2) Weeks et al 1974; (3) Based on saturated thickness given by (2)

Alluvial groundwater occurs at relatively shallow depths within the alluvial and colluvial deposits that exist in the Piceance Creek Basin. The presence of groundwater in the alluvium in the area is dependent on recharge by infiltration of precipitation and by lateral and upward flow

from underlying bedrock aquifers. Due to the head relationships between the alluvial aquifer and bedrock aquifers in the region, discharge to the bedrock aquifers from the alluvial aquifer is likely not common. The alluvial aquifer is composed of mixtures of clay, silt, sand, and various grades of gravel deposits that are derived from the erosion of surrounding Uinta Formation. The thickness of the alluvial aquifers in the area ranges from approximately 30 to 100 feet (Weeks 1974).

The upper aquifer is comprised of the Uinta Formation (sandstone, siltstone, and shale) and the upper Parachute Creek Member (marlstone, kerogenous shale, and siltstone). The upper aquifer may include perched zones within the Uinta portion of the aquifer, but generally exhibits a depth to water ranging from 250 to 360 ft on the ridge tops in the area. The upper aquifer ranges from approximately 900 ft to 1,700 ft thick depending on location and what boundary between aquifers is used. The upper aquifer receives some recharge from the infiltration of precipitation (likely no more than 10% of precipitation infiltrates).

The primary discharge pathways of the upper aquifer occur by leakage of groundwater into the lower aquifer, lateral discharge or vertical leakage to the alluvial aquifer, and spring discharge to the surface. Water quality in the upper aquifer is moderate, ranging from approximately 350 to 2,100 mg/L total dissolved solids (Weeks et al 1974). Wells completed in the upper aquifer yield groundwater at variable rates depending on what zones are screened; flow rates vary from a few gpm to over 50 gpm.

The lower aquifer is comprised of the lower Parachute Creek Member (marlstone, and illitic siltstone, and kerogenous shale). Nahcolite deposits in the form of beds and nodules commonly occur in the upper to middle sections of the aquifer. The lower aquifer generally exhibits heads below the upper aquifer of 50 to 100 ft on the ridge tops in the area. The lower aquifer ranges from approximately 800 ft to 1,000 ft thick depending on location and what portions yield water readily to wells. It is generally accepted that groundwater below the “dissolution surface”, the boundary between evaporite deposits that have been dissolved away by groundwater and non- dissolved evaporite deposits exist, is of minimal quantities and the low permeability does not yield groundwater to wells. (Weeks 1974)

Wells in the vicinity of the project area include three water wells drilled by Chevron in the early 1980s (CDWR 2009). These wells are likely completed in the Uinta Formation and alluvium. Permits have expired on these wells and they are not of domestic use.

In general, the use of the Laydown Yard should have no effect on surface or groundwater resources in the area.

REFERENCES

Colorado Division of Water Resources (CDWR) Website. 2009. http://water.state.co.us/groundwater/groundwater.asp October, 2009

Colorado Geologic Survey, 2001. Rock Talk. Vol. 4, No. 4. October 2001. http://geosurvey.state.co.us/pubs/rocktalk/rtv4n4.pdf

Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Committee (COGCC). 2009. Website: http://cogcc.state.co.us/

EPA 2009. Surf Your Watershed Website and Water Quality Information. http://oaspub.epa.gov/tmdl/w305b_report_v2.huc?p_huc=14010006&p_state=CO. October, 2009.

Frankel, Arthur, Mueller, Charles, Barnhard, Theodore, Perkins, David, Leyendecker, E. V., Dickman, Nancy, Hanson, Stanley, and Hopper, Margaret, 1997, National 1996 Seismic Hazard Maps: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 97-131.

Hail, William J. and Marjorie C. Smith. 1994. Geologic Map of the Northern Part of the Piceance Creek Basin, Northwestern Colorado. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Inestigations Series, Map I-2400. 1994.

