11111111 11 11 11ill 11111 Control Number: 50016 lilt IlliMill Item Number: 2
Addendum StartPage: 0 PUC DOCKET NO. 50016
APPLICATION OF ELECTRIC BEFORE TRANSMISSION TEXAS, LLC TO AMEND ITS CERTIFICATES OF CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR PUBLIC UTILITY COM1141§1 THE PROPOSED TESLA TO FAGUS DOUBLE-CIRCUIT CAPABLE 345-KV TRANSMISSION LINE IN CHILDRESS COUNTY OF TEXAS
APPLICATION
SEPTEMBER 26, 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Appl ication 2 List of Attachments 18 Attachment 1 19 Attachment 2 151 Attachment 3 196 Attachment 4 252 Attachment 5 253 Attachment 6 254 Attachment 7 /55 Attachment 8a 256 Attachment 8b 258 Attachment 8c 259 Attachment 8d 260 Attachment 8e 265 Attachment 8f 266 Attachment 8g 267 Attachment 9a 268 Attachment 9b 270 Attachment 10a 271 Attachment 10b /73 Attachment 11 274 Attachment 12a 276 Attachment 12b 279 Attachment 13 280 Attachment 14a 282 Attachment 14b 283 Attachment 15 284 APPLICATION OF ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION TEXAS, LLC TO AMEND ITS CERTIFICATES OF CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR THE PROPOSED TESLA TO FAGUS DOUBLE-CIRCUIT CAPABLE 345-KV TRANSMISSION LINE IN CHILDRESS COUNTY
DOCKET NO. 50016
Submit seven (7) copies of the application and all attachments supporting the application. If the application is being filed pursuant to P.U.C. Subst. R. 25.JOJ (b)(3 )(D) or P.U.C. Subst. R. 25.174, include in the application all direct testimony. The application and other necessary documents shall be submitted to:
Public Utility Commission of Texas Attn: Filing Clerk 1701 N. Congress Ave. Austin, Texas 78711-3326
2 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
Applicant Electric Transmission Texas, LLC (ETT) requests that all parties serve copies of all pleadings, discovery, correspondence, and other documents on the following ETT representative:
Service Contact:
Jerry Huerta State Bar No. 24004709 AEP Service Corporation 400 W. 15th Street, Suite 1520 Austin, Texas 78701 (512) 481-3323 (Telephone) (512) 481-4591 (Facsimile) in.huertara,aep.c.on) Attorney for Electric Transmission Texas, LLC
Page 2 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
3 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
1. Applicant (Utility) Name : Electric Transmission Texas, LLC Certificate Number 30193 and 30194 Street Address: 400 W. 15th Street, Suite 800 Austin:TX 78701 Ifailing Address• 400 W. 15t h St., Suite 800 Austin, TX 78701 2. Please identify all entities that will hold an ownership interest or an investment interest in the proposed project, but which are not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction. Not Applicable
3. Person to Contact: Randal E. Roper, PE Title Position• Regulatory Case Manager — AEP Texas, Inc. Phone Number - (512) 481-4572 Alailing Address: 400 W. 15th Street, Suite 1520 Austin, TX 78701 Email .4ddress reriveritacp.coin
Alternate Contact: Roy R. Bermea Title Position. Regulatory Consultant — AEP Texas, Inc. Phone Number: (512) 481-4575 t failing Address: 400 W. 15th Street, Suite 1520 Austin, TX 78701 Entail Address: i rhei meataep.com
Legal Counsel: Jerry Huerta Phone Number - (512) 481-3323 .tlailing Address - 400 W. 15t h Street, Suite 1520 Austin, TX 78701 Email Address: mhueita.a acp Com
Page 3 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
4 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
4. Project Description: Name or Designation of Project Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to amend its certificates of convenience and necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County (Application). Provide a general description of the project, including the design voltage rating (Id), the operating voltage (kI), the CREZ Zone(s) (if any) where the project is located (all or in part), any substations and or substation reactive compensation constructed as part of the project, and any series elements such as sectionalLing switching devices, series line coinpensation, etc For HI'DC transmission lines, the converter stations should be considered to be project components and should be addressed in the project description. Electric Transmission Texas, LLC (ETT) is proposing to design and construct the proposed Tesla to Fagus double-circuit capable 345-kilovolt (kV) transmission line in Childress County, Texas, to interconnect a new solar generation facility (Project). The proposed transmission line would be constructed as a double-circuit capable 345- kV transmission line that will extend from the existing ETT Tesla 345-kV Station to the solar farm's Fagus Substation. The Project will be constructed using primarily steel single-pole structures. The Project will be approximately 2.82 miles in length and will require a nominal 150-foot right-of-way (ROW).
If the project will be owned by more than one party, briefly explain the ownership arrangements between the parties and provide a description of the portion(s) that will be owned by each party. Provide a description of the responsibilities of each party for implementing the project (design, Right-of-Way acquisition, material procurement, construction, etc ) Not applicable. The Project that is the subject of this Application will be owned solely by ETT.
If applicable identify and explain any deviation in transmission project components from the original transmission specifications as previously approved by the Commission or recommended by a PURA $39.151 organilation
Not applicable. There are no transmission specifications that have been previously approved by the Commission. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) Nodal Protocols Section 3.11 (relating to Transmission Planning) defines a project that interconnects new generation as a "neutral project", which does not require ERCOT Regional Planning Group (RPG) review. Since the Project was not submitted for RPG review, ERCOT did not provide any Project transmission specifications. Thus, in the transmission Project components, there are no deviations from the original transmission specifications previously recommended by ERCOT (a PURA § 39.151 organization). 5. Conductor and Structures: Conductor Six and Type The conductor used for the Project will be 954 KCM ACSR (Cardinal), 54/7 Stranded with 2 OPGW shield wires. This conductor is the standard conductor used by ETT for prior generation interconnections in the area and other transmission projects in the past. The consistent use of this conductor type can provide inventory cost savings and some additional capacity for additional growth in renewable generation, which has continued to develop in the areas where transmission service is being provided by ETT.
Number of Conductors Per Phase The Project will be constructed with two (2) conductors per phase.
Continuous Summer Static Current Rating (A)
The Continuous Summer Static Current Rating for the Project is 2205 A.
Continuous Summer Static Line Capacity at Operating l'oltage (A/f "A) The Continuous Summer Static Line Capacity at Operating Voltage for the Project is 1317 MVA.
Page 4 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
5 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
Continuous Summer Static Line Capacity at Design 'oltage (M11-1)
The Continuous Summer Static Line Capacity at Design Voltage for the Project is 1317 MVA.
Type and Composition of Structures
The Project will be constructed primarily using self-supporting single-pole steel structures on drilled pier foundations. Alternative structure types, such as 2-pole structures at angles or 3-pole structures, may be used due to engineering constraints. Constraints can include, but are not limited to, Federal Aviation Administration height limitations, underground and overhead obstructions, or existing line crossings.
Height of TIpical Structures
The typical double-circuit capable structure for the Project will be between 125-160 feet in height. The height may vary depending on location, clearance requirements due to the terrain, span lengths, and overhead obstructions.
Estimated Maximum Height of Typical Structures
The estimated maximum height of a typical double-circuit capable structure for the Project will be 160 feet above ground. Note that all structures will have a 2 foot reveal on the foundation.
Explain why these structures were selected; include such factors as landownerpreference, engineering considerations, and costs comparisons to alternate structures that were considered. Provide dimensional drcnvings of the typical structures to be used in the project.
The specific area of the Project is currently used for farming. This is the primary reason that self-supporting tubular steel monopole structures were selected for this Project since they do provide a reduced structure footprint. Landowners overwhelmingly prefer single-pole construction in an area where farming is occurring as well.
The reduced footprint of the monopole structure will ease the ability to access the easement in a manner to reduce the impact to farming operation for maintenance of the area around the structure, as well provide the ability of the farmer to utilize more of the property. Monopole tubular steel structures are also cost competitive for this Project application.
Dimensional drawings of the single-pole structures are included as Figures 1-2 and 1-3 of the Environmental Assessment for ETT's Proposed Misae II 345-kl' Transmission Line Project in Childress County, Texas (EA). This document, prepared by ETT's routing consultant TRC, is also referred to in this Application as the EA, and is included as Attachment 1 to this Application.
For joint applications, provide and separately identify the above-required information regarding structures for the portion(s) of the project owned by each applicant.
Not applicable. This is not a joint application.
6. Right-of-way:
Aides of Right-of-Way
The total miles of right-of-way for the Consensus Route filed by ETT is approximately 2.82 miles in length.
Miles of Circuit
The Project will be a double-circuit-capable transmission line with conductors for one circuit installed and the number of circuit miles is approximately 2.82 miles.
Width of Right-of-Way
The typical right-of-way for the Project will be 150 feet in width.
Page 5 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
6 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
Percent of Right-of-11"ay Acquired None of the right-of-way (0%) has been acquired on private property at this time. However, ETT has acquired written consent from all impacted landowners crossed for the Consensus Route presented for this Project. Written consent for each landowner crossed by the Consensus Route is provided as Attachment 2 to this Application. Aerial road permits for crossings are anticipated but have not been obtained at this time.
Forjoint applications, provide and separately identify the above-required information for each route for the portion(s) of the project owned by each applicant Not applicable. This is not a joint application.
Provide a brief description of the area traversed by the transmission line. Include a description of the general land uses in the area and the type of terrain crossed by the line. The area traversed by the transmission line is in the southeastern portion of Childress County, approximately 6 miles southeast of the City of Childress. Childress County is the 2161h largest county of 254 counties in Texas in terms of land area (texascounties.net), at approximately 696 square miles. The estimated total population of Childress County was 7,291 (U.S. Census Bureau, July 1, 2018). Childress, which serves as the county seat, is located approximately 6 miles northwest of the Study Area. No incorporated cities are located within the Study Area; however, the unincorporated community of Kirkland is located at the northeast corner of the Study Area, approximately one mile from the centerline of the Consensus Route at the closest point. The Childress Independent School District (Childress ISD 038901) serves the Study Area; however, no ISD schools or other facilities are located within the Study Area boundary (Texas Education Agency, 2016-17). The Study Area was delineated with the western boundary on the east side of FM Road 2638, the southern boundary approximately 1/3 mile south of the proposed Fagus Substation, the eastern boundary on the west side of FM Road 1033, and the northern boundary south of the U.S. 287 and BN&SF railroad and encompassing an area of approximately 5.4 square miles. Land-surface elevations range from a high of approximately 1,740 feet above mean sea level (ms1) in the northwest corner of the Study Area to a low of approximately 1,710 feet above msl at the southeast corner of the Study Area. The Study Area is predominantly cropland and has experienced a moderate degree of alteration due to large solar farm development, existing electric transmission lines, and substations.
7. Substations or Switching Stations: List the name of all existing HIDC converter stations, substations, or switching stations that will be associated with the new transmission line. Provide documentation showing that the owner(s) of the existing H1DC converter stations, substations, and or switchingstations have agreed to the installation of the required proiect facilities. The existing Tesla 345-kV Station is owned by ETT.
List the name of all new HI'DC converter stations, substations, or switching stations that will be associated with the new transmission line. Provide documentation showing that the owner(s) of the new HIDC converter stations, substations, and'or switching stations have agreed to the installation of the required project facilities. The new Fagus 345-kV Substation will be owned by Excel Advantage Services, LLC dba Misae Solar Park II.
8. Estimated Schedule:* Estimated Dates Of: Start Completion Right-af-Way Acquisition March 2019 January 2020 Engineering and Design May 2019 May 2020 Material and Equipment Procurement December 2019 October 2020 Construction o Facilities July 2020 December 2020 Energi=e Facilities December 2020 January 2021
Page 6 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
7 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
* With the Consensus Route and necessary easements obtained to connect the Tesla and Fagus Substations, this schedule was provided for a non-contested proceeding.
9. Counties: For each route, list all counties in which the route is to be constructed. The Consensus Route evaluated for this project is located entirely in Childress County, Texas.
10. Municipalities: For each route, list all municipalities in which the route is to be constructed. The Consensus Route evaluated for this Project is not located within the incorporated limits of any municipality.
For each applicant, attach a copy of the franchise, permit, or other evidence of the city's consent held by the utility, if necessary or applicable. Iffranchise, permit, or other evidence of the city's consent has been meviouslyfiled, provide only the docket number of the application in which the consent was filed. Each applicant should provide this information only for the portion(s) of the project which will be owned by the applicant. Not Applicable.
11. Affected Utilities: Identify any other electric utility served by or connected to facilities in this application. There is no other electric utility served by or directly connected to this Project.
Describe how any other electric utilities will be affected and the extent of the other utilities' involvement in the construction o this project. Include anv other utilities whose existing facilities will be utilized for the project (vacant circuit positions, ROW, substation sites and or equipment, etc. ) and provide documentation showing that the owner(s) of the existing facilities have agreed to the installation of the required project facilities. Not applicable.
12. Financing: Describe the method of financing this project. For each applicant that is to be reimbursed for all or a portion of this project, identify the source and amount of the reimbursement (actual amount if known, estimated amount otherwise) and the portion(s) of the project for lvhich the reimbursement will be made. Funds for this Project will come from short-term borrowings and owner equity.
13. Estimated Costs: Provide cost estimates for each route of the proposedproject using the following table. Provide a breakdown of "Other" costs by major cost category and amount. Provide the information for each route in an attachment to this application The estimated costs for the Consensus Route for the transmission line facilities and for each of the termination costs at the existing ETT Tesla Station and the proposed generation customer Fagus Substation associated with this Project are provided in the table below.
Consensus Route Costs Transmission Substation Facilities Facilities Right-of-way and Land Acquisition $802,213 $0 Engineering and Design (Utility) $125,000 $130,000 Engineering and Design (Contract) $861,282 $895,630 Procurement of Material and Equipment (including stores) $2,903,239 $2,267,970
Page 7 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
8 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
Construction of Facilities (Utility) $115,000 $100,000 Construction of Facilities (Contract) $2,865,176 $2,732,207 Other (all costs not included in the above categories) $0 $0 Estimated Total Cost $7,671,910 $6,125,807
Forjoint applications, provide and separately identifr the above-required information for the portion(s) of the project owned by each applicant. Not applicable. This is not a joint application.
14. Need for the Proposed Project: For a standard application, describe the need for the construction and state how the proposed project will address the need. Describe the existing transmission system and conditions addressed by this application. For projects that are planned to accommodate load growth, provide historical load data and load projections for at least five years For projects to accommodate load growth or to address reliability issues, provide a description of the steady state loadilow analysis thatjustifies the project For interconnection projects, provide any documentation from a transmission service customer, generator, transmission service provider, or other entity to establish that the proposedfacilities are needed For projects related to a Competitive Renewable Energy Zone, the foregoing requirements are not necessary; the applicant need only provide a specific reference to the pertinent portion(s) of an appropriate commission order speci&ing that the facilities are needed. For all projects, provide any documentation of the review and recommendation of a PURA § 39 151 organiration. Pursuant to 16 TAC Rule § 25.198(6), a transmission service provider is required to provide service to a transmission customer when certain conditions are met, including execution of an interconnection agreement. The ERCOT Standard Generation Interconnection Agreement between ETT and Excel Advantage, LLC dba Misae Solar Park 11 has been executed for such an interconnection request and is included in this Application as Attachment 3. Additionally, 16 TAC 25, 195(c)( I ) provides as follows: "When an eligible transmission service customer requests transmission service for a new generation source that is planned to be interconnected with a TSP's transmission network, the transmission service customer shall be responsible for the cost of installing step-up transformers to transform the output of the generator to a transmission voltage level and protective devices at the point of interconnection capable of electrically isolating the generation source owned by the transmission service customer. The TSP shall be responsible, pursuant to paragraph (2) of this subsection, for the cost of installing any other interconnection facilities that are designed to operate at a transmission voltage level and any other upgrades on its transmission system that may be necessary to accommodate the required transmission service." The interconnection agreement provided as Attachment 3b specifies and assigns these responsibilities pursuant to 16 TAC 25.195(c)(I).
The ERCOT Regional Planning Group (RPG) Charter and Procedures defines a project that is directly associated with the interconnection of new generation as a "neutral project", which is not required to be submitted for RPG review. Therefore, there is no documentation of a review or a recommendation of a PURA § 39.151 organization.
The area of this project is also in the process of developing additional solar project activity that would require another interconnection to the ERCOT 345-kV network. The location of this activity is in close proximity to the ETT Tesla Station. The ETT Tesla Station already has eight 345-kV circuits terminating into the station and an adjacent SVCs interconnection. This project will make the ninth 345-kV circuit termination. Access into the station is becoming limited and knowing that more activity is expected to occur in this area it is prudent to construct this transmission line as double-circuit capable to allow a future path into the station on the open circuit position.
15. Alternatives to Project: For a standard application, describe alternatives to the construction of this project (not routing options). Include an analysis of distribution alternatives, upgrading voltage or bundling of conductors of existing facilities, adding transformers, and for utilities that have not unbundled, distributed generation as alternatives to the project. Explain how the project overcomes the insufficiencies of the other options that were considered.
Page 8 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017 9 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
There are no other practical alternatives to the project. Any other transmission option not terminating at the Tesla Station would require the construction of a new station and transmission line for the interconnection into that new station. The use of distribution to attempt to transfer 682 MW from the generation customer's substation to the ETT Tesla station is not a practical engineering solution. The most practical and cost effective solution is the interconnection as proposed.
16. Schematic or Diagram: For a standard application, provide a schematic or diagram of the applicant's transmission system in the proximate area of the proiect. Show the location and voltage of existing transmission lines and substations, and the location of the construction. Locate any taps, ties, meter points, or other facilities involving other utilities on the system schematic. A schematic of the transmission system in the proximate area of the Project is included with this Application as Attachment 4.
17. Routing Study: Provide a brief summary of the routing study that includes a description of the process of selecting the study area, identifying routing constraints, selecting potential line segments, and the selection of the routes. Provide a copy of the complete routing study conducted by the utility or consultant. State which route the applicant believes best addresses the requirements of PURA and P. UC. Substantive Rules. A copy of the complete EA for the Consensus Route, prepared by TRC, is included as Attachment 1 to this CCN application. This assessment is titled Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line in Childress County (EA). The EA presents the analysis that was conducted by TRC, and the land use and environmental data for the Consensus Route that is being presented in this CCN Application.
The objective of the complete EA was to evaluate the potential environmental and land use impacts for the Consensus Route presented in the CCN Application and determine if that route complies with PURA § 37.056(c)(4)(A)-(D), 16 TAC § 22.52(a)(4), and 16 TAC § 25.101(b)(3)(B), including the P.U.C.'s policy of prudent avoidance. TRC utilized a comprehensive evaluation methodology to evaluate the potential environmental and land use impacts of the proposed transmission line Consensus Route.
TRC utilizes a multiphase approach for completing such a project route evaluation: define the study area; obtain environmental information; map environmental and land use constraints and opportunities; and conduct the environmental evaluation. The following sections provide a description of the process used in the development and evaluation of the proposed transmission line route.
Description of the Process of Selecting the Study Area The Study Area was determined by beginning with the two end points for the transmission line. ETT's existing 345kV Tesla Station location was used to establish the northwest extent, and the proposed generator's Fagus Substation location was used to establish the southeast extent. The solar developer determined that the Fagus Substation location, southwest of the intersection of FN4 1033 and County Road CC, was the optimal location for gathering the generation output from the proposed solar arrays.
The locations of these endpoints established the approximate boundaries of the Study Area. The north boundary of the Study Area is U.S. Highway 287 and the Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad. the south boundary is a land line approximately 1/3 mile south of the Fagus Substation, the west boundary is just east of FM 2638 that provides access to the Tesla Station, and the east boundary is just west of FM 1033 that will provide access to the Fagus Substation. The Study Area boundary is approximately 2.0 miles east to west, approximately 3.0 miles north to south along the western boundary, approximately 2.6 miles north to south along the eastern boundary, and the northern boundary follows the diagonal of U.S. Highway 287 and the BNSF railroad for a length of approximately 2.1 miles. The Study Area contains approximately 5.4 square miles. The Study Area is shown on Figure 2-1 of the EA (Attachment I to this Application).
Identification of Routing Constraints
Page 9 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
10 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
Data used by TRC in the evaluation of the Project was drawn from a variety of sources, including published literature, information from local, state, and federal agencies, recent aerial photography, and ground reconnaissance of the study area. The routing criteria considered the following aspects of the human environment, environmental, and cultural resources:
Human Environment
• Paralleling existing linear facilities, with pipelines considered a constraint • Land use, including habitable structures
Environmental Resources
• Physiography and Geology • Soils • Mineral and Energy Resources • Surface Water • Wetlands • Sensitive Vegetation Habitats • Sensitive Fish and Wildlife Habitats • Recreationally and Commercially Important Species • Threatened and Endangered Species (TES) Critical Habitats
Cultural Resources
• Sensitive Historic Sites • Sensitive Cultural Sites
In addition, the length, number of angle structures, number of land parcels crossed, and cost were considered by ETT. The routing criteria used by TRC for the land-use and environmental impact is shown in Table 6-1 of the EA (Attachment 1 to this Application).
The mapping process was used to identify areas of constraint and opportunity. Locations of environmentally sensitive and other restrictive areas within the Study Area were located and considered during the evaluation process. These constraints were mapped onto an aerial base map (Figure 2-2) created using Google Earth Pro 2019. While it is difficult to eliminate the use of all areas of constraint, alternatives were identified during the determination of the Consensus Route to minimize such areas and impacts to human and environmental resources.
The evaluation of the Project involved studying a variety of environmental factors using desktop analysis of aerial maps and resource maps and a field visit conducted on April 16, 2019. In addition, biological field surveys were conducted along the ROW for the Consensus Route on June 4-5, 2019. The initial field evaluation was conducted by driving the Study Area and reviewing aerial and resource maps. The follow-up biological field evaluation was conducted by walking along the proposed ROW for the Consensus Route. In evaluating the proposed Consensus Route, 39 environmental criteria were considered. These criteria are presented in Table 2-1 of the EA (Attachment 1 to this Application). Figure 2-2 shows the environmental and land use constraints within the Study Area.
Consensus Route
The Consensus Route was selected based on evaluation of the potential impacts along with consideration of the direct path between the interconnection points, being parallel to the existing 345-kV transmission line, the length, number of angle structures, number of land parcels crossed, and habitable structures associated with other alternative routes considered in the development of the Consensus Route. Other alternative routes initially considered were adjacent to existing linear facilities (existing transmission lines and road rights-of-way) or followed parcel lines. In addition, TRC contacted each of the landowners in the study area who owned a parcel that would be crossed by the Consensus Route to obtain their input in regards to the Consensus Route and support of the filed Consensus Route. The landowners crossed by the Consensus Route have all signed a
Page 10 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
1 1 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
Consent Agreement for the Consensus Route that is being presented in the Application (Attachment 2 to this Application).
ETT determined that the Consensus Route complies with the requirements of PURA and P.U.C. Substantive Rules.
18. Public Meeting or Public Open House: Provide the date and location for each public meeting or public open house that was held in accordance with C Proc R. 22.52 Provide a summary of each public meeting or public open house including the approximate number of attendants and a copy of any survey provided to attendants and a summary of the responses received For each public meeting or public open house provide a description of the method of notice, a copy of any notices, and the number of notices that were mailed and or published. No public open house meeting was held for this Project. 16 TAC § 22.52 requires an applicant to hold at least one public open house meeting if 25 or more persons would be entitled to receive direct mail notice of the application. There are fewer than 25 landowners that would be entitled to receive direct mail notice of the CCN Application for the Consensus Route. However, ETT representatives have discussed this transmission project with representatives or owners of all land directly impacted by this Project and have received signed Consent Agreements from all the landowners crossed by the Consensus Route (Attachment 2 to this Application). There are no habitable structures within 500 ft. located on any adjacent properties to the Consensus Route.
PUC Procedural Rule Tex. Admin. Code § 22.52 (a)(4) related to notice in licensing proceedings, requires a utility to notify the Department of Defense Siting Clearinghouse of any public meeting to be held during the route evaluation process. In the event that no public meeting is held due to a small number of affected landowners, the utility is required to provide written notice to the Department of Defense Siting Clearinghouse of the utility's intent to file an application at the PUC. ETT provided notice to DoD of its intent to file an application with the PUC to amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity to construct a double-circuit 345-kV electric transmission line in Childress County, Texas on July 15, 2019. This notice is included as Attachment 5 to this Application
19. Routing Maps: Base maps should be a full scale (one inch = not more than one mile) highway map of the county or counties involved, or other maps of comparable scale denoting sufficient cultural and natural features to permit location of all routes in thefield. Provide a map (or maps) shmving the study area, routing constraints, and all routes or line segments that were considered prior to the selection of the routes. Identify the routes and any existing facilities to be interconnected or coordinated with the project. Identify any taps, ties, meter point, or other facilities involving other utilities on the routing map. Show all existing transmission facilities located in the study area Include the locations of radio transmitters and other electronic installations, airstrips, irrigated pasture or cropland, parks and recreational areas, historical and archeological sites (subject to the instructions in Question 27), and any environmentally sensitive areas (subject to the instructions in Question 29) A Consensus Route is shown in the EA (Attachment 1 of this Application) on Figure 2-2. Figure 2-2 is an aerial-photograph based map with a scale of 1 inch = 3,000 feet that shows the Study Area, the proposed Consensus Route and substations, routing constraints, other environmental and land use features, and existing transmission lines.
Provide aerial photographs of the study area displaying the date that the photographs were taken or maps that show (1 ) the location of each route with each route segment identified, ( 2 ) the locations of all major public roads including, as a minimum, all federal and state roadways, (3) the locations of all known habitable structures or groups of habitable structures (see Question 19 below) on properties directly affected by any route, und (4 ) the boundaries (approxiinate or estimated according to best available information if required) of all properties directly affected by any route An aerial-photograph-based property ownership map with a scale of 1 inch = 1,200 feet is included in this Application as Attachment 6. It shows the approximate boundaries of all properties that are directly affected by the proposed 345-kV transmission line Consensus Route according to the best information available from
Page 11 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
12 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
county tax appraisal district records. Each property has been assigned a unique "Property/Map ID" number. There is no habitable structure located within 500 feet of the Consensus Route. This Property/Map ID number is among the information provided in Attachment 6 that is the cross-reference table discussed below.
For each route, cross-reference each habitable structure (or group of habitable structures) and directly atkcted property identified on the maps or photographs with a list of corresponding landowner names and addresses and indicate which route segment affects each structure, group or property.
There is no habitable structure located within 500 feet of the Consensus Route. Landowner names, property identification, links, map locations, and associated Parcel ID's are included in a cross-reference table provided as Attachment 7 of this Application.
20. Permits: List any and all permits and or approvals required by other governmental agencies for the construction of the proposed project Indicate whether each permit has been obtained.
ETT will coordinate with all the appropriate local, state, and federal agencies with jurisdiction regarding the construction of the transmission facilities associated with this Project. ETT and TRC have initiated contact with and provided information about the Project to various agencies. Some input from these agencies has been incorporated in this Application; however, requests for permits and or approvals will not be submitted to the appropriate agencies until the Consensus Route is approved and final alignment is determined. None of the following potential permits, approvals, requirements, easements, or clearances have been obtained.
• Notification to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) might be required for the Consensus Route once structure locations and structure designs and heights are complete. Requirements to alter the design of the structures or potential requirements to mark or illuminate the line will be coordinated with the FAA, as necessary.
• Permits or other requirements associated with possible impacts to waters of the U.S. under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) will be coordinated with the USACE as necessary. The proposed line will meet the criteria of two nationwide permits (NWPs): NWP 25 (Structural Discharges) and NWP 12 (Utility Line Activities). The proposed transmission line crosses no USACE-owned property; therefore, no easements on USACE property will be necessary.
• Permits or other requirements associated with possible impacts to endangered/threatened species will be coordinated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as necessary.
• Coordination with Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) might be necessary to determine the need for any surveys and to avoid or minimize any potential adverse impacts to sensitive habitats, threatened or endangered species, and other fish and wildlife resources along the approved route.
• A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) might be required by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). ETT or its contractor will submit a Notice of intent to the TCEQ at least 48 hours prior to the beginning of construction. ETT will have the SWPPP on site at the initiation of clearing and construction activities.
• Permits for crossing state-maintained roads/highways will be obtained from the Texas Department of Transportation, as necessary.
• Cultural resource clearance will be obtained from the Texas Historical Commission for the proposed Project right-of-way, as necessary.
21. Habitable Structures: For each route, list all single-family and inulti-family dwellings and related structures, mobile homes, apartment buildings, commercial structures, industrial structures, business structures, churches, hospitals, nursing homes, schools, or other structures normally inhabited by humans or intended to be inhabited by
Page 12 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
13 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
humans on a daily or regular basis within 300 feet of the centerline if the proposed project will be constructed for operation at 230k1' or less, or within 500 feet of the centerline if the proposed project will be constructed for operation at greater than 230k1' Provide a general description of each habitable structure and its distance from the centerline of the route. In cities, towns, or rural subdivisions, houses can be identified in groups Provide the number of habitable structures in each group and list the distance from the centerline of the route to the closest and the farthest habitable structure in the group. Locate all listed habitable structures or groups of structures on the routing map. There are no habitable structures located within 500 feet of the Consensus Route.
22. Electronic Installations: For each route, list all commercial A.If radio transmitters located within 10,000 feet of the centerline of the route and all FAI radio transmitters, microwave relay stations, or other similar electronic installations located within 2,000 of the centerline of the route. Provide a general description of each installation and its distance from the center line of the route Locate all listed installations on a routing map.
No AM radio transmitters are located within 10,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route and no FM radio transmitters microwave towers, or other electronic installations are located within 2,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route.
23. Airstrips: For each route, list all known private airstrips within 10,000 feet of the center line of the project. List all airports registered with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) with at least one runway more than 3,200 feet in length that are located within 20,000 feet of the center line of any route. For each such airport, indicate whether any transmission structures will exceed a 50:1 horizontal slope (one foot in height for each 100 feet in distance) from the closest point of the closest runway List all listed airports registered with the FAA having no runway more than 3,200 feet in length that are located within 10,000 feet of the center line of any route. For each such airport, indicate whether any transmission structures will exceed a 50 - 1 horizontal slope from the closest point of the closest runway List all heliports located within 5,000 feet of the center line pf any route For each such heliport, indicate whether any transmission structures will exceed a 25 1 horizontal slope from the closest point of the closest landing and takeoff area of the heliport. Provide a general description of each listed private airstrip, registered airport, and heliport, and state the distance of each from the center line of each route. Locate and identify all listed airstrips, airports, and heliports on a routing map.
No known private airstrips are within 10,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route.
No known airports registered with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) with at least one runway more than 3,200 feet in length are within 20,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route. The only known airport is the Childress Municipal Airport, located approximately 10 miles northwest of the Study Area.
No known FAA-registered airports having no runway more than 3,200 feet in length are within 10,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route.
No known heliports are within 5,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route. The only known heliport is at the Childress Regional Medical Center, located approximately 7.5 miles northwest of the Study Area,
24. Irrigation Systems: For each route, identify any pasture or cropland irrigated by traveling irrigation systems (rolling or pivot tipe) that will be traversed by the route. Provide a description of the irrigated land and state how it will be affected by each route (number and type of structures etc ). Locate any such irrigated pasture or cropland on a routing map.
No pasture or cropland irrigated by traveling irrigation systems (rolling or pivot type) will be traversed by the Consensus Route,
25. Notice:
Page 13 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
14 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
Notice is to be provided in accordance with P.0 C Proc R. 22 52. A Provide a copy of the written direct notice to owners of directly affected land Attach a list of the names and addresses of the owners of directly affected land receiving notice. Sample copies of the written direct notice and enclosures that were mailed to the owners of directly affected land are provided in Attachments 8a through 8g. The list of the names and addresses of the owners of directly affected land is provided in Attachment 8g.
B Provide a copy of the written notice to utilities that are located within five iniles of the routes. A sample copy of the written notice to utilities that are located within five miles of the proposed Project is provided in Attachment 9a. The list of the names and addresses of these utilities is provided in Attachment 9b.