Weeks, J.B., Leavesley, G.H.,Welder, F.A., and G.J. Saulnier Jr. 1974. Simulated Effects of Oil- Shale Development on the Hydrology of Piceance Basin, Colorado. Geological Survey Prof. Paper 908. United States Gov’t. Printing Office, Washington.

4 REPORT ON THE CLASS I CULTURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY FOR A LIMITED IMPACT REVIEW FOR A PROPOSED LAYDOWN YARD ON PRIVATE LANDS IN GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, FOR EPCO, INC.

GRI Project No. 2987

17 September 2009

Prepared by

Carl E. Conner (Principal Investigator) and Barbara Davenport Grand River Institute P.O. Box 3543 Grand Junction, Colorado 81502 BLM Antiquities Permit No. C-52775 State of Colorado Antiquities Permit No. 2009-82

Submitted to

Board of County Commissioners Garfield County, Colorado Abstract

This work was undertaken to ensure the project's compliance with county, state, and federal laws and regulations governing the identification and protection of cultural resources on privately owned lands that will be affected by a government action. This work was performed under State of Colorado Antiquities Permit No. 2009-82 and BLM Permit No. C-52775. The purpose of the cultural resources investigation was to identify previously recorded resources within or near the project area that may be adversely affected by the proposed action.

The Class I files search and report preparation were performed on September 17th, 2009. As a result no sites have been previously recorded within a mile of the project area. Accordingly, a determination of “no effect” for the project is recommended pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800).

ii Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 1

Location of the Project Area ...... 1

Environment ...... 1

Paleoclimate ...... 3

Files Search Results ...... 4

Archaeological Assessment of Cultural Resources ...... 5

Relevant Historical Background post-1880 ...... 6

Study Objectives /Summary and Recommendations ...... 8

References ...... 8

List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1. Project location map ...... 2

Table 1. List of projects previously conducted near the study area ...... 4

iii Introduction

At the request of EPCO, Inc. (as represented by Westwater Engineering) Grand River Institute conducted a Class I cultural resources inventory for a Limited Impact Review for a Proposed Laydown Yard in relation to an anticipated Special Use Permit Application with Garfield County. The study is for a block area of ~ 2.0 acres situated on private land adjacent to the Marathon Trunk Discharge Pipeline, which is generally located on the Roan Plateau west of Parachute Creek and east of Conn Creek/Roan Creek. The Class I files search and report preparation were performed on 17 September 2009 by Carl E. Conner and Barbara Davenport. This work was performed under State of Colorado Antiquities Permit No. 2009-82 and BLM Permit No. C-52775.

This inventory was undertaken to ensure the project's compliance with state and federal legislation governing the identification and protection of cultural resources on privately owned lands that will be affected by a government action. It was done to meet requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act (as amended in 1992), the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321), the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701), and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 U.S.C. 470aa et seq., as amended), and Article 80.1, Colorado Revised Statutes. These laws are concerned with the identification, evaluation, and protection of fragile, non-renewable evidence of human activity, occupation, and endeavor reflected in districts, sites, structures, artifacts, objects, ruins, works of art, architecture, and natural features that were of importance in human events. Such resources tend to be localized and highly sensitive to disturbance. All work was performed according to guidelines set forth by the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) of the Colorado Historical Society.

Location of the Project Area

The study area is located on the Roan Plateau west of Parachute Creek and east of Conn Creek/Roan Creek. It lies in T. 6 S., R. 97 W., Section 2, SESE; 6th P.M. (Figure 1).

Environment

The project area is within the Piceance Creek Basin, one of the major geologic subdivisions of Colorado. The Piceance Creek Basin is an elongate structural downwarp of the Colorado Plateau province that apparently began its subsidence approximately 70 million years ago during the Laramide Orogeny. Sediments from surrounding highlands were deposited in the basin, accumulating to a thickness of as much as 9000 feet by the lower Eocene epoch, when subsidence ceased. Regional uplift occurred in the Late Tertiary, and erosion of the area has continued since (Young and Young 1977:43-46). The Uinta formation underlies the study area.