C Provide a copy of the written notice to county and municipal authorities. and the Department of Defense Siting Clearinghouse. Notice to the DoD Siting Clearinghouse should be provided to the email address found at hun it u ìì cp,d mil clods,: Sample copy of the written notice to county and municipal authorities is provided as Attachment 10a. The list of the names and addresses of these authorities is provided in Attachment l Ob. A copy of the written notice to the Department of Defense Siting Clearinghouse is provided as Attachment 11.
D. Provide a copy of the notice that is to be published in newspapers of general circulation in the counties in which the facilities are to be constructed. Attach a list of the newspapers that will publish the notice for this application. After the notice is published, provide the publisher's affidavits and tear sheets A sample copy of the notice to be published in the newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the proposed facilities are to be constructed is provided in Attachment 12a. The notice for this application will be published in The Red River Sun in Childress, Texas, which is the newspaper of general circulation in Childress County and as listed in Attachment 12b.
For a CREZ application in addition to the requirements of P U.C. Proc. R. 22 52, the applicant shall, not less than twenty-one (21) days before the filing of the application, submit to the Commission staff a "generic" cony of each type of alternative published and written notice for review. Staff's comments, if any, regarding the alternative notices will be provided to the applicant not later than seven days after receipt by Staff of the alternative notices. .4pplicant may take into consideration any comments made by Commission staff before the notices are published or sent by mail. Not applicable. This is not a CREZ application.
In addition to the notices described above, 16 TAC §22.52 requires ETT to provide notice of this Application to the Office of Public Utility Counsel. A copy of that notice is included in this Application as Attachment 13.
26. Parks and Recreation Areas: For each route, list all parks and recreational areas owned by a governmental body or an organized group, club, or church and located within 1,000feet of the center line of the route. Provide a general description of each area and its distance from the center line Identify the owner of the park or recreational area (public agency, church, club. etc ). List the sources used to identin,' the parks and recreational areas. Locate the listed sites on a routing map. No parks or recreation areas are within 1,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route or within the Study Area.
27. Historical and Archeological Sites: For each route, list all historical and archeological sites known to be within 1,000 feet of the center line of the route. Include a description of each site and its distance from the center line List the sources (national, state or local conimission or societies) used to identifi, the sites. Locate all historical sites on a routing map For the protection of the sites, archeological sites need not be shown on inaps.
Page 14 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
15 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
To identify historical and archaeological sites in the Study Area, TRC researched the records and maps available online through the Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory (TARL) restricted archaeological site database and Texas Historical Commission's publicly accessible Texas Historic Sites Atlas database. The two databases provide information and location regarding: listed and eligible National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) properties, sites, and districts; Official Texas Historical Markers; State Archaeological Landmarks; National listoric Landmarks; National Monuments; National Memorials; National Historic Sites; National Historical Parks; museums; cemeteries; historical highways; and courthouses. The review found 12 previous systematic cultural resource surveys have been done in Childress County, of which only one has been done in proximity to the proposed project. The search also found 146 archaeological sites and 102 historic resources have been documented in Childress County. Of the 102 historic properties, 9 are cemeteries, 11 are historical markers, 81 are neighborhood surveys, and I is a National Register property.
This review identified one previously recorded archaeological site approximately 1.5 miles to the west of the Consensus Route. No historic (non-archaeological) resources were identified within 1 mile of the Consensus Route. The nearest archaeological sites outside of the Study Area are between 1 and 1.5 miles from the Consensus Route or substation locations. The nearest historic resource, Kirkland Cemetery, is nearly 2 miles away. The one archaeological site — 41C1136 — occurs along a previously surveyed existing transmission line approximately 1.5 miles to the west. Two additional archaeological sites — 41C1146 and 41C1147 — are 1.6 and 1.06 miles southeast of the south end of the Consensus Route.
The proposed transmission line along the Consensus Route will have no effect upon either of the two archaeological sites described above. There are no archaeological sites located in the Study Area.
28. Coastal Management Program: For each route, indicate whether the route is located, either in whole or in part, within the coastal management program boundary as defined in 31 T.A.C. s.50.3.1. If any route is, either in whole or in part, within the coastal management program boundary, indicate whether any part of the route is semvard of the Coastal Facilities Designation Line as defined in 31 T A.C. $1 9.2(a)(21). Using the designations in 31 T A.C. $501.3(b), identify the type of Coastal ,Vatural Resource Area (s) impacted by any part of the route andor facilities. This proposed project is not located within the Coastal Management Program (CMP) boundary as defined in 31 T.A.C. § 503.1.
29. Environmental Impact: Provide copies of any and all environmental impact studies and'or assessments of the project. If no formal study was conducted for this project, explain how the routing and construction of this project will impact the environment. List the sources used to identify the existence or absence of sensitive environmental areas. Locate any environmentally sensitive areas on a routing map. In some instances. the location of the environmentally sensitive areas or the location of protected or endangered species should not be included on maps to ensure preservation of the areas or species. Within seven days after filing the applicationfor the project, provide a copy of each environmental impact study andpr assessment to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPI1 D) for its review at the address below. Include with this application a copy qf the letter of transmittal with which the studies assessments were or will be sent to the TPUiD Wildlife Habitat Assessment Program Wildlife Division Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 4200 Smith School Road Austin, Texas 78744
The EA that was conducted by TRC is included with this Application as Attachment 1. Data used by TRC in the evaluation of the Consensus Route were drawn from a variety of sources, including published literature (documents, reports, maps, aerial photography, etc.), information from local, state, and federal agencies, and field investigations conducted on April 16, 2019 and June 4-5, 2019. An extensive list of reference resources is provided in Section 8.0 of the EA. Ground reconnaissance of the Study Area and the proposed Consensus Route ROW, as well as computer-based evaluation of digital aerial imagery, aided in the evaluation. Environmentally sensitive areas (if any) are shown of Figure 2-2 of the EA.
Page 15 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
16 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-KV Transmission Line in Childress County
A copy of the letter of transmittal providing a copy of the Application, which includes the EA for this Project, to the TPWD is included in this Application as Attachment 14a. An affidavit verifying that the Application and EA were sent to TPWD is included in this Application as Attachment 14b.
30. Affidavit: Attach a sworn affidavit from a qualified individual authorized by the applicant to verify and affirm that, to the best of their knowledge, all information provided, statements made, and matters set forth in this application and attachments are true and correct. The sworn affidavit of the Regulatory Case Manager for this Project is included with this Application as Attachment 15.
Page 16 CCN Form Effective Date: June 8, 2017
17 Application of Electric Transmission Texas, LLC to Amend its Certificates PUC Docket No. 50016 of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Tesla to Fagus List of Attachments Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line in Childress County Page 1 of 1
CCN Application - List of Attachments
1 Environmental Assessment
/ Consensus Route Agreements
3 Interconnection Agreement
4 Diagram of Transmission System in Project Area
5 ETT Letter of Intent to File CCN Application to DoD
6 Aerial-photograph-based Property Ownership Map
7 Table providing landowner names, property identification, and map locations
8a Notice — Landowner Letter 8b Notice — Map of Consensus Route 8c Notice — Consensus Route Description 8d Notice — Landowner Brochure 8e Notice — Comment Form 8f Notice — Intervenor Form 8g Notice — Landowner List
9a Notice — Utilities Letter * 9b Notice — Utilities List
10a Notice — County and Municipal Officials Letter * 10b Notice — County and Municipal Officials List
11 Notice — Department of Defense (DoD) Siting Clearinghouse*
12a Notice — Newspaper Publication 12b Notice — Newspaper Publication List
13 Notice — Office of Public Utility Counsel *
14a Letter of Transmittal of Application to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 14b Affidavit Transmittal of Application to TPWD
15 Application Affidavit of Regulatory Case Manager
* Excluding Maps and Route Descriptions provided in Attachment 8 set of documents
18
PUC Docket No. 50016 Attachment 1
' i r TRC
Environmental Assessment
ETT -f•kgr'.- Electric Transmission Texas
PROPOSED TESLA TO FAGUS DOUBLE-CIRCUIT CAPABLE 345-kV TRANSMISSION LINE IN CHILDRESS COUNTY
Docket No. 50016
July 2019 Environmental Assessment
prepared for
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC
Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line in Childress County
Docket No. 50016
July 2019
prepared by
A, TRC TRC Companies Austin, Texas
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC TRC Companies
20
Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No.
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 1-1 1.1 Scope of Project 1-1 1.2 Purpose and Need 1-3 1.3 Description of Proposed Design and Construction 1-3 1.3.1 Transmission Line Design 1-3 1.3.2 Right-of-Way Requirements 1-6 1.4 Construction Considerations 1-6 1.4.1 Clearing and Right-of-Way Preparation 1-6 1.4.2 Structure Assembly and Erection 1-7 1.4.3 Conductor and Shield Wire Installation 1-7 1.4.4 Construction Operations 1-8 1.4.5 C leanup 1-9 1.5 Maintenance Considerations 1-9 1.6 Agency Actions 1-10 1.6.1 Public Utility Commission of Texas 1-10 1.6.2 Federal Aviation Administration 1-10 1.6.3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1-11 1.6.4 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1-12 1.6.5 Federal Emergency Management Agency 1-12 1.6.6 Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 1-12 1.6.7 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 1-13 1.6.8 Texas Department of Transportation 1-13 1.6.9 Texas Historical Commission 1-13 1.6.10 Texas General Land Office 1-13 2.0 ROUTE EVALUATION METHODOLOGY 2-1 2.1 Objective of Study 2-1 2.2 Data Collection 2-1 2.3 Evaluation of the Route 2-1 2.3.1 Study Area Delineation 2-1 2.3.2 Constraints Mapping 2-2 2.3.3 Evaluation Factors 2-4 3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 3-7 3.1 Physiography 3-7 3.1.1 North-Central Plains 3-7 3.1.2 High Plains (Llano Estacado) 3-7 3.2 Geology 3-9 3.3 Soils 3-10 3.3.1 Soil Associations 3-10 3.3.2 Prime Farmland Soils 3-11 3.4 Mineral and Energy Resources 3-11 3.5 Water Resources 3-11 3.5.1 Surface Water 3-11
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC TRC Companies
21 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Table of Contents
3.5.2 Floodplains 3-12 3.5.3 Groundwater/Aquifers 3-12 3.6 Vegetation 3-13 3.6.1 Regional Vegetation 3-13 3.6.2 Vegetation Community Types in the Study Area 3-13 3.6.3 Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands 3-16 3.7 Fish and Wildlife 3-19 3.7.1 Fish and Wildlife Habitats and Species 3-19 3.7.2 Fish 3-21 3.7.3 Amphibians and Reptiles 3-22 3.7.4 B irds 3-24 3.7.5 Mammals 3-31 3.8 Recreationally and Commercially Important Species 3-32 3.9 Endangered and Threatened Species 3-32 3.9.1 Endangered and Threatened Plant Species 3-33 3.9.2 Federally Listed Fish and Wildlife Species 3-33 3.9.3 Critical Habitat 3-34 3.9.4 State-Listed Fish, Wildlife, and Plant Species 3-34 3.10 Human Resources 3-36 3.10.1 Community Values and Community Resources 3-36 3.10.2 Land Use 3-36 3.10.3 Recreation 3-38 3.10.4 Agriculture 3-38 3.10.5 Transportation and Aviation 3-38 3.10.6 Communication Towers 3-39 3.10.7 Existing Utilities 3-39 3.10.8 Aesthetic Values 3-40 3.11 Cultural Resources 3-41 3.11.1 Cultural Overy iew 3-41 3.11.2 Paleoindian Period (9500-6500 B.C.) 3-43 3.11.3 Clovis Complex (9500-9000 B.C.) 3-43 3.11.4 Folsom Complex (9000-8000 B.C.) 3-43 3.11.5 Plano Complex (8000-6500 B.C.) 3-44 3.11.6 Archaic Period (6500 B.C.—A.D. 1) 3-44 3.11.7 Ceramic/Late Prehistoric Period (A.D. 1-1550) 3-46 3.11.8 The Apache 3-48 3.11.9 Spanish Exploration 3-49 3.11.10 Historic Period (A.D. 1650—Present) 3-50 3.11.11 The Comanche 3-50 3.11.12 The Kiowa and Kiowa Apache 3-51 3.11.13 Euro-American Historic Period 3-52 3.11.14 Previous Investigations 3-57 3.11.15 Results of the Background Review 3-57 3.12 Paleontological Resources 3-58 3.12.1 Present Climate 3-61
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC TRC Companies
22 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Table of Contents
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT 4-1 4.1 Impact on Natural Resources 4-1 4.1.1 Impact on Physiography and Geology 4-1 4.1.2 Impact on Soils 4-1 4.1.3 Impact on Water Resources 4-2 4.1.4 Impact on the Ecosystem 4-3 4.2 Impact on Human Resources 4-8 4.2.1 Impact on Community Values 4-8 4.2.2 Impact on Land Use 4-8 4.2.3 Impact on Recreation 4-10 4.2.4 Impact on Agriculture 4-10 4.2.5 Impact on Transportation and Aviation 4-10 4.2.6 Impact on Communication Towers 4-11 4.2.7 Impact on Existing Utilities 4-11 4.2.8 Impact on Aesthetics 4-11 4.3 Impact on Cultural Resources 4-13 4.3.1 Direct Impacts on Cultural Resources 4-13 4.3.2 Indirect Impacts 4-13 4.3.3 Mitigation Measures for Cultural Resources 4-14 4.3.4 Summary of Impacts on Cultural Resources 4-14 4.4 Environmental Mitigation 4-15 5.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES 5-1 5.1 Correspondence with Agencies and Officials 5-1 5.1.1 Federal 5-1 5.1.2 State 5-1 5.1.3 Local 5-2 5.2 Agency Actions 5-4 5.3 Public Open-House Meetings 5-6 6.0 PROJECT ASSESSMENT 6-1 7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS 7-1 8.0 REFERENCES 8-1
Appendix A — Consultation Responses
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC TRC Companies
23 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES Page No.
Table 3-1: Soil Units 3-10 Table 3-2: Representative List of Reptile and Amphibian Species of Potential Occurrence in the Study Area 3-22 Table 3-3: Representative List of Avian Species of Potential Occurrence in the Study Area 3-24 Table 3-4: IPaC List of Migratory Bird Species. 3-29 Table 3-5: Representative List of Mammalian Species of Potential Occurrence in the Study Area 3-31 Table 3-6: Federally and State-Listed Threatened, Endangered, and Special Status Species that Potentially Occur in Childress County, Texas 3-33 Table 3-7: State-listed Threatened, Endangered, and Special Status Species that Potentially Occur in Childress County, Texas' 3-34 Table 3-8: Previous Investigations Within 1 Mile of the Study Area 3-57 Table 3-9: Archeological Sites Within 1 Mile of the Study Area 3-58 Table 6-1: Environmental Data for Consensus Route Assessment Misae Solar Park II 345-kV Transmission Line Project 6-2 Table 7-1 TRC Professionals Involved in Preparation of this Environmental Assessment 7-1
Electnc Transmission Texas, LLC TRC Companies 24 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES Page No.
Figure 1-1: Project Location 1-2 Figure 1-2: Typical Double-Circuit Tangent Monopole Structure 1-4 Figure 1-3: Typical Dead-end Two-Pole Angle Structure 1-5 Figure 2-1: Study Area Location 2-3 Figure 2-2: Environmental and Land Use Constraints Within the Study Area 2-5 Figure 3-1: Location of Childress County in Relation to the Physiographic Provinces of Texas 3-8 Figure 3-2: Location of Childress County in Relation to the Vegetation Areas of Texas 3-14 Figure 3-3: Location of Childress County in Relation to the Biotic Provinces of Texas 3-20 Figure 3-4: Location of Childress County in Relation to the Central U.S. Whooping Crane Flyway 3-30 Figure 3-5: Location of Childress County in Relation to the Cultural Resources Planning Regions of Texas 3-42
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC TRC Companies
25 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Table of Contents
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviation Term/Phrase/Name AEP American Electric Power AEPSC American Electric Power Service Corporation AOS American Ornithological Society APLIC Avian Power Line Interaction Committee BEG Bureau of Economic Geology BGEPA Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act BMP best management practice CFR Code of Federal Regulations CWA Clean Water Act dba doing business as EA Environmental Assessment and Alternative Routing Analysis EMST Ecological Mapping Systems of Texas EOR Element Occurrence Record EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ETT Electric Transmission Texas, LLC FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAR Federal Aviation Regulations FCC Federal Communications Commission FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FM Farm-to-Market Road ft foot/feet FVZ foreground visual zone GIS geographic information system GLO General Land Office HPA high probability area IPaC Information, Planning, and Conservation ISD Independent School District IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature LCRA TSC Lower Colorado River Authority Transmission Services Corporation kV kilovolt MBTA ME Migratory Bird Treaty Act Miscellaneous Easement MW megawatt
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC i TRC Companies
26 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Table of Contents
Abbreviation Term/Phrase/Name rnsl mean sea level NAIP National Agriculture Imagery Program NDD TPWD's Natural Diversity Database NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NERC North Arnerican Electric Reliability Corporation NESC National Electrical Safety Code NOI Notice of Intent NOT Notice of Termination NPS National Park Service NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NWI National Wetlands Inventory NWP Nationwide Permit OSD Office of the Secretary of Defense OTHM Official Texas Historical Marker PBRPC Permian Basin Regional Planning Commission PSF Permanent School Fund PUC Public Utility Commission of Texas PUF Permanent University Fund PURA Public Utility Regulatory Act ROW right-of-way RRC Railroad Commission of Texas SCS Soil Conservation Service SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan TAC Texas Administrative Code TARC Texas Association of Regional Councils TARL Texas Archeological Research Laboratory TASA Texas Archeological Sites Atlas TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality THC Texas Historical Commission TPDES Texas Pollution Discharge Elimination System TPWD Texas Parks and Wildlife Departrnent TSHA Texas State Historical Association
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC li TRC Companies
27 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Table of Contents
Abbreviation Term/Phrase/Name TWDB Texas Water Developrnent Board TXNDD Texas Natural Diversity Database TxDOT Texas Department of Transportation UL University Lands USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC iii TRC Companies
28 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
1.1 Scope of Project Electric Transmission Texas, LLC (ETT), a joint venture between subsidiaries of American Electric Power (AEP) and Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company (BHE), is proposing to design and construct a new 345-kilovolt (kV) transmission line in Childress County, Texas, to interconnect a proposed solar generation facility with the existing ETT Tesla Station. The proposed transmission line would be constructed as a double-circuit-capable 345-kV transmission line starting from the existing ETT Tesla Station located approximately 6.5 miles southeast of Childress, Texas on the south side of U.S. Highway 287 and the east side of Farm-to-Market Road (FM) No. 2638 in Childress County, and heading south approximately 1.23 miles to an angle structure and then will continue southeast approximately 1.59 miles to the proposed solar generation owned Fagus Substation interconnection point where the transmission line will terminate (Project). The proposed transmission line will be certificated as a double-circuit 345- kV transrnission line. The length of the proposed Project will be approximately 2.82 miles in length along a Consensus Route obtained with directly impacted landowners and will require a 150-foot wide right-of- way (ROW) adjacent to an existing 345-kV double-circuit 150-foot ROW. Figure 1-1 shows the Project location: the Study Area is described in Section 2.3.1 and shown on Figure 2-1.
ETT retained TRC to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) to support its application for a Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) to be submitted to the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) for the Project. This document has been prepared to provide information and address requirements of Section 37.056 (c)(4)(A-D) of the Texas Public Utilities Code, the PUC's CCN application form, and PUC Texas Administrative Code (TAC) §25.101, and the PUC's policy of "prudent avoidance." ETT and Mortenson Construction provided information in this Section and Sections 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 concerning the purpose and need for the Project, proposed design, construction methods, easements, clearing, cleanup, and maintenance. This document is intended to provide information and address issues concerning the natural, human, and cultural environment within the Study Area. This document may also be used in support of any additional local, state, or federal permitting activities that may be required for ETT's proposed Project.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-1 TRC Companies
29 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of the Proposed Project
Figure 1-1 Project Location
THIS PAGE IS IN COLOR AND CAN BE VIEWED IN CENTRAL RECORDS OR THE PUC INTERCHANGE BY DOWNLOADING THE NATIVE FILE (ZIP) FOR THIS ITEM NUMBER IN DOCKET NO. 50016
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-2 TRC Companies
30 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
1.2 Purpose and Need This proposed 345-kV transmission Project is designed to directly interconnect a new transmission service customer. Excel Advantage, LLC, dba Misae Solar Park II (MSP 11), into the existing ETT Tesla Station. MSP II has requested ETT to interconnect its proposed 682-megawatt (MW) solar farm. The proposed solar developments will have a double-circuit capable 345-kV transmission line circuit from the proposed Fagus Substation routed into the Tesla 345-kV Station.
Additional details are provided in the CCN application regarding the termination into the ETT Tesla Station and the generator Fagus Substation. 16 TAC 25.191 (d)(3) requires a Transmission Service Provider to interconnect a generator once the other conditions are completed for transmission service, as defined in 16 TAC 25.191(c).
1.3 Description of Proposed Design and Construction The following information has been developed by TRC and approved by ETT. This information presents the proposed design and construction of facilities for the double-circuit capable 345-kV transmission line.
1.3.1 Transmission Line Design ETT is proposing to use self-supporting, double-circuit capable tubular steel monopole structures for the Project, as shown in Figure 1-2 and Figure 1-3. Design criteria will be per American Electric Power Service Corporation (AEPSC) standard design specifications and will comply with applicable statues, the appropriate edition of the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC), and acceptable engineering design practice. Geotechnical considerations will include soil borings and in situ soil testing to provide parameters of foundation design and embedment depth of the structures. Structures will be supported by foundations that are appropriate and compatible to the structure design. It is expected for this project that there will be a combination of direct-embedded monopoles for some locations and base-plated monopoles on drilled shaft foundations for other locations. The structure height above ground for the Tesla to Fagus transmission line will range from 125 to 160 feet in height. These heights will vary depending upon terrain, span requirements. and engineering constraints. Span distance between the structures will vary from approximately 440 feet to 930 feet (typically 800 feet), with some exceptions due to individual site conditions or engineering requirements.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-3 TRC Companies
3 1 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
Figure 1-2: Typical Double-Circuit Tangent Monopole Structure
t
t • V.
I
Figure 1-2 ETT 4 Typical Double-Circuit Capable Eiectror rarloronman Tangent Monopole Structure Proposed Testa to FaguS Double Circuit Capable 345 kV z TR C Transmission Une ri Chi.dress County
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-4 TRC Companies
32 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
Figure 1-3: Typical Dead-end Two-Pole Angle Structure
0,111".• 141.4. 4 0.y
1.1 .1- •••
YINuAL RUNNTNG ANGLE TYP r1111 OFAr:FN'N TWO - POLE STRUCTURE TWO POI E STRUCTURE
Figure 1-3 ETT Typical Dead-end Two-Pole EN1KtMC rlanSPIR141011 14.a. Angle Structure Proposed Tesla to FaguS Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV TRC Transmission Line in Childress County
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-5 TRC Companies
33 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
1.3.2 Right-of-Way Requirements The proposed ROW width for this Project will be 150 feet, except for some angle turns that could require more. The proposed transmission line will be located along the centerline of the ROW. Additional temporary workspace may be required at line angles and at dead-ends for conductor pull and construction.
1.4 Construction Considerations Projects of this type require surveying, ROW clearing, foundation installation, structure assembly, erection, conductor and shield wire installation, cleanup, and reclamation or revegetation when the Project is completed. Construction operations will be conducted with attention to the preservation of natural habitat and existing agricultural field terracing, as applicable.
1.4.1 Clearing and Right-of-Way Preparation After regulatory approval and design of the transmission line is finalized, ROW will be acquired and then cleared according to ETT's clearing specifications. Clearing will be accomplished to comply with North American Reliability Corporation (NERC) reliability standards. Mortenson, under the direction of ETT, will perform any required clearing of the ROW. Available methods of disposal will include mulching, brush piling, and salvaging. The option often selected by landowners requires that cleared brush or trees be stacked and left for use as wildlife habitat adjacent to, but off, the ROW. Trees and brush in the ROW are initially cleared to permit safe construction of the line. Minimal clearing will be required in agricultural areas.
The ROW will be utilized for access during construction operations, with ingress and egress through private property procured as necessary to access the ROW. In these cases, existing private roads will be used where possible. Culverts and angular rock fords will be installed to cross streams where necessary. Public roads will be used for access to the ROW where feasible as well.
Clearing plans, methods, and practices are extremely important for success in any program designed to minimize the adverse effects of electric transmission lines on the natural environment. The following measures, thoughtfully implemented and applied to this Project, will help meet this goal:
1. Clearing will be performed in a manner that will maximize the preservation of natural habitat and the conservation of natural resources and minimize impacts to waters in the activity area.
The method of clearing ROW will consider soil stability, the protection of natural vegetation, sensitive habitats, the protection of adjacent resources such as natural habitat for plants and wildlife, and the prevention of silt deposition in watercourses.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-6 TRC Companies
34 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
3. ETT vv ill use efficient and effective methods to remove vegetation within the ROW. Hydro axes and flail rnowers or similar devices may be used in clearing operations where such use will preserve the cover crop of grass and similar vegetation.
4. If deemed appropriate, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-approved herbicides will be applied and handled in accordance with the product manufacturers' published recommendations and specifications and as directed by appropriate qualified staff.
1.4.2 Structure Assembly and Erection Survey crews will stake or otherwise mark structure locations. Depending on soil type, crews will either direct-embed structures or pour foundations utilizing augured circular holes, rebar cages, and anchor bolts or stubs. Crews will transport and assemble structures and related hardware. The usual procedure is to assemble each structure on its side, then lift the structure and set it on its base. However, taller structures may need to have sections assembled in the air. Sections are either jacked together or connected using bolts, which will be torqued to the manufacturer's recommended value. Once anchor bolt foundations have cured sufficiently, crews will set the structures and install the conductor and shield wire suspension assemblies.
Where direct-embedded structures are used, crews will install them by auguring oversized holes, lifting and setting the structure, and backfilling with native soils, select fill, or concrete, depending on soil conditions at the site (based on soils testing). Although vehicular traffic is a large part of this operation, construction crews will take care to minimize damage to the ROW by minimizing the number of pathways traveled.
1.4.3 Conductor and Shield Wire Installation The conductors and shield wires are installed via a tensioning system. A pilot (pulling) line is first threaded through the stringing blocks or travelers for each conductor and shield wire. Conductor and shield wires are then pulled by the pilot line and held tight by a tensioner to keep the wires from coming in contact with the ground and other objects that could be darnaging to the wire. In addition, guard structures (temporary wood-pole structures) will be installed where the transmission line crosses overhead electric power lines, overhead telephone lines, roadways, or other areas requiring an additional margin of safety during wire installation. When the wire is tensioned to the required sag, the wire is taken out of the blocks and placed in the suspension and dead-end clamps for perrnanent attachment.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-7 TRC Companies
35 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
1.4.4 Construction Operations Construction operations will be conducted with attention to the preservation of the natural habitat and the conservation of natural resources. The following criteria will be used to attain these goals. These criteria are subject to adjustment according to the rules and judgments of any public agencies whose lands may be crossed by the proposed line.
1 Disturbance of construction areas and laydown yards will be minimized. These areas will be graded in a manner that will minimize erosion and conform to the natural topography.
2. Soil excavated during construction and not used for other purposes will be evenly backfilled onto a cleared area. Backfilled soil will be sloped gradually to conform to the terrain and adjacent land.
3. Erosion control devices will be constructed where necessary to reduce soil erosion in the ROW.
4. If any roads are found to be necessary, they will not be constructed on unstable slopes. Where feasible, service and access roads are constructed jointly, but none are expected in this Project.
5. Clearing and construction activities near streambeds will be performed in a manner that will minimize damage to the natural condition of the area. Stream banks will be restored as necessary to minimize erosion.
6. Concerted and diligent effort will be made to prevent accidental oil spills and other types of pollution, particularly while performing work near streams, lakes, and reservoirs.
7. Precautions will be taken to prevent the possibility of accidental range fires.
8. Tension stringing of conductors will be employed, which may reduce the amount of vegetation clearing necessary.
9. Precautions will be taken to protect natural features and cultural resources (identified by site- specific studies of the Project) along the ROW, if any are found.
10. If federally protected species or habitat is present, guidance from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will be obtained prior to clearing or construction activities.
1 1 . Soil disturbance during construction will be kept to a minimum, and restorative measures will be taken within a reasonable length of time.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-8 TRC Companies
36 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
1.4.5 Cleanup The cleanup operation involves the restoration of disturbed areas to grade (as much as possible), the removal of construction debris, and the restoration or compensation of any items damaged by the construction of the Project. The following criteria generally apply to the cleanup of construction debris and the restoration of the area's natural setting.
. If site factors make it unusually difficult to establish a protective vegetative cover, other restoration procedures will be used, such as the use of gravel or rocks. 2. Sears, cuts, fill, or other aesthetically degraded areas will be allowed to seed naturally or may be reseeded with native species to reduce erosion, restore a natural appearance, and to provide food and cover for wildlife. 3. If temporary access roads are removed after construction, the original slopes will be restored.
4. Construction equipment and supplies will be dismantled and removed from the ROW when construction is completed.
5. Construction debris will be removed prior to completion of the Project.
6. Replacement of soil adjacent to water crossings for access roads will be at slopes less than the normal angle of repose for the soil type involved and will be stabilized/revegetated to avoid erosion.
1.5 Maintenance Considerations Maintenance of the facilities will include periodic inspection of the line and repair of damaged structures due to equipment failures, accidents, or natural phenomena, such as wind or lightning. In areas where treatment of vegetation within the ROW is required, mowing, pruning, or application of EPA-approved herbicides will be conducted as required (normally once every 3 to 5 years) to ensure proper clearance between the conductors and nearby vegetation. While maintenance patrols will vary, aerial, vehicle, and foot patrols will be performed periodically. In cropland areas and properly managed grazing lands and lawn areas, little or no vegetation control will be required, due to existing land-use practices. The major maintenance item will be the trimming of trees that pose a potential danger to the conductors or structures to provide a safe and reliable power line.
AEPSC's maintenance of ETT's transmission ROW occurs through the implementation of a comprehensive, systematic, integrated vegetation management program designed to ensure that the vegetation along each transmission line is managed at the proper time and in the most cost effective and environmentally sound manner. Vegetation is managed on a prescriptive basis. Ongoing evaluation of the
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-9 TRC Companies
37 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project system through ground and aerial inspections provides the basic information used by AEPSC to develop an annual plan. Circuit criticality, historical data, line voltage, location. vegetative inventory information, and land use are among the factors considered in developing the annual vegetation management plan. As conditions change, vegetation patrols may modify the plans.
1.6 Agency Actions Numerous federal, state, and local regulatory agencies and organizations have promulgated rules and regulations regarding the routing and potential impacts associated with the proposed transmission line Project. This section lists the major regulatory agencies that are involved in project planning and permitting of transmission lines in Texas, and it describes the permits or approvals required. TRC solicited comments from various regulatory agencies and officials during the development of this document. A summary of agency responses is provided in `set.tion 5 o (Correspondence with Agencies and Officials) and copies of the responses received are included in \EpendiN (Agency Correspondence). Construction documents and specifications will indicate any special construction measures needed to comply with the regulatory requirements listed below. In addition, depending upon the location of the transmission line structures, Childress County may require floodplain development permits and road crossing permits.
1.6.1 Public Utility Commission of Texas The proposed transmission line Project will require ETT to file an application to amend its CCN with the PUC. This EA report has been prepared by TRC in support of ETT's application for the CCN on this Project. This document is intended to provide information on certain environmental and land use factors contained in Public Utility Regulatory Act (PURA) § 37.056(c)(4). and PUC's Substantive Rule 16 TAC § 25.10 I (b)(3)(8), as well as to address relevant questions in the PUC's CCN application. This report may also be used in support of any local, state, or federal permitting requirements, if necessary. ETT will obtain PUC approval of its CCN application prior to beginning construction of the Project.