1 2 Elevation of the project area is 8330 feet, which falls within the Transitional Zone. The natural vegetation cover in the canyon bottoms is sagebrush/ grasslands. The surrounding higher elevation ridges have groves of aspen, common particularly at the heads of drainages. On the ridge tops and sides, the understory is quite thick, consisting of chokecherry, smooth maple, serviceberry, and wild rose. On the steep slopes bordering these uplands is found the only coniferous forest type of the project area, the Douglas fir. Associated understory is light-- predominantly snowberry, serviceberry, and barberry. The flat terrain of the project area is occupied by mountain big sage and western snowberry. Gentle north and east-facing aspects support a mountain brush community–Utah serviceberry, gambel oak, and snowberry. Ground cover ranges from 80 to 100 percent. Soils on ridgetops are shallow loams with intermixed shale, or fractured shale. Away from the ridge, soils deepen and become darker and loamier.

Nineteen mammal species–among them the deer mouse, least chipmunk, short-tailed weasel, mule deer, and black bear–and 38 bird species are known in the Douglas fir community. Amid the aspen environment are 16 mammals–including the deer mouse, masked shrew, least chipmunk, northern pocket gopher, montane vole, porcupine, striped skunk, short-tailed weasel, red fox, deer, and elk–and 30 birds. The mountain brush community attracts 37 bird species and 27 mammal species, among these the rock squirrel, bushy-tailed woodrat, deer mouse, porcupine, least chipmunk, beaver, muskrat, raccoon, striped skunk, coyote, red fox, and the short-tailed weasel (Union Oil Company, Energy Mining Division 1982:H14-18). Present land use includes energy development, open range for domestic animals, and modern hunting.

Climatically, the region is characterized as having a steppe-type climate. Average annual rainfall ranges roughly between 12 and 24 inches. On the Roan Plateau at 8000 feet, the average annual rainfall is 25.66 inches and the average annual temperature is 35.5E F. (ibid.:182, Tables K.1.5 and K.1.7). Temperatures have varied between -20 degrees F. in winter and 90 degrees F. in summer with a frost free seasonal range of 70 to 100 days. Agriculture is limited by the low rainfall, a short period of frost-free days, and low winter temperatures (USDA SCS 1978).

Paleoclimate

Relatively small changes in past climatic conditions altered the exploitative potential of an area and put stress upon aboriginal cultures by requiring adjustments in their subsistence patterns. Therefore, reconstruction of paleoenvironmental conditions is essential to the understanding of population movement and cultural change in prehistoric times (Euler et al. 1979). To interpret whatever changes are seen in the archaeological record, an account of fluctuations in past climatic conditions must be available or inferences must be made from studies done in surrounding area. Generally, only gross climatic trends have been established for western North America prior to 2000 BP (Antevs 1955; Berry and Berry 1986; Mehringer 1967; Madsen 1982; Wendlund and Bryson 1974; Peterson 1981). Scientific data derived from

3 investigations of prehistoric cultures and geoclimatic and bioclimatic conditions on the southern Colorado Plateau over the past two millennia have achieved a much greater degree of resolution (Dean et al. 1985).

Files Search Results

Cultural resource investigations in the region have yielded surface diagnostic artifacts and excavated cultural materials consistent with the regional cultural history. Evidence provided by chronometric diagnostic artifacts and radiocarbon analyses indicate regional occupation during the Paleoindian Era, Archaic Era, Formative Era, and Protohistoric Era. Historic records suggest occupation or use of the region by EuroAmerican trappers, settlers, miners, and ranchers as well. Overviews of the prehistory and history of the region are provided in documents published by the Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists entitled Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the Northern Colorado Plateau (Reed and Metcalf 1999), and by the Colorado Historical Society entitled Colorado Plateau Country Historic Context (Husband 1984). Many of the prehistoric sites that were previously recorded in the Roan Plateau area have been identified as open lithic scatters. Most are likely to have been open camps (albeit for a short period) as there are no local lithic procurement sites in the Basin. The remains of wickiups (brush shelters) have been identified at a relatively high number of sites in the area. Historic site types recorded in the region have been ranch complexes, cabins, trails/roads, and herder camps.