1.6.2 Federal Aviation Administration According to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations (FAR), Part 77, the construction of a transmission line requires FAA notification if structure heights exceed 200 feet or the height of an imaginary surface extending outward and upward at one of the following slopes (FAA, 2010):
• A 100:1 slope for a horizontal distance of 20,000 feet from the nearest point of the nearest runway of a public or military airport having at least one runway longer than 3.200 feet • A 50:1 slope for a horizontal distance of 10,000 feet from the nearest runway of a public or military airport where no runway is longer than 3,200 feet in length
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-10 TRC Companies
38 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
• A 25:1 slope for a horizontal distance of 5,000 feet for heliports
Based on these guidelines. AEPSC. as agent for ETT, will make a final determination of the need for FAA notification based on the alignment of the approved route, structure locations, and structure designs. lf necessary, AEPSC will file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (Form 7460-1) with the FAA at least 30 days prior to construction. The result of this notification, and the subsequent coordination with the FAA, could include changes in the design or potential requirements to mark or illuminate portions of the line.
1.6.3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), activities in waters of the U.S., including wetlands, can be regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), in conjunction with the EPA. Certain construction activities that potentially impact waters of the U.S. may be authorized by one of the USACE's Nationwide Permits (NWPs). Permits that may apply to placement of support structures and associated activities are NWP 25 (Structural Discharges) and NWP 12 (Utility Line Activities). NWP 25 generally authorizes the discharge of concrete, sand, rock, etc., into tightly sealed forms or cells where the material is used as a structural member for standard pile-supported structures (linear projects, not buildings or other structures).
NWP 12 generally authorizes discharges associated with the construction of utility lines and substations within waters of the U.S. and additional activities affecting waters of the U.S., such as those associated with the construction and maintenance of utility line substations; foundations for overhead utility line towers, poles, and anchors; and access roads for the construction and maintenance of utility lines.
Construction of this transmission line Project will likely meet the criteria of NWP 12. However, if the impacts of the Project exceed the criteria established under General Condition 13 or other regional conditions listed under the NWP 12, then a Regional General Permit may be required. An Individual Permit, however, is not anticipated for this Project. lf necessary, AEPSC, as agent for ETT, will coordinate with the USACE prior to clearing and construction, to ensure compliance with the appropriate regulations associated with construction-related impacts to waterbodies and wetland features.
Under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, 33 U.S.C. § 403, the USACE is directed by Congress to regulate all work and structures in, or affecting the course, condition, or capacity of navigable waters of the U.S., including tidal waters. No navigable waters occur within the Study Area that would require permitting under this Act.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-11 TRC Companies
39 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
1.6.4 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service The USFWS enforces federal wildlife laws and provides comments on proposed projects under the jurisdiction of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA). Additionally, USFWS oversight includes review of projects with a federal nexus under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Reviews of protected species have taken place at a national level under the Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Several bird species have the potential to occur in the area and impacts will need to be reviewed.
Upon PUC approval of the proposed Project, a survey may be necessary to identify any potential suitable habitat for federally protected species. If suitable habitat is noted, then informal consultation with the USFWS may be conducted to determine if permitting or other requirements associated with possible impacts to protected species under the ESA. MBTA, or BGEPA is necessary.
1.6.5 Federal Emergency Management Agency At the time of this report, Childress County does not participate in the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) program; therefore, floodplain information for the Study Area is not available. Although detailed floodplain analyses for Childress County are not available, floodplains are likely associated with North Groesbeck Creek and South Groesbeck Creek areas within the Study Area. The Project is expected to have no significant impact on the function of the existing and presumed floodplains. FEMA requested that Coordination with the Childress County Judge should occur as determined necessary.
1.6.6 Texas Parks and Wildlife Department The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) is the state agency with the primary responsibility of protecting the fish and wildlife resources in accordance with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code Section 12.001 I (b). TRC did initial research on the TPWDs Texas Natural Diversity Database (TXNDD), and county listed threatened and endangered (T&E) species during the Project scoping phase and a copy of this EA will be submitted to TPWD when the CCN application is filed with the PUC. Once the PUC approves a route, additional coordination with TPWD may be necessary to determine the need for additional species surveys, and to avoid or minimize potential adverse impacts to sensitive habitats, threatened or endangered species, and other fish and wildlife resources.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-12 TRC Companies
40 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
1.6.7 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality The Project may require a Texas Pollution Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) General Construction Permit (TX150000) as implemented by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) under the provisions of Section 402 of the CWA and Chapter 26 of the Texas Water Code. The TCEQ has developed a three-tiered approach for implementing this permit that is dependent on the acreage of disturbance. No permitting is required for land disturbances of less than 1 acre (Tier I). Disturbance of more than 1 acre, but less than 5 acres, would require implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (Tier II). If more than 5 acres of land are disturbed, the requirements mentioned above for Tier II are necessary and the submittal of a Notice of Intent (NOI) and Notice of Termination (NOT) to the TCEQ is also required (Tier III). Once a route is approved by the PUC, ETT will determine the amount of ground disturbance and the appropriate tier and conditions of the TX general permit no. TXR150000.
1.6.8 Texas Department of Transportation Permits and approvals will be obtained from the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) for any crossing of, or access from. a State-maintained roadway. Best management practices (BMPs) will be used, as required, to minimize erosion and sedimentation resulting from the construction. Revegetation will occur within TxDOT controlled ROW as required under the "Revegetation Special Provisions" and contained in TxDOT form 1023 (Rev. 9-93).
1.6.9 Texas Historical Commission
Cultural resources are protected by federal and state laws if they have some level of significance under the criteria of the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 60) or under State guidance TAC. Title 13. Part 2, Chapter 26.7-8). TRC contacted the Texas Historical Commission (THC), and the agency determined that the final route and substation sites need to be surveyed by a professional archaeologist for consideration by the Texas Public Utilities Commission prior to initiating any ground disturbance.
1.6.10 Texas General Land Office The Texas General Land Office (GLO) requires a Miscellaneous Easement (ME) for any ROW crossing a State-owned riverbed, navigable stream, or tidally influenced waters. The agency asked to be contacted once the final route for the Project has been determined to see if it will cross any streambeds or Permanent School Fund (PSF) land that would require an easement from the GLO. However, no GLO easement has been identified or is anticipated for this Project.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 1-13 TRC Companies
41 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
2.0 ROUTE EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
2.1 Objective of Study The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential environmental and land use impacts for ETT's proposed 345-kV transmission line Project that complies with PURA § 37.056(c)(4)(A)-(D), 16 TAC § 22.52(a)(4), and 16 TAC § 25.101(b)(3)(B), including the PUC's policy of prudent avoidance. ETT and TRC utilized a comprehensive and well-established evaluation methodology to evaluate potential impacts of the proposed transmission line route. ETT utilizes a multiphase approach for completing such a Project: define the Study Area; obtain environmental information; map environmental and land use constraints; conduct environmental, engineering, and cost analyses; and design and construct the transmission facility. The following sections provide a description of the process used in the development and evaluation of the proposed Consensus Route.
2.2 Data Collection To evaluate the Project. TRC collected data from a variety of sources, including published literature (documents, reports, maps, aerial photography. etc.). information from local, state and federal agencies, and site-specific studies or investigations performed by others. The following types of data were used throughout the evaluation of the Project: recent aerial imagery (Google Earth Pro 2019). U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps (1:24,000), USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD), USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps, TPWD's Natural Diversity Database (NOD), USDA — NASS Cropland Data Layer. Railroad Commission of Texas (RRC) Pipeline Data, RexTag dba Hart Energy Mapping & Data, and ground reconnaissance surveys. The data collection effort, although concentrated in the early stages of the Project, was an ongoing process.
2.3 Evaluation of the Route
2.3.1 Study Area Delineation The Study Area was determined by beginning with the two end points for the transmission line. ETT's existing 345-kV Tesla Station location was used to establish the northwest extent and the proposed generator owned Fagus Substation location was used to establish the southeast extent. The Fagus Substation location southwest of the intersection of FM 1033 and County Road CC, were established by the solar developer as the optimal locations for gathering the generation output from the proposed solar arrays.
The locations of these endpoints established the approximate boundaries of the Study Area. The north boundary of the Study Area is U.S. Highway 287 and the Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 2-1 TRC Companies
42
Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project the south boundary is a land line approximately 1/3 mile south of the Fagus Substation, the west boundary is just east of FM 2638 that provides access to the ETT Tesla Station, and the east boundary is just west of FM 1033 that will provide access to the generator's Fagus Substation. The Study Area boundary is approximately 2.0 miles east to west, approximately 3.0 miles north to south along the western boundary, approximately 2.6 miles north to south along the eastern boundary, and the northern boundary follows the diagonal of U.S. Highway 287 and the BNSF railroad for a length of approxirnately 2.1 miles. The Study Area contains approximately 5.4 square miles. The Study Area is shown on Figure 2-1.
2.3.2 Constraints Mapping To quantify potential impacts to sensitive environrnental and land use features, a constraints mapping process was used in evaluating the Project. The geographic locations of environmentally sensitive and other restrictive areas within the Study Area were located and considered during the evaluation process. These constraints were rnapped onto an aerial base rnap (Figure 2-2) created using Google Earth Pro 2019.
Data used by TRC in the evaluation of the Project was drawn frorn a variety of sources, including published literature, information from local, state, and federal agencies, recent aerial photography, and ground reconnaissance of the Study Area. The routing criteria considered the following aspects of the hurnan environment, environmental, and cultural resources:
Human Environment Environmental Resources • Paralleling existing linear facilities, with • Physiography and Geology pipelines as a constraint • Soils • Land use, including habitable structures • Mineral and Energy Resources Cultural Resources • Surface Water • Sensitive Historic Sites • Wetlands • Sensitive Cultural Sites • Sensitive Vegetation Habitats • Sensitive Fish and Wildlife Habitats • Recreationally and Commercially important Species • TES Species Critical Habitats
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 2-2 TRC Companies
43 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of the Proposed Project
Figure 2-1 Study Area Location
THIS PAGE IS IN COLOR AND CAN BE VIEWED IN CENTRAL RECORDS OR THE PUC INTERCHANGE BY DOWNLOADING THE NATIVE FILE (ZIP) FOR THIS ITEM NUMBER IN DOCKET NO. 50016
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 2-3 TRC Companies
44 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Description of Proposed Project
In addition, the length, number of angle structures, number of land parcels crossed, and cost were considered. The complete routing criteria is shown in i i of this EA. Figure 2-2 shows the environmental and land use constraints within the Study Area.
2.3.3 Evaluation Factors The evaluation of the Project involved studying a variety of environmental factors using desktop analysis of aerial maps and resource maps and conducting a field visit on April 16, 2019. In addition, biological field surveys were conducted along the ROW for the Consensus Route on June 4-5, 2019. The initial field evaluation was conducted by driving the Study Area and reviewing aerial and resource maps. The follow- up biological field evaluation was conducted by walking along the proposed ROW for the Consensus Route. In evaluating the proposed Consensus Route, 39 environmental criteria were considered. These criteria are presented in Table 6-1.
The analysis of the Project involved the inventory and tabulation of the number or quantity of each environmental criterion located along the route (e.g., number of habitable structures within 500 feet, amount of brushland/shrubland crossed, etc.). The number or amount of each criterion was determined by reviewing various maps and recent color aerial imagery (Google Earth Pro 2019) and by field verification. Potential environmental impacts of the transmission line route are addressed in seil ion of this document.
Consensus Route The Consensus Route was selected based on evaluation of the potential impacts along with consideration of the direct path between the interconnection points, being parallel to the existing 345-kV transmission line, the length, number of angle structures, number of land parcels crossed, and habitable structures associated with other alternative routes. Other alternative routes initially considered were adjacent to existing linear facilities (existing transmission lines and road rights-of-way) or followed parcel lines. In addition, TRC contacted each of the landowners in the Study Area who owned a parcel that would be crossed by the Consensus Route. ETT believes the Consensus Route best addresses the requirements of PURA and PUC Substantive Rules. All of the landowners crossed by the Consensus Route have signed a Consensus Route Agreement, Attachment 2 of the CCN Application.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 2-4 TRC Companies
45 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Enviroment
Figure 2-2 Environmental and Land Use Constraints Within the Study Area
THIS PAGE IS OVERSIZED AND CAN BE VIEWED IN CENTRAL RECORDS OR THE PUC INTERCHANGE BY DOWNLOADING THE NATIVE FILE (ZIP) FOR THIS ITEM NUMBER IN DOCKET NO. 50016
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 2-5 TRC Companies
46 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Enviroment
This page intentionally left blank
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 2-6 TRC Companies
47 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
3.1 Physiography
Childress County, which is in the southeastern portion of the Texas Panhandle. lies within the transition between the Southern High Plains and North Central Plains regions of the Great Plains physiographic province (Figure 3-1). The general slope of the rolling and hilly county is from northwest to southeast with elevations ranging from 1,800 to 2,000 feet above mean sea level (Blakley and Mohle 1963:70).
3.1.1 North-Central Plains
The North-Central Plains of Texas and Oklahoma are distinct from the High Plains physiography due to the presence of low north-south ridges. The ridges were formed from natural erosion of weaker caprock. The transition from the harder caprock of the High Plains to the North-Central Plains is a steep erosional slope known as the Caprock Escarpment. Topographic elevations in the North-Central Plains range from 900 to 3,000 feet (BEG 1996). The region is dissected by rivers resulting in varying topographic relief. The topography is characterized by numerous sinkholes, caves, solution valleys, and other karst topography features common in some limestone regions.
3.1.2 High Plains (Llano Estacado)
The High Plains region of Texas is located in the southern end of the Great Plains. The High Plains were formed by deposition of sediment eroded from the uplifting Rocky Mountains in Early Tertiary time, beginning about 65 million years ago. This physiographic region consists of approximately 20 million acres of a relatively high plateau. Topographic elevations range from 2,000 to 3.800 feet, sloping gently toward the southeast (BEG 1996; USGS 2019). Childress County is located near the eastern boundary of this physiographic region. It is a distinct area of the section due to its flat topography, many playas, and local dune fields (BEG 1996).
Playa lakes are shallow, round depressions, ephemeral wetlands, characterized by clay soils. ln the region, playas cover 2 percent of the land surface and average 15 acres in size. Most (87 percent) are less than 30 acres in size although some may exceed 800 acres (TPWD 2019). These playa lakes may originate wherever water periodically can collect in a surficial depression. They expand by hydrologic and geomorphic processes that include: dissolution of lithologic carbonates; downward movement of fine grained clastics and organics by infiltrating groundwater, leading to additional carbonate dissolution; and, eolian (wind) removal of elastics from the floor of the lakes when dry (Osterkamp and Moon 1987).
Local dune fields are comprised of sand. Where vegetation is present, the dunes are stable. In dry locations with minimal ground cover, the dunes are active. Active sand dunes grow and change shape in response to seasonal, prevailing winds, resulting in a dynamic geomorphic region.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-7 TRC Companies
48 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Figure 3-1: Location of Childress County in Relation to the Physiographic Provinces of Texas
A. Coastal Prairies a. Interior Coastal Plains C. Blackland Prairies D. Grand Prairie E. Edwards Plateau F. Central Texas Uplift G. North-Central Plains H. High Plains Trars-Pecos Basin and Range
Figure 3-1 ETT-V Location of Childress County in Relation floctric Transimszeort Taxa. to the Physiographic Provinces of Texas Ilt 230 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV
I -115t14N TR C Transmission Line in Childress County
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-8 TRC Companies
49 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Most dunes are longer on the windward side where sand migrates up by wind action and shorter on the slip face of the dune in the lee side. In the High Plains, much of the near-surface layers are comprised of caliche, a caprock. Caliche is formed by the leaching of carbonate and silica from surface soils and the re- deposition of the dissolved mineral layers below the surface. The caliche ranges from crumbly to very hard (Reeves 1970). As described above, this caprock is covered with sheets of extensive eolian sediment.
3.2 Geology
The geology of Childress County is variable, with alluvium and eolian deposits to various types of bedrock with varying ages, dependent on the amount of erosion that has occurred. Geologic formations present in Childress County include:
• Blaine Formation: The Blaine Formation of Permian (Guadalupe Series) age occurs in 57 percent of Childress County and consists of mudstone. gypsum, dolomite, and sandstone within laterally persistent dolomite beds that are 2 to 8-feet thick. The Childress dolomite occurs in beds no greater than 2 feet thick and outcrops in and around the town of Childress. The Blaine Formation deposits are white, tan, yellow, clayey, fine- to coarse-grained with thin- to medium- bedded molds of pelecypods and large ammonoids and nautiloids in coarse-grained beds. The rnudstone and shale have indistinct bedding of various shades of red and gray, brownish-red green thin lenses of satin spar and selenite gypsum and thin beds and nodules of alabaster gypsum. The gypsum is 1 — 10 feet thick within laminated dolomite beds. The Blaine Formation is 250 — 400 feet thick in the Wichita Falls, TX and Lawton. OK areas (USGS 2019a; USGS 2019b).
• Whitehorse Group: This formation of Permian (Guadalupe Series) age occurs within 24 percent of the county and consists of sandstone, shale, gypsum, and dolomite. The sandstone is a silty, fine-grain quartz that contains thin beds of anhydrite, gypsum, and dolomite. The shale is sandy and red with a massive texture. The gypsum is white and pink with a thin bedded to massive texture. The dolomite is grey and present in thin, discontinuous beds associated with gypsum. The thickness of the formation varies from approximately 300 to 700 feet (USGS 2019a).
• Sand Sheet Deposits: Sand Sheet deposits of Holocene age occur within 9 percent of the county. The sand sheets consist of eolian sand with some larger dunes. The sand has moderate to high permeability and low to moderate water-holding capacity (USGS 2019a).
• Alluvium: Alluvial deposits of Holocene age occur within 5 percent of the county. Alluvium consists of clayey fine to very fine quartz sand, silt, clay, and gravel with various thicknesses as stream laid deposits (USGS 2019a).
• Dune Sand Sheet Deposits: These deposits of Holocene age occur within 2 percent of the county. They include active blowouts with depressed relief. They have moderate to very high permeability and low to moderate water-holding capacity (USGS 2019a).
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-9 TRC Companies
50 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
• Quaternary Deposits, Undivided: These deposits occur within 2 percent of the county and consist of sand, silt, clay, and gravels. They are locally indurated with calcium carbonate (caliche) deposits. They occur on point bars, natural levees, strearn channels, sand dunes, terraces, alluvial fans, and playas (USGS 2019a).
• Terrace Deposits: These deposits of Pleistocene and Holocene age are alluvial sands and silts along drainages throughout the county. They constitute 0.7 percent of the lands in Childress County. Gravels occur more frequently in older and higher terrace deposits. Locations include point bars, natural levees, and stream channels along valley walls (USGS 2019a).
• Lingos Formation: This forrnation is middle Pleistocene to Recent age. Deposits consist of alluvial coarse sands and gravels and lacustrine clays along drainages and constituting 0.3 percent of the county lands (USGS 2019a).
3.3 Soils The Study Area occurs within southeastern Childress County. The general soil map of Childress County, published by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) in 1963, was referenced for the following descriptions of the general soil map units within the Study Area.
3.3.1 Soil Associations The soil resources within the Study Area are derived froni Permian sedirnentary rock and include the Tillman clay loarn and Vernon-Weymouth clay loarn associations in Childress County, Texas. The Tillman soils are characterized by deep to very deep, well drained, clayey soils which forrned on upland prairies. The Vemon-Weyrnouth soils characterized by moderately deep to very deep upland clay or clay loam soils. The soils forrned on upland prairies and may be seasonally wet or droughty.
Table 3-1: Soil Units
Acres in Proposed Percentage of Soil Type Project Proposed Corrosive to Soil Map Unit Symbol Footprint Study Area Steel Rating Hydric Tillman clay loam, 0 to 1 TcA 5.9 11.5 High No percent slopes Tillman clay loam, 1 to 3 TcB 28.6 55.8 High No percent slopes Vernon-Weymouth clay VcB 16.8 32.7 High No loams, 1 to 3 percent slopes
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-10 TRC Companies
51 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.3.2 Prime Farmland Soils The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines prime farmland as land that has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops and is available for these uses. Prime farmland could be cultivated land, pastureland, forestland, or other land, but it is not urban or built-up land or water areas. The soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply are those needed for the soil to produce economically sustained high yields of crops when proper management, including water management, and acceptable farming methods are applied. In general, prime farmland has an adequate and dependable supply of moisture from precipitation or irrigation, a favorable temperature and growing season, acceptable acidity or alkalinity, an acceptable salt and sodium content, and few or no rocks. The water supply is dependable and of adequate quality. Prime farmland is permeable to water and air. It is not excessively erodible or saturated with water for long periods, and it either is not frequently flooded during the growing season or is protected from flooding. Slope ranges mainly from 0 to 6 percent. More detailed information about the criteria for prime farmland is available at the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS, 2019a).
According to the NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2019b), TcA and TcB soils, which account for approximately 74.2 percent (2,565.4 acres) of the Study Area, are considered prime farmland. The remaining approximately 25.8 percent (890.6 acres) of the Study Area is comprised of VcB soils which are not considered prime farmland.
3.4 Mineral and Energy Resources The Bureau of Economic Geology (BEG) Texas Mineral Resource Map indicates that no major mineral resources are mapped near the Study Area (BEG, 2019). Additionally, USGS topographic maps do not indicate the presence of mines or quarries near the Study Area.
According to Railroad Commission of Texas (RRC) records, no active or plugged oil and gas wells are documented in the Study Area; however, an abandoned crude oil gathering line crosses the Study Area on the north side of County Road BB1 (RRC, 2019). Current aerial photographs indicate the presence of several active and plugged wells to the north and east of the Study Area.
3.5 Water Resources
3.5.1 Surface Water Childress County has three primary drainages that consist of Buck Creek and its tributaries in the northeastern part of the county, the Red River and its tributaries in the central and northwestern parts of
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-11 TRC Companies
52 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment the county. and tributaries of the Pease River in the southern part of the county, where the present Study Area is located (Blakley and Mohle 1963:70). The Study Area is crossed by a drainage basin divide between two tributaries of the Red River Basin, with the Prairie Dog Town Fork of the Red River 11 miles to the north and the North Pease River 8 miles to the south. The beginning of the Red River is 14 miles north of the Study Area. Numerous small perennial, intermittent. and/or ephemeral unnamed tributaries to these streams also are found throughout Childress County. Many of the smaller tributaries have been dammed. Lakes and reservoirs in Childress County are as follows: Park Lake Darn, 0.42-mile from Childress; Lake Scott Dam. 1.16 miles from Childress; Baylor Lake Dam. 6.13 miles from Childress; Lake Childress Dam. 6.88 miles from Childress; Nippert Lake Dam, 6.48 miles from Childress; Williams Dam, 7.24 miles from Childress; Texas No Name Number 23 Darn, 2.74 miles from Childress; and Texas No Name Dam Number 1, 2.49 miles from Childress (Top Dams in Childress County, TX 2019).
The TPWD designates Ecologically Significant Stream Segments (ESSS) for waters that display unique ecological value based on biological function, hydrologic function, riparian conservation areas, water quality, aquatic life, aesthetics, or habitat for threatened or endangered species. Near the Study Area. Prairie Dog Town Fork of the Red River is designated as ESSS. The Prairie Dog Town Fork of the Red River upstream of the Briscoe/Hall County line is also listed on the Nationwide Rivers Inventory for scenery, recreation, geologic, historic, and cultural value. The Nationwide Rivers Inventory is a designation for free-flowing river segments of the U.S. that possess one or more outstandingly remarkable natural or cultural values. Prairie Dog Town Fork of the Red River is considered significant because it flows through Palo Duro Canyon (outside of the Study Area), which contains Palo Duro Canyon State Park, a National Natural Landmark, and the JA Ranch, a National Historic Landmark (NPS 2019a, 2019b).
3.5.2 Floodplains Review of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) revealed that unincorporated portions of Childress County do not participate in the FEMA prograrn. Therefore, floodplain inforrnation for the Study Area is not available. As directed by FEMA, ETT will consult as necessary with the local floodplain administrator once a route is approved by the PUCT.
3.5.3 Groundwater/Aquifers A major aquifer is defined as an aquifer that supplies large quantities of water over a large area of the state. A minor aquifer supplies a large quantity of water over a srnall area, or small quantities over a large area (Ashworth and Hopkins 1995). The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) identifies the
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-12 TRC Companies
53 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
following major and minor aquifers within Childress County: the Seymour and Blaine Aquifers (TWDB 2019a, 2019b). The only major aquifer underlying Childress County is the Seymour Aquifer. The Blaine Aquifer is the only minor aquifer in Childress County. The Blaine Aquifer is present as both outcrop and subcrop.
3.6 Vegetation
3.6.1 Regional Vegetation As shown on Figure 3-2, The Study Area is located in Childress County within the Central Great Plains ecoregion, defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as Ecoregion 29, a Level 111 ecoregion. The Study Area is located in a sub-ecoregion of the Central Great Plains, the Red Prairie (27h). Within this ecoregion, soils are derived frorn Perrnian sedimentary rock, and predorninant vegetation cover was once composed of rnixed tall and short grass prairie species. Most of the area has been converted for crop production. The original vegetation included big bluestern (Adropogon gerardii), little bluestern (Schizachyrium scoparium). sand bluestern (Andropogon hallii), silver bluestem (Bothrichlou saccharoides), Texas wintergrass (Nasella leucotricha), indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans), switchgrass (Panicum virgaturn), sideoats grarna (Bouteloua curtipendula), blue grarna (Bouteloua gracilis), wildryes (Elymus spp.), tobosagrass (Pleuraphis rnutica), and buffalograss (Bouteloua dactvloides) on the clay soils. The sandy soils support tall bunchgrasses (rnainly sand bluestem). Woody plants commonly found on clay soils include shin oak (Quercus havardii), sand sagebrush (Artemisia filijblia), and mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa).
Remnant prairie areas found in the region are typically dominated by bluestems, grarnas. Texas wintergrass, and buffalogass. Many non-cultivated areas in the region are now dominated by brushy species, including mesquite and lotebush, which have encroached into traditional grassland prairies by way of overgrazing, soil erosion, lowering groundwater table. and decline of native grasslands. (Griffith, 2004).
3.6.2 Vegetation Community Types in the Study Area TPWD. in cooperation with private, state, and federal partners, has produced a 398-class land classification for the State of Texas. Of these land classifications, only 3 occur in Childress County. The land classification for the Study Area is (27h) Red Prairie (Figure 3-2). This was accomplished by attributing land cover and abiotic variables to 10-meter resolution image objects generated from NAIP photographs. In some regions. enhanced satellite land cover classification, landforrn rnodeling efforts, or other ancillary data were included to map important current vegetation types. These results are used by a wide variety of partners in Texas for conservation planning and managernent.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-13 TRC Companies
54 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Enviroment
Figure 3-2 Location of Childress County in Relation to the Vegetation Areas of Texas
THIS PAGE IS IN COLOR AND CAN BE VIEWED IN CENTRAL RECORDS OR THE PUC INTERCHANGE BY DOWNLOADING THE NATIVE FILE (ZIP) FOR THIS ITEM NUMBER IN DOCKET NO. 50016
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-14 TRC Companies
55 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
According to TPWD's Texas vegetation cover types, row crops comprise approximately 84 percent of the Study Area (TPWD, 2019b). The row crops vegetation cover type includes all cropland where fields are fallow for some portion of the year. Some fields may rotate into and out of cultivation frequently, and year-round cover crops and tame hay fields are generally mapped as grassland.
3.6.2.1 Other Vegetation Types
Three other vegetation types account for the remaining 16 percent of the Study Area and include Rolling Plains: Mixedgrass Prairie. High Plains: Riparian Herbaceous Vegetation, and Native Invasive: Mesquite Shrubland.
Rolling Plains: Mixedgrass Prairie vegetation type circumscribes a variety of grasslands across a relatively large area and under various past and current management regimes, and mesquite is often an important woody component. Dry sites to the west often contain short grasses such as tobosa grass, purple threeawn (Aristida purpurea), and buffalograss together with mesquite and succulents such as Engelmann pricklypear (Opuntia englelmannii), and Arkansas yucca (Yucca arkansana). Wetter sties to the east may contain mid-grasses such as little bluestem, sideoats grama. Texas wintergrass, and tall grasses such as lndiangrass and big bluestem in locally well-watered areas. Grazing-tolerant species such as Japanese brome (Bromus japonicus), rescuegrass (Bromus catharticus), and prairie broomweed (Amphiachyris dracunculoides) are common in the modem landscape. Some recently retired cropland fields are also mapped within this type.
High Plains: Riparian Herbaceous vegetation type is characterized by upland drainages, which may be slightly wetter representations of surrounding grasslands and shrublands. Short grasses such as tobosagrass, buffalograss, western wheatgrass (Pascopvrum triticeum), blue grama, and Japanese brome may be present together with introduced Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) and shrubs such as rnesquite, sand sage, lotebush (Ziziphus obtusifolia), and wolfberry (lyceum berlandieri).
Native Invasive: Mesquite Shrubland vegetation type is generally the result of mesquite invasion into areas because of land use and habitat conversion. These areas are typically dominated by mesquite, but may also include huisache (Acacia farnesiana), sugar hackberry (Celtis laevigata), Ashe juniper (Juniperus ashei), cedar elm (Ulmus crassifolia), lotebush (Ziziphus obtusilblia), agarito (Mahonia trifoliolata), winged elm (Uhnus alata), sumacs (Rhus spp.), brasil (Condalia hookeri), common persimmon (Diospvros virginiana), Texas persimmon (Diospyros texana), granjeno (Celtis ehrenbergiana), and Lindheimer pricklypear (Opuntia engelmannii var. lindheimeri). Trees such as plateau live oak (Quercus Insifbrmis), coastal live oak (Quercus virginiana), or post oak (Quercus stellata) may form a sparse canopy.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-15 TRC Companies
56 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.6.3 Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (C WA) (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), as amended, requires that a Water Quality Certification Permit be obtained for anticipated discharges associated with construction activities or other disturbance within waterways. No discharges associated with construction activities or other disturbance within waters or wetlands of the U.S. are anticipated. Therefore. Section 401 of the CWA would not apply to the proposed Project action or no-action alternative.
Section 402 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) as amended, regulates construction discharges of pollutants into waters of the U.S. or a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) and specifies that stormwater discharges associated with construction activities shall be conducted under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) guidance. Construction activities associated with stormwater discharges are characterized by such things as clearing, grading, and excavation, subjecting the underlying soils to erosion by storm-water, which results in a disturbance to one or more acres of land. The Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) general permit (TXR150000) guidance would apply to projects causing greater than 1 acre of ground disturbance activity and/or discharge to an MS4. Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would cause ground disturbance of approximately 2.8 acres. Therefore, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required by the contractor, as well as notification to the MS4 Operator. The SWPPP would include erosion control best management practices (BMPs) that would be utilized during construction and post- construction activities until natural vegetation communities are restored. Based on the utilization of erosion control measures outlined in the SWPPP, the proposed Project action impacts from stormwater runoff are expected to be negligible.
Section 404 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), as amended, provides for the protection of waters of the U.S. through regulation of the discharge of dredged or fill material.