A file search for known cultural resources within the project area was made through the Colorado Historical Society’s Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, and the BLM White River and Glenwood Springs Field Offices. This review identified only one project has been done in the general area (Table 1). Notably, that project was a Class III inventory (intensive, pedestrian survey), which bordered the eastern boundary of the present study. The files search indicated no cultural resources occur within about one mile of the study area.

Table 1. Project previously conducted within about 1.0 mile of the study area. [T. 6 S., R. 97 W., Sections 1, 2, 11, 12]

Survey ID Project/author/date None Title: Class I and Class III cultural resources inventory for a Sensitive Area Study in relation to an anticipated Special Use Permit Application with Garfield County for the Proposed Marathon Trunk Discharge Pipeline and Compressor Site Author: Carl E. Conner (Principal Investigator) and Barbara Davenport Date: 09/2/2008 Contractor: Grand River Institute

4 Archaeological Assessment of Cultural Resources in the Region

Previous archaeological studies in the general vicinity have suggested regional occupation for as long as 8000 years, although recently an inventory of block units south of this study area within the Doghead GAP (Conner et al. 2006) provided direct evidence of the presence of Foothill-Mountain Paleoindian occupation at 5GF1323, which pushes the regional prehistoric occupation dates back to about 10,000 yr BP. Historic records also indicate a permanent Euro- American presence in the region began as early as the late 1880's. Notably, many of the newly and previously recorded resources in the general area indicate it was intensively occupied during the Protohistoric Era. In fact, a Ute Trail is known to have crossed over the Roan Plateau in the general vicinity of the study area and branched in two directions: to Roan and Parachute Creeks. Unfortunately for many of the sites where wickiups were present, post-cutting and wood collection by the Historic EuroAmerican settlers and ranchers over the past 125 years has nearly wiped out evidence of their presence. Also, surface collection of diagnostic artifacts has impacted the sites and affected the assignment of cultural/temporal associations.

In general, although the region was probably not continuously occupied prehistorically, it seems to have offered an attractive environment for gathering, floral processing, hunting, as well as lithic procurement and processing. Site density in these higher elevations is relatively low, probably due to two factors: access to permanent water, and strategic topographical positioning. Campsites are often located near the springs or stream convergences for reasons of acquiring water and for the procurement/processing of floral and faunal resources.

The apparent differences in the characteristics of the upland and lowland sites may be due to factors other than cultural selection. The lowland sites are subjected to more artifact collecting than the uplands, and the areas along the Colorado River have been subject to few cultural resource surveys. The upland area exhibits a very thick vegetation cover that may be limiting discovery of features and additional artifacts.

Lowland sites exhibit greater variability in site types. While the uplands are limited to isolated finds, open camps, and lithic scatters; the lowlands contain these site types and open architectural sites, sheltered sites, and a single tool stone procurement area. The lowland sites contain higher frequencies of cultural features or evidence of features. These features include fire-cracked rock scatters, charcoal stains, hearths, stone structures, and wickiups. All of the prehistoric sites contain low numbers of artifacts, including very limited numbers of debitage, bifacial tools and expedient tools. This suggests conservation, curation, and reuse of flaked stone tools in an area where tool material sources are limited.

Lowland sites tend to be situated in the pinyon-juniper vegetation community in greater frequencies than is suggested by the relative proportion of the pinyon-juniper to other vegetation communities. The sites in the uplands are distributed proportionally to the size of the vegetation communities, with the mountain shrub and sagebrush communities exhibiting the highest site density.

5 Too little is known of the age of the sites to make any definitive statements. The distribution of site ages based on projectile points and ceramics is generally the same as portrayed in Reed and Metcalf (1999), but the lack of absolute dating precludes any conclusions in this area. Lithic scatters exhibit a smaller site size than open camps in both the lowland and upland settings. Isolated finds are distributed across a wider range of slopes than lithic scatters or open camps.