A desktop analysis of potential wetlands and waters of the U.S. was performed by reviewing aerial photographs (Figure 3), topographic maps (Figure 2; USGS, 1981), online web soil survey data (Figure 4; USDA — NRCS, 2019a), hydric soils data (USDA — NRCS, 201911), and NWI wetlands data (USFWS,
2019). The NWI maps encompassing the Study Area indicate the presence of one riverine feature crossing the Study Area approximately 430 feet north of County Road BB. Aerial photography indicates that the feature appears to be ephemeral in nature and does not exhibit characteristics of wetland hydrology. Additionally, none of the underlying soil units mapped within the Study Area are hydric.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-16 TRC Companies
57 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, a qualified wetland biologist conducted a survey of wetlands. waterbodies, and other special aquatic sites within the Project Study Area in June 2019. No distinct wetlands or wetland plant communities were observed within the proposed Study Area. Based on the NWI map. one potentially jurisdictional stream (ephemeral/erosional feature). identified as S-101 (see Biological Survey Figure 3-2A below), crosses the Project Study Area to the north of County Road BB. During the June 4-5 site investigation, the area of S-101 was observed to be dominated by upland vegetation species, and there were no indications of surface hydrology (bed and bank, ordinary high-water mark, soil erosion, etc.). Additionally, a manmade upland drainage swale and gilgai, identified as S-102 (see Biological Survey Figure 3-2A below), was observed on the west side of the existing electrical substation, to the south of the northwestern terminus of the Project. The swale appeared to be associated with stormwater conveyance at the substation and was dominated by upland vegetation species.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-17 TRC Companies
58 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Enviroment
Figure 3-3 Biological Survey Figure
THIS PAGE IS IN COLOR AND CAN BE VIEWED IN CENTRAL RECORDS OR THE PUC INTERCHANGE BY DOWNLOADING THE NATIVE FILE (ZIP) FOR THIS ITEM NUMBER IN DOCKET NO. 50016
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-18 TRC Companies
59 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.7 Fish and Wildlife
3.7.1 Fish and Wildlife Habitats and Species As shown on Figure 3-3, the Project Study Area is located in the Kansan Biotic Province. The Kansan Biotic Province in Texas extends south and east from the Oklahoma and New Mexico borders, eventually transitioning to the Chihuahuan. Balconian, and Texan Biotic Provinces. The Kansan includes three distinct biotic districts, the Mixed-grass Plains, Short-grass Plains, and Mesquite Plains Districts. The Study Area lies within the Short-grass Plains District. Within the Short-grass Plains District, buffalograss is the principal vegetational constituent and is the most important plant association. Various species of grama grasses are also important to this area (Blair, 1950). Characteristic faunal species of the area are discussed below. The extensive agricultural development in the area has significantly reduced native grassland habitats. Wildlife species that occur include species that have historically occurred in the area, as well as others that are particularly adapted to this agricultural environment.
The ecological region was once grassland comprised of mixed or transitional prairie from the tallgrass in the east to shortgrass farther west. Scattered low trees and shrubs occur in the south. Most of the ecoregion is now cropland. The Central Great Plains forms a shallow trough between the surrounding ecoregions. The Brazos and Colorado Rivers are the two major water basins in the region. Precipitation amounts are greater in the Red Plains area than in the High Plains. although they are not high enough to support forest vegetation. The prairie type in the Central Great Plains may be midgrass or shortgrass depending upon soil type, moisture availability, and grazing pressure. Shrubland and woodland has increased on large portions of the plains into the point where the predominate bird species assemblages are not from typical Great Plains groups. Increased woody vegetation is a major contributor the decline of grassland bird species in the region (TPWD, 1984).
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-19 TRC Companies
60 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Figure 3-4: Location of Childress County in Relation to the Biotic Provinces of Texas
Austroriparian
Navahonian
Figure 3-4 ETT Location of Childress County in Relation Electroc ttansnussron Toxas to the Biotic F'rovinces of Texas 111; 2), Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV r by,t, , 1151,U, TIRC Transmission Line in Childress County
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-20 TRC Companies
61 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Typical grasses under less-disturbed conditions include little bluestem (Schizachyriurn scoparium), Texas wintergrass (Stipa leucotrichu), white tridens (Tridens albescens), Texas cupgrass (Eriochlou sericea), and sideoats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula). Tobosa (Pleuraphis rnutica) and curlymesquite (Hilaria helangeri) increase in swales and flats with clay soils. Buffalograss (Buchloe daetyloides), hairy tridens (Erioneuron pilosurn) and purple threeawn (Aristida purpurea) increase with grazing. Today, much of Ecoregion 27h is cultivated, in contrast to the neighboring Broken Red Plains (27i) that are predominately grazed. In the riparian zones of perennial streams, pecan (Carva illinoensis) is the most prominent tree, mixed with American elm (Ulmus americana), black willow (Salix nigra), and little walnut (Juglans microcaipa). Farther west and along intermittent channels, riparian vegetation becomes patchy and brushy, with thickets of netleaf hackberry (Celtis reticulata), bumelia (Bumelia lanuginosa), and western soapberry (Sapindus saponaria) or mesquite and grass.
Wildlife species that could frequent this area may include: white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), three species of kangaroo rat (Dipodomys spp.), western kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis), Say's phoebe (Sayornis saya), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), horned lark (Eremophila alpestris), meadow lark (Sturnella magna), scaled quail (Callipepla squarnata), burrowing owl (Speotyto cunicularia), yellow box turtle (Terrapene ornate luteola), and desert grassland whiptail (Cnernidophorus uniparens). In addition, various mammals and reptiles such as mice. rabbits, skunks, and snakes may also transit through the proposed Study Area.
The proposed construction would occur in areas that are managed for crop production. A biological survey of the proposed Study Area was conducted on June 3-4, 2019. Wildlife species observed within the Study Area consisted mainly of avian species (Red-tailed Hawk, Scaled Quail, Northern Bobwhite, European Starling, Mourning Dove, Boat-tailed Grackle. and Sparrow species). Jack rabbits, western diamondback rattlesnake, and a deceased great plains rat snake were also observed.
3.7.2 Fish Fish species are not expected to be present within the Study Area. Review of available topographical rnaps and aerial photographs indicates that the only potential waterway in the Study Area is an ephemeral tributary of North Groesbeck Creek, identified as S-101 (Figure 3-2A). The feature appears to only hold water following intense storm events. During the June 2019 site investigation, the area did not contain water and exhibited no characteristics of a stream.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-21 TRC Companies
62 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.7.3 Amphibians and Reptiles A representative list of amphibian and reptile species of potential occurrence in the Study Area is included as Table 3.2.
Table 3-2: Representative List of Reptile and Amphibian Species of Potential Occurrence in the Study Area
Common Namea Scientific Nameb Amphibians Eastern tiger salamander Atnbystoma tigrinum Frogs and Toads Blanchard's cricket frog Acris blanchardi Bullfrog Lithohates catesbeianus Couch's spadefoot toad Scaphiopus couchii Eastern green toad Anaxyrus debilis Great Plains narrowmouth toad Gastrophryne olivacea Great Plains toad Anaxyrus cognatus Plains leopard frog Lithobates blairi Plains spadefoot toad Spea bombifrons Red-spotted toad Bufo punctatus Spotted chorus frog Pseudacris clarkii Texas toad Anaxyrus speciosus Woodhouse's toad Anaxvrus woodhousii Lizards Checkered whiptail Aspidoscelis tesselatus Eastern collared lizard Crotaphytus collaris Great Plains skink Plestiodon obsoletus Northern earless lizard Holbrookia maculata Prairie lizard Sceloporous consobrinus Prairie racerunner Aspidoscelis seclineata viridis Side-blotched lizard Uta stansburiana Texas horned lizard Phrynosoma cornutum Texas spotted whiptail Aspidocelis gularis Snakes Blotched water snake Nerodia etythrogaster transversa Bullsnake Pituophis catenifer sayi Central Plains milk snake Lampropeltis triangulum gentilis Checkered garter snake Thanmophis marcianus
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-22 TRC Companies
63 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Common Namea Scientific Nameb Eastern hognose snake Heterodon platirhinos Eastern yellovv belly racer Coluber constrictor fluviventris Graharn's crayfish snake Regina grahamii Great Plains rat snake Pantherophis emoryi Ground snake Sonora semiannulata Kansas glossy snake Arizona elegans Northern ringneck snake Diadophis punctatus edwards Plains blackhead snake Tantilla nigriceps Prairie kingsnake Lampropeltis calligaster Prairie rattlesnake Crotalus viridis Speckled king snake Lampropeltis holbrooki Texas blind snake Rena dulcis Texas longnose snake Rhinocheilus lecontei tessellutu Texas night snake Hypsiglena jani Western coachwhip Masticophis flagellum Western diamondback rattlesnake Crotalus atrox Western hognose snake Heterodon nasicus Western massasauga Sistrurus cutenatus Western ribbon snake Thamnophis proximus Turtles Ornate box turtle Terrapene ornata Red-eared slider Trachemy scripta eleguns Srnooth softshell Apalone inutica Snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina Spiny softshell Apalone spinifera Yellow mud turtle Kinosternon flavescens (a) According to Werler and Dixon (2000) and Dixon (2013) (b) Nomenclature follows Crother et al. (2012)
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-23 TRC Companies
64 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.7.4 Birds Avian species of potential occurrence in the Study Area include rnany year-round residents. migrants/ summer residents, and migrants/winter residents. A representative list of bird species of potential occurrence in the Study Area is included as Table 3-3.
Table 3-3: Representative List of Avian Species of Potential Occurrence in the Study Area Common Name Scientific Nameb Likely Seasonal Occurrencea, c American Avocet Recurvirostra americana M, SR American Coot Fulica americana R American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos R American Goldfinch Spinus tristis M. WR American Kestrel Falco sparverius M, WR American Pipit Anthus rubescens M. WR American Robin Turdus migratorius R American White Pelican Pelecanus erythrorhynchos M American Wigeon Anus americana M, WR Ash-throated Flycatcher Myiarchus cinerascens M. SR Baird's Sandpiper Calidris bairdii M Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus M, WR Baltimore Oriole Icterus galbula M, SR Bank Swallow Riparia M. SR Barn Owl Tyto alba R Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica M, SR Bell's Vireo Vireo bellii M, SR Belted Kingfisher Megaceryle alcyon R Bewick's Wren Thryomanes bewickii R Black Tern Chlidonias niger M Black-chinned Hummingbird Archilochus alexandri M. SR Black-crested Titmouse Baeolophus atricristatus R Black-crowned Night-Heron Nvcticorax M Black-necked Stilt Himantopus mexicanus M Blue Grosbeak Passerina caerulea M, SR Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata R Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea M. SR Blue-winged Teal Anus discors M, SR Brewer's Blackbird Euphagus cyunocephalus M. WR Brown Thrasher Toxostoma rujiim R Brown-headed Cowbird Molothrus ater R Bufflehead Bucephala albeola M, WR Bullock's Oriole Icterus bullockii M, SR Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia M, SR Cackling Goose Brunta hutchinsii M Canada Goose Branta canadensis M, WR Canvasback Avthya valisineria M, WR Carolina Chickadee Poecile carolinensis R Carolina Wren Thrvothorus ludovicianus R Cassin's Sparrow Peucaea cassinii M, SR
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-24 TRC Companies
65 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Common Name Scientific Nameb Likely Seasonal Occurrencea, c Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis M. SR Cave Swallow Petrochelidon fulva M, SR Cedar Waxwing Bombvcilla cedrorum M, WR Chihuahuan Raven Corvus cryptoleucus R Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica M, SR Chipping Sparrow Spi:ella passerina M, WR Cinnamon Teal Anas cyanoptera M Clay-colored Sparrow Spifella pallida M Cliff Swallow Petrochelidon pvrrhonota M, SR Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula R Common Loon Gavia burner M Common Merganser Mergus merganser M. WR Common Name Scientific Nameh Likely Seasonal Occurrence' c Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor M, SR Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas M, SR Cooper's Hawk Accipiter cooperii M, WR Curve-billed Thrasher Toxostoma curvirostre R Dark-eyed Junco ,hinco hyemalis M. WR Dickcissel Spi:a americana M. SR Double-crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus M Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens R Dunlin Calidris alpina M Eared Grebe Podiceps nigricollis M Eastern Bluebird Sialia sialis R, WR Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus M. SR Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella magna R Eastern Phoebe Sayornis phoebe M, SR Eastern Screech-Owl Megascops asio R Eastern Whip-poor-will Caprimulgus vociferus M Eurasian Collared-Dove Streptopelia decaocto M European Starling Sturnus vulgaris R Ferruginous Hawk Buteo regalis M. WR Field Sparrow Spizella pusilla R Forster's Tern Sterna forsteri M Franklin's Gull Leucophaeus pipixcan M Gadwall Anas strepera M, WR Golden-fronted Woodpecker Melunerpes aurifrons R Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum M. SR Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias R Great Crested Flycatcher Mviarchus crinitus M. SR Great Egret Ardea alba M Great Horned Owl Bubo virginianus R Greater Roadrunner Geococcyx californianus R Greater White-fronted Goose Anser albifrons M Greater Yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca M Great-tailed Grackle Quiscalus mexicanus R Green Heron Butorides virescens M, SR Green-winged Teal Anas crecca M, WR
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-25 TRC Companies
66 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Common Name Scientific Nameb Likely Seasonal Occurrencea, c Harris's Sparrow Zonotrichia querula M. WR Herring Gull Lana argentatus M Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus M Homed Grebe Podiceps uuritus M Homed Lark Eremophila ulpestris R House Finch Haemorhous mexicanus R House Sparrow Passer domesticus R House Wren Troglodytes aedon M Inca Dove Columbina inca R Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea M. SR Killdeer Charadrius vociferus R Ladder-backed Woodpecker Picoides scalaris R Lark Bunting Calamospiza tnelanocorys M. WR Lark Sparrow Chondestes grammacus M. SR Least Sandpiper Calidris minutilla M. WR Least Tern Sternula antillarum M Lesser Scaup Avthva affinis M. WR Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes M Lincoln's Sparrow Melospiza lincolnii M. WR Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludoviciunus R Mallard Anas platyrkvnchos R. WR Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris M. WR Merlin Falco columbarius M. WR Mississippi Kite Ictinia mississippiensis M, SR Mountain Bluebird Sialia currucoides M. WR Mouming Dove Zenaida macroura R Northem Bobwhite Colinus virginianus R Northem Cardinal Cardinalis R Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus R Northem Harrier Circus cyaneus M, WR Northern Mockingbird Mimus polvglottos R Northern Pintail Anas acuta M, WR Northern Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis M. SR Northem Shoveler Anas cypeata M. WR Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi M Orange-crowned Warbler Vermivora celata M. WR Orchard Oriole Icterus spurius M. SR Osprey Pandion haliaetus M Painted Bunting Passerina ciris M. SR Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps R Pine Siskin Spinus pinus M, WR Prairie Falcon Falco mexicanus M. WR Purple Martin Progne subis M. SR Pyrrhuloxia Cardinalis sinuatus R Red-bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus R Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator M Redhead Aythya americana M, WR
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-26 TRC Companies
67 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Common Name Scientific Nameb Likely Seasonal Occurrencea, c Red-headed Woodpecker Afelanerpes erythrocephalus R Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamuicensis R Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus M. R Ring-billed Gull Larus delawarensis M. WR Ring-necked Duck Avthva. . collaris M Ring-necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus R Rock Pigeon Columba livia R Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus M Rough-legged Hawk Buteo lagopus M, WR Ruby-crowned Kinglet Regulus calendula M. WR Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis M Rufous-crowned Sparrow Aimophila nqiceps R Sanderling Calidris alba M Sandhill Crane Antigone canadensis M. WR Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis M. WR Say's Phoebe Sayornis saya M Scaled Quail Callipepla squamata R Scissor-tailed Flycatcher Tyrannus forlicatus M. SR Scissor-tailed Flycatcher Tyrannus fOrficatus M. SR Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla M Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus M. WR Snow Goose Chen caerulescens M Snowy Plover Charadrius nivosus M, SR Solitary Sandpiper Tringa solitaria M Song Sparrow Alelospiza melodia M, WR Sora Porzana carolina M Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularius M S otted Towhee Pipilo maculatus M. WR Stilt Sandpiper Calidris himantopus M Swainson's Hawk Buteo swainsoni M. SR Swamp Sparrow Melospila georgiana M, WR Swan Goose (Domestic type) Anser cygnoides R Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor M Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura M, SR Verdi n Auripurus flaviceps R Vesper Sparrow Pooecetes gramineus M. WR Virginia Rail Rallus limicola M Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus M. SR Western Grebe Aechmophorus occidentulis M Western Kingbird Tyrannus verticalis M. SR Western Meadowlark Sturnella neglecta R Western Sandpiper Calidris mauri M White-crowned Sparrow Zonotrichia leucopluys M, WR White-eyed Vireo Vireo griseus M. SR White-faced Ibis Plegudis chihi M White-rumped Sandpiper Culidris fuscicollis M White-throated Sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis M. WR White-winEed Dove Zenaida asiatica R
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-27 TRC Companies
68 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Common Name Scientific Nameb Likely Seasonal Occurrencea, c Wild Turkey Meleagris gullopavo R Wilson's Phalarope Phalaropus tricolor M Wilson's Snipe Gallinago delicata M, WR Wood Duck Aix sponsa M. SR Yellow Warbler Setophaga petechia M Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccy=us americanus M, SR Yellow-crowned Night-Heron Nyctanassa violacea M. SR Yellow-headed Blackbird Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus M Yellow-rumped Warbler Setophagu coronata M. WR (a) According to Lockwood and Freeman (2014). (b)Nomenclature follows Chesser et al. (2018) (c) R — Resident: Occurring regularly in the same general area throughout the year — implies breeding SR — Summer Resident: Implies breeding but may include nonbreeders WR — Winter Resident: Occurring during winter season M — Migrant: Occurs as a transient passing through the area either in spring or fall or both
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), originally passed in 1918, implements the U.S. commitment to four bilateral treaties, or conventions, for the protection of a shared migratory bird resource, protecting rnore than 800 species of birds. The protection of migratory birds is regulated by the MBTA and Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA). Based on recent interpretation (issued December 2017; revised April 2018) of the MBTA by the U.S. Department of the Interior, the take provision for migratory birds is restricted to intentional actions. The USFWS field offices in Texas are now applying this interpretation with respect to project-related activities such as clearing of vegetation within the breeding season. Since these activities are not designed to specifically take migratory birds, the USFWS has not imposed seasonal timing restrictions or required compensatory mitigation. TPWD recommends excluding vegetation clearing during the general bird nesting season, March through August, to avoid adverse irnpacts to nesting migratory birds. If this is not feasible. TPWD recommends a nest survey be conducted and any vegetation where occupied nests are located should not be disturbed until the eggs have hatched and the young have fledged. TPWD also referred to Avian Power Line Interaction Committee guidance documents for reducing bird collision with power lines (APLIC 1994).