The differences in the type and distribution of historic sites are: Sites in the uplands are limited to sheep and cattle raising activities and are primarily post-1889. Sites in the uplands are distributed proportionally to the size of the vegetation communities, with the mountain shrub and sagebrush communities exhibiting the highest site density. Sites in the lowlands display a greater diversity in types and are found mainly in the pinyon-juniper and sagebrush zones. The historic sites in the lowlands are concentrated near transportation corridors and near permanent water sources, particularly the habitation sites. Sites indicative of particular economic activities are spread across the landscape.

During 1980, the BLM 's Glenwood Springs Resource Area was subject to an archaeological survey that randomly sampled three percent of its managed lands. A total of 17,400 acres was surveyed for cultural resources. As a result, 58 prehistoric sites and 2 historic sites were recorded, an average of about 2 sites per section (.0034/acre). Three types of prehistoric sites were distinguished by the study; limited activity areas, short-term camps, and large habitation sites. These were classified on the basis of site size and the diversity of artifacts/activities represented. Notably, the sites were unevenly distributed and varied by vegetation community. The highest site density, about 5.0 sites/section (.0078/acre), occurred in pinyon/juniper and sagebrush communities. Concurrently, the greatest number of sites located during the survey tended to occur in or near the pinyon/juniper community. Other environmental factors found to be important during the statistical analysis of the settlement patterns included 1) vertical distance between the site and the primary water source is a greater controlling factor that the horizontal distance, 2) sites tend to be near or on points of vantage, 3) sites tend to be located in forested areas, preferably with a southern exposure and, 4) sites tend to occur on flat ground (less than 40% grade) in areas of relatively low surface relief (Burgess et al. 1980:108-120, 138- 139). In general, the region exhibits a relatively low site density and sites tend to cluster near permanent water sources.

Relevant Historical Background post-1880

The Ute people occupied large areas of Western Colorado until about 1881. Due to the White River Ute’s discontent that lead to the “Meeker Massacre,” as the incident became know, a congressional investigation lead to the Treaty of 1880 that stipulated the removal of the White River bands to the Uintah Reservation in northeastern Utah. The Uncompahgre band was to be given a small reservation in the vicinity of the confluence of the Colorado and Gunnison Rivers. Aware of the value of these agricultural lands, however, the commission charged with enforcing

6 the terms of the treaty, under the direction of Otto Mears, manipulated the location process using a loophole in the treaty language, and the Uncompahgres were given lands in Utah near the Uintah Reservation. The Southern Ute bands were left on the small reservation in southwestern Colorado that had been given them by the Treaty of 1873. On 1 September 1881, the last of the Utes were moved to their new reservations in Utah, and western Colorado was completely opened to the whites.

Interest in the potential agricultural lands of western Colorado (namely the Uncompahgre, Gunnison, Colorado, Dolores, San Miguel, White, and La Plata River valleys) had been growing for some time prior to the Utes’ banishment, and by the spring of 1881 frontier towns closest to the Ute lands were “crowded with people, anxious to enter the Reservation and take possession of the most desirable locations (Haskell 1886:2).” Only days after the last of the Utes had been expelled, settlers began rushing onto the reservation lands. Settlement activity spread quickly-- during the autumn months of 1881 land claims were staked, townsites were chosen, and railroad routes were surveyed (Haskell 1886, Borland 1952, Rait 1932). However, because the former reservation lands were not officially declared public lands until August 1882, the first year of settlement activity was marked by a degree of uncertainty regarding the legality of land claims. When finally announced, the 1882 declaration did not allow home-stead entries on the newly opened lands, but only pre-emptions, or cash entries, at the rate of $1.25 per acre for agricultural land, $5.00 per acre for mineral land (Borland 1952:75).

By 1895, the major portion of the land along Mamm Creek had been claimed, mostly under Cash Entry patents. The settlers raised their own food and availed themselves of the plentiful game in the area. Gardens, hay fields, and orchards were planted, and irrigation ditches were dug to divert the creek's water to cultivated fields. Large herds of cattle and sheep were accumulating, grazing the valley floor and the vast open range above, driven to the uplands via trails leading up the various gulches.