According to the IPaC consultation, there are no migratory birds of conservation concern expected to occur in the Study Area; however, the official IPaC lists a total of four T&E bird species that are also migratory species that may be present in the Study Area if habitat is present (Table 3-4). Figure 3-4 shows the migration path for the Whooping crane, which just skirts the Study Area. The breeding season for migratory birds is generally between April 1 through August 31.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-28 TRC Companies
69 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Table 3-4: IPaC List of Migratory Bird Species.
Probability of Presence Common Name (Scientific Name) in Study Area Breeding Season Least Tern (Sterna antillarum) Potential migrant Breeds elsewhere Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) Potential migrant Breeds elsewhere Red Knot (Calidris canutus ruler) Potential migrant Breeds elsewhere Whooping Crane (Grus americana) Potential migrant Breeds elsewhere USFWS 2019 iPAC
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-29 TRC Companies
70 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Enviroment
Figure 3-5 Location of Childress County in Relation to the Central U.S. Whooping Crane Flyway
THIS PAGE IS IN COLOR AND CAN BE VIEWED IN CENTRAL RECORDS OR THE PUC INTERCHANGE BY DOWNLOADING THE NATIVE FILE (ZIP) FOR THIS ITEM NUMBER IN DOCKET NO. 50016
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-30 TRC Companies
71 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.7.5 Mammals A representative list of mammals that may occur in the Study Area is included as Table 3-5.
Table 3-5: Representative List of Mammalian Species of Potential Occurrence in the Study Area
Common Nameb Scientific Nameb Xenarthrans Nine-banded arrnadillo Dasypus novemcinctus Chiroptera Big brown bat Eptesicus fuscus Black-tailed jackrabbit Lepus californicus Bobcat Lynx rr!fus Brazilian free-tailed bat Tadarida brasiliensis Comrnon gray fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus Carnivores Bobcat Lynx rufus Common Gray Fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus Cornmon Raccoon Procyon lotor Coyote Canis latrans Long-tailed Weasel Mustela frenata Mountain Lion Felis concolor Ringtail Bassariscus astutus Striped Skunk Mephitis Virginia Opossum Didelphis virginiana Artiodactyls White-tailed deer Odocoileits virginianus Rodents American Beaver Castor canadensis Deer Mouse Peromyscus maniculatus Fulvous Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys fulvescens Hispid Cotton Rat Sigmodon hispidus Hispid Pocket Mouse Chaetodipus hispidus Jones' Pocket Gopher Geomys knoxjonesi Llano Pocket Gopher Geomys texensis Plains Pocket Gopher Geomys hursarius Plains Pocket Mouse Perognathus flavescens Prairie Vole Microtus ochrogaster Texas Kangaroo Rat Dipodornys elator Texas Mouse Perornyscus uttwateri Thirteen-lined Ground Squirrel Spermophilus tridecemlineatus White-footed Mouse Peromyscus leucopus White-tailed Deer Odocoileus virginianus Lagomorphs Black-tailed Jackrabbit Lepus californicus
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-31 TRC Companies
72 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Common Nameb Scientific Nameb Eastern Cottontail sylvilagus floridanus Marsupials Virginia Opossum Didelphis virginiana
3.8 Recreationally and Commercially Important Species A species is considered important if one or more of the following criteria applies:
• The species is recreationally or commercially valuable • The species is endangered or threatened • The species affects the well-being of some important species within criterion (a) or (b) • The species is critical to the structure and function of the ecological system • The species is a biological indicator
Wildlife resources can generally be categorized as consumptive (fishing, hunting, trapping, etc.) and non- consumptive (photography, bird watching, etc.). Several species of mammals, fish, and birds in the Study Area have consumptive value. while all may be considered to hold non-consumptive value. Primary consumptive value species in the general vicinity include white-tailed deer, mourning dove, scaled quail, white-winged dove. wild turkey, and several migratory duck species. The white-tailed deer is generally considered the most economically important mammal in Texas (Schmidly, 2004), due to the popularity of big game hunting. Additionally, several species are considered recreationally or commercially valuable for wildlife viewing opportunities, including many of the species listed in Tables 3.6-3.8.
Commercial fishing does not occur in the region; however, recreational fishing opportunities are present in the area. However, due to the lack of perennial waterways, no fishing opportunities are present within the Study Area. Common recreational fish species in the region include largemouth bass, white crappie, channel catfish, flathead catfish, and sunfish species (Lepomis spp.).
3.9 Endangered and Threatened Species This section assesses the potential for the proposed Project to adversely affect any of the listed threatened and endangered (T&E) species considered by USFWS and TPWD as having the potential to occur in Childress County. The analysis for this section includes a review of TPWD's Texas Natural Diversity Database (TXNDD), including a review of maps and Element Occurrence Records (EOR). The study Area is highly disturbed due to crop production and development of solar generation facilities. The potential for the presence of special status species is described in the following sections.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-32 TRC Companies
73 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.9.1 Endangered and Threatened Plant Species Special status species that occur in Childress County and that may occur within or near the proposed Study Areas are listed below in Table 3-6 (USFWS, 2019; TPWD, 2019).
Table 3-6: Federally and State-Listed Threatened, Endangered, and Special Status Species that Potentially Occur in Childress County, Texas
Status Potential for Occurrence in the Common Name Scientific Nameb USFWS Study Area Birds Interior Least Tern Sternula antillarum athalassos Endangered Not likely` Piping Plover Charadrius melodus Threatened Not likely` Red Knot Calidris canutus rufa Threatened Not likely` Whooping Crane Grus americana Endangered Not likely` (a) According to USFWS (2018a) and TPWD (2018c, 2018d) (b)Nomenclature follows Manning et al. (2008), Crother et al. (2012), Chesser et al. (2018), USFWS (2018a), and TPWD (2018c) (c)Only expected to occur as a migrant, transient, or rare vagrant within the Study Area
Available information from the USFWS (2019a), TPWD (20179), and TPWD's NDD (TPWD, 2019d) was reviewed to identify endangered or threatened plant species of potential occurrence within the Study Area. Currently, 32 species are listed by the USFWS and TPWD as threatened, endangered, or Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) in Childress County. Of the 32 listed species, there are two federally endangered, two federally threatened, two state endangered, two state threatened, and 24 state SGCN. State and federally listed species are further described in Tables 3-4 above and Table 3-7 below.
Based on existing field conditions within the Study Area, of the listed species. there is one state listed threatened species with the potential to occur in the Study Area.
3.9.2 Federally Listed Fish and Wildlife Species There are four federally listed threatened and endangered species with potential to occur in Childress County, Texas, including the Inland Least Tern, Piping Plover, Red Knot, and Whooping Crane. Based on the existing conditions, suitable habitat is not present for any of the federally listed T&E species within the Study Area (USFWS. 2019; TPWD, 2019). The TXNDD review did not identify EORs for any of the federally listed T&E species within 10 miles of the Study Area. During the June 2019 on-site investigation, biologists confirmed that suitable habitat for federally listed species was not present within the Study Area.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-33 TRC Companies
74 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.9.3 Critical Habitat The USFWS, in Section 3(5)(A) of the ESA, defines critical habitat as:
"(i) the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at the time that it is listed in accordance with the ESA, on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species at the time it is listed in accordance with the ESA, upon a determination by the Secretary of the Interior that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species." (USFWS, 1973)
The 1PaC provided by USFWS constitutes the official coordination documentation with the USFWS. The IPaC revealed that no critical habitat has been designated in the Study Area for any species included under the ESA.
3.9.4 State-Listed Fish, Wildlife, and Plant Species There are six state-listed T&E species that have the potential to occur within the proposed Study Area. Within 10 miles of the proposed Study Area, the TXNDD review identified EORs only for the Texas kangaroo rat (Table 3-7). Most of the EORs for the Texas kangaroo rat were located within remnant areas of native prairie that have not been cultivated. During the June 2019 on-site investigation, suitable habitat for the Texas kangaroo rat was not observed within the proposed Study Area. An area of uncultivated land was observed in the northern portion of the Study Area; however, review of aerial imagery indicates that the area is a fallow agricultural field. Therefore, the uncultivated portion of the Study Area is not anticipated to provide suitable habitat for the Texas kangaroo rat at this time.
Table 3-7: State-listed Threatened, Endangered, and Special Status Species that Potentially Occur in Childress Count , Texasa Status Potential for Occurrence in the Common Name Scientific Nameb TPWIY Study Area Amphibians Woodhouse's toad Ancayrus woodhousii SGCN Not likely Birds White-faced Ibis Plegadis chihi Threatened Not likelyd Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Threatened Not likely Black Rail Laterallus jamaicensis SGCN Not likelyd Franklin's Gull Leucophaeus pipbccan SGCN Not likely Sternula antillarum Not likelyd Interior Least Tern Endangered athalassos
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-34 TRC Companies
75 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Status Potential for Occurrence in the Common Name Scientific Nameb TPWEr Study Area Mountain Plover Charadrius montanus SGCN Not likely' Athene cunicularia Western Burrowing Owl SGCN Not likely h_vpugaea Whooping Crane Grus americana Endangered Not likely' Insects Arnerican bumblebee Bombus pensylvanicus SGCN Likely Mammals Cave rnyotis bat Illyotis velifer SGCN Not likely Tricolored bat Perimyotis subflavus SGCN Not likely Big brown bat Eptesicus fUscus SGCN Not likely Eastern red bat Lasiurus borealis SGCN Not likely Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus SGCN Not likely Townsend's big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii SGCN Not likely Mexican free-tailed bat Tadurida brasiliensis SGCN Not likely Thirteen-lined ground Ictidomys tridecemlineatus SGCN Likely squirrel Black-tailed prairie dog Cynomvs ludovicianus SGCN Not likely Texas kangaroo rat Dipodomys elator Threatened Not likely Arachnids Unnamed arachnid Islandiana unicornis SGCN Not Likely Reptiles Western box turtle Terrupene ornata SGCN Likely Slender glass lizard Ophisaurus attenuatus SGCN Likely Texas horned lizard Phrynosoma cornutum Threatened Not likely Western hognose snake Heterodon nasicus SGCN Likely Western rattlesnake Crotalus viridis SGCN Likely Massasauga Sistrurus tergeminus SGCN Likely Plants Cienega false clappia-bush Pseudocluppia arenaria SGCN Not likely Solidago mollis var. Rolling Plains goldenrod SGCN Not likely angustata Echinocereus Bailey's hedgehog cactus SGCN Likely reichenbachii var. bailevi (a) According to USFWS (2018a) and TPWD (2018c, 2018d). (b) Nomenclature follows Manning et al. (2008), Crother et al. (2012). Chesser et al. (2018), USFWS (2018a), and TPWD (2018c). (c) SGCN = Species of Greatest Conservation Need (TPWD, 2019a) (d) Only expected to occur as a migrant, transient, or rare vagrant within the Study Area.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-35 TRC Companies
76 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Of the eight (8) species identified in Table 3-7 as likely to occur, none of these were observed in the Study Area during the field investigation conducted in June 2019. While it is possible for transients of these species to occur, it may be less likely due to the agricultural disturbance and therefore any adverse effects to these species would be minimal and short-term during construction.
Sensitive Plant Communities The TPWD NDD data lists plant communities which are considered valuable or at risk due to habitat alteration. The NDD data identifies one EOR for the Rolling Plains goldenrod (Solidago inollis var. angustata) 2.7 miles northwest of the Study Area. The species is not considered threatened or endangered at the state or federal level; however, it may be considered vulnerable based on the extensive alteration of traditional grassland areas. Remnant prairie habitat near the Study Area may be considered suitable habitat for the species. During the June 2019 on-site investigation, no specimens of Rolling Plains goldenrod were observed.
3.10 Human Resources
3.10.1 Community Values and Community Resources The term "community values" is included as a factor for consideration of transmission line certification under PURA § 37.056(c)(4). Although the term is not formally defined in the statute or PUC rules, the PUC and the PUC Staff have recognized a working definition as "a shared appreciation of an area or other mutual resource by a national, regional, or local community" in several CCN proceedings.
TRC evaluated the proposed Project for community resources that may be important to a community as a whole, such as parks or recreational areas, historical and archeological sites, or scenic vistas within the Study Area. Additionally, TRC mailed consultation letters to federal, state, and local officials (Appendix A) to, among other things, identify and collect information regarding community values and community resources. Input received was used in the evaluation of the proposed Project. Community values and comrnunity resources are discussed in the following sections.
3.10.2 Land Use The Study Area is located in the southeastern portion of Childress County, approximately 6 miles southeast of the City of Childress. Childress County is the 216' largest county of 254 counties in Texas in terms of land area (texascounties.net), at approximately 696 square miles. The estimated total population of Childress County was 7,291 (U.S. Census Bureau, July 1, 2018). Childress, which serves as the county seat, is located approximately 6 miles northwest of the Study Area. No incorporated cities are located
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-36 TRC Companies
77 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment within the Study Area. The unincorporated community of Kirkland is located in the northeast corner of the Study Area. The Childress Independent School District (Childress ISD 038901) serves the Study
Area; however, no 1SD schools or other facilities are located within the Study Area boundary (Texas
Education Agency, 2016-17).
The Study Area is located in State Planning Region No. 1, represented by the Panhandle Regional
Planning Commission (Panhandle Regional Planning Commission, 2019). The Panhandle region covers a
26-county area consisting of almost 26,000 square miles and a population of approximately 427,927
(Texas Demographic Center, 2019). The Panhandle Regional Planning Commission has 90 member- govemments — including all 26 counties, 60 incorporated cities, and 5 special districts (Texas Association on Regional Councils [TARC], 2019).
The Panhandle Regional Planning Commission was established in 1969 and assists local governments to plan, develop, and implement programs to improve the general health, safety, and welfare of the citizens in the Texas Panhandle. The Planning Commission has been involved in a wide range of projects and programs. including Area Agency on Aging, Criminal Justice, Dispute Resolution, Economic
Development, Emergency Preparedness, Local Government Services, Regional 9-1-1 Network, Regional
Services, Regional Transportation Planning, Solid Waste Management, Water Planning, and Workforce
Development (TARC; PRPC).
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) geospatial data and interactive maps were referenced to estimate land use within the Study Area