Because the area was still fairly remote, competition for lands had not yet begun. Travel in and out of the Rifle area was restricted to horse and/or wagon. There were several well- developed Ute trails, and in the early 1880s, the federal government had built the aforementioned road between the White and Grand Valleys. In 1885 a toll road opened along the Grand River between Rifle and Grand Junction; prior to the building of this road through DeBeque Canyon, the route to Grand Junction had been a two-week journey "through the Cedar Hills, up Kimball Creek...down the "Sawtooth Range to Fruita and then back to Grand Junction" (Murray 1973:5). But, despite this network of trails and roads, Parachute remained pretty much isolated.

With the coming of the D&RG railroad in 1890, however, new pressures were brought to the area. More and more settlers arrived, competing not only for arable land but also for grazing privileges on the unpatented public domain of the surrounding uplands. Increasing numbers of cattle and sheep were imported, some being run as commission cattle for outside investors (ibid:84). Open warfare between cattle and sheep ranchers ensued, resulting in the slaughter of thousands of animals. Four thousand sheep belonging to Messrs. Starkey and Charlie Brown

7 were killed by masked men who tried to drive the animals over cliffs at the head of a Clear Creek tributary and above the Granlee Schoolhouse (LaPoint et al. 1981:3-51). Another 4000 sheep belonging to J.B. Hurlburt were driven to their deaths above Ben Good Creek, a tributary of East Fork. The animosity between cattlemen and sheepmen continued into the 1900s. Finally, Congress passed the Taylor Grazing Act in 1934, bringing to an end to the free range by providing for regulated grazing and an end to the Sheep-Cattle Wars.

Cash Entry, Desert Land, and Homestead patents continued to be granted into the 1920s and 30s. Ranching and farming were still the most important economic activities in the Parachute area and remained so until the 1960s and 1970s when many of the farms and ranches of the region were bought up by large companies interested in the large-scale extraction of oil shale and natural gas.

Study Objectives / Summary and Recommendations

The purpose of the Class I cultural resources investigation (records search) was to identify previously recorded resources within or near the project area that may be adversely affected by the proposed action. The inventory work was to be done to specifications of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO).

The files search and intensive inventory indicated no cultural resources occur within the project area. Accordingly, a determination of “no effect” for the project is recommended pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800).

References

Antevs, E. 1955 Geologic-climate dating in the west. American Antiquity 20:317-355.

Borland, Lois 1952 Ho for the reservation; settlement of the Western Slope. Colorado Magazine 29(1):56-75.

Berry, Claudia F. and Michael S. Berry 1986 Chronological and Conceptual Models of the Southwestern Archaic. In: Anthropology of the Desert West, ed. by Carol J. Condie and Don D. Fowler, pp. 253-327. University of Utah Anthropological Papers No. 110. Salt Lake City.

8 Burgess, Robert J.; Kenneth L. Kvamme; Paul R. Nickens, Alan D. Reed; and Gordon C. Tucker 1980 Class II cultural resource inventory report of the Glenwood Springs Resource Area, Grand Junction District, Colorado. Ms on file, Bureau of Land Management, Grand Junction.

Conner, Carl E., James C. Miller and Nicole Darnell 2006 Class III (intensive) cultural resource inventory of three block acreages within the South Parachute Geographic Area Plan (GAP) domain in Garfield County, Colorado, for Williams Production RMT. Ms on file, Bureau of Land Management, Glenwood Springs Field Office.

Dean, Jeffery S.; R. C. Euler; G. J. Gumerman; F. Plog; R. H. Hevly; and T. N.V. Karlstrom 1985 Human behavior, demography and paleoenvironment on the Colorado Plateau. American Antiquity 50(3):537-554.

Euler, Robert C.; G. J. Gumerman; Thor N.V. Karlstrom; J, S. Dean; and Richard H. Hevly 1979 The Colorado Plateaus: Cultural dynamics and paleoenvironment. Science 205(4411):1089-1101.

Haskell, Charles W. 1886 History and Description of Mesa County, Colorado. Edited and published by the Mesa County Democrat, Grand Junction.

Husband, Michael B. 1984 Colorado Plateau Country Historic Context. Colorado Historical Society, Denver.

LaPoint, Halcyon, Brian Aivazian, and Sherry Smith 1981 Cultural resources inventory baseline report for the Clear Creek Property, Garfield County, Colorado, Volume I. Laboratory of Public Archaeology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins.

Madsen, David B. 1982 Great Basin paleoenvironments: summary and integration. In:Mand and Environment in the Great Basin, D.B. Madsen and J.F. O'Connell, editors. Society of American Archaeology Papers No. 2, pp.102-104. Washington, D.C.

Mehringer, Peter J. 1967 Pollen analysis and the alluvial chronology. The Kiva 32:96-101.

Murray, Erlene D. 1973 Lest We Forget–A Short History of Early Grand Valley, Colorado, Originally called Parachute, Colorado. Quahada, Inc., Grand Junction.

9 Peterson, Kenneth P. 1981 10,000 years of change reconstructed from fossil pollen, La Plata Mountains, southwestern Colorado. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Seattle.

Rait, Mary 1932 History of the Grand Valley. M.A. thesis, University of Colorado, Boulder.

Reed, Alan D. and Michael D. Metcalf 1999 Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the Northern Colorado River Basin. Colorado Historical Society, Denver.

Union Oil Company, Energy Mining Division 1982 Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board Permit Application. Phase II: Parachute Creek Shale Oil Program. Volumes VI and VII. Union Oil Company of California, Parachute.

USDA Soil Conservation Service 1978 Technical Guide IIE: Range Site Descriptions.

Wendlund, Wayne M. and Reid A. Bryson 1974 Dating climatic episodes of the Holocene. Quaternary Research 4:9-24.

Young, Robert G. and Joann W. 1977 Colorado West, Land of Geology and Wildflowers. Wheelwright Press, Ltd.

10 REPORT ON THE CLASS I PALEONTOLOGY INVENTORY FOR A LIMITED IMPACT REVIEW FOR A PROPOSED ENTERPRISE WELL TIE YARD ON PRIVATE LANDS IN GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, FOR ENTERPRISE GAS PROCESSING

GRI Project No. 29110

14 December 2009

Prepared by

Joshua Smith (Principal Investigator) Grand River Institute P.O. Box 3543 Grand Junction, Colorado 81502 BLM Antiquities Permit No. C-60700

Submitted to

Board of County Commissioners Garfield County, Colorado Abstract

At the request of Enterprise Gas Processing (as represented by Westwater Engineering) Grand River Institute conducted a Class I paleontology inventory for a Limited Impact Review for a Proposed Enterprise Well Tie Yard in relation to an anticipated Special Use Permit Application with Garfield County. The study is for a block area of ~ 2.0 acres situated on private land adjacent to the Marathon Trunk Discharge Pipeline, which is generally located on the Roan Plateau west of Parachute Creek and east of Conn Creek/Roan Creek.

This Class I paleontological resources investigation was performed by Josh Smith, paleontologist for Grand River Institute (GRI) of Grand Junction, Colorado, who holds BLM Paleontological Resources Use Permit No. C-60700. The purpose of this Class I paleontological resources investigation was to identify previously recorded resources within or near the project area that may be adversely affected by the proposed action.

The files search indicated no previously recorded paleontological resources occur within or nearby the presently proposed project area.

ii Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 1

Location of the Project Area ...... 1

Files Search Results ...... 3

Summary and Recommendations ...... 4

References ...... 4

List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1. Project location map ...... 2

Table 1. List of projects previously conducted near the study area ...... 3

iii Introduction

At the request of Enterprise Gas Processing (as represented by Westwater Engineering), Grand River Institute conducted a Class I paleontological resources investigation for a Limited Impact Review for a Proposed Enterprise Well Tie Yard in relation to an anticipated Special Use Permit Application with Garfield County. The study is for a block area of ~ 2.0 acres situated on private land adjacent to the Marathon Trunk Discharge Pipeline, which is generally located on the Roan Plateau west of Parachute Creek and east of Conn Creek/Roan Creek.

This work was undertaken to ensure the project's compliance with county, state, and federal laws and regulations governing the identification and protection of paleontological resources; federal and state legislation concerning fossils on public lands include:

1) The National Environmental Act of 1969 (NEPA)(P.L. 91-190; 31 Stat 852, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4327); 2) The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-579; 90 Stat. 2743, U.S.C. 1701-1782); 3) BLM Paleontology Resources Management Manual and Handbook H-8270-1 (revised 1998); 4) Colorado CRS 1973, 24-80-401 through 409, established similar paleontological resource protection guidelines for the State of Colorado.

Additionally, the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act (PRPA) was signed into law on March 30, 2009, as part of the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act (OPLA) of 2009, Public Law 111-011. “P.L. 111-011, Title VI, Subtitle D on Paleontological Resources Preservation (OPLA-PRP) requires the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to manage and protect paleontological resources on Federal land using scientific principles and expertise...The OPLA-PRP reaffirms the authority for many of the policies the Federal land managing agencies already have in place for the management of paleontological resources...”

Location of the Project Area

The study area is located on the Roan Plateau west of Parachute Creek and east of Conn Creek/Roan Creek. It lies in T. 6 S., R. 97 W., Section 2, SESE; 6th P.M. (Figure 1).

1 2 Files Search Results

A file search for known paleontological resources within the project area was made through the Colorado Historical Society’s Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation’s on- line Comapss website. This review indicated that no previously recorded paleontological localities have been recorded within a mile of the area of proposed impact.

The Proposed Enterprise Well Tie Yard is located in the Tertiary Uinta Formation (Tweto, 1979), which overlies and inter-tongues with the Tertiary Green River Formation. The Uinta Formation is composed of coarse alluvial sediments including sandstone, siltstone, marlstone, and mudstone (Donnell, 2009). The Uinta Formation is known to produce vertebrate fossils including the remains of freshwater reptiles such as turtles and crocodilians, and also terrestrial mammals, however a search of the Colorado Historical Society’s Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation’s on-line Comapss website indicates that no recorded vertebrate fossil sites are nearby the proposed construction area. The files search did however, indicate that one paleontological survey had been previously conducted in the general vicinity (Table 1). The lack of vertebrate fossil sites in this area may be due to the fact that the proposed construction site is located on private land and no pedestrian surveys for such have been conducted within the project area; or alternatively, because the exposed beds of the Uinta Formation in this area are unfossiliferous.

Table 1. Project previously conducted within about 1.0 mile of the study area. [T. 6 S., R. 97 W., Sections 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, 12 T. 5S., R. 97 W., Sections 34, 35, and 36]

Survey ID Project/author/date MC.LM.NR220 Title: Paleontological Survey of Existing Data and Field Survey for Williams Gas Pipeline Company Project from Parachute to Greasewood Gulch the Piceance Lateral Pipeline in Garfield and Rio Blanco Counties, Colorado Author: Stadtman, Kenneth L. Date: 11/10/2005 Contractor: Kenneth L. Stadtman for Williams Gas Pipeline Company and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

3 Study Objectives / Summary and Recommendations

The purpose of the Class I paleontological resources investigation (records search) was to identify previously recorded resources within or near the project area that may be adversely affected by the proposed action. The inventory work was to be done to specifications of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO).

The files search indicated no previously recorded paleontological resources occur within or nearby the presently proposed project area.

References

Donnell, J.R. 2009 Intertonguing of the lower part of the Uinta Formation with the upper part of the Green River Formation in the Piceance Creek Basin during the late stages of Lake Uinta: U.S. Geological Survey, Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5237, 25 p.

Tweto, Ogden 1979 Geologic Map of Colorado. Colorado Geological Survey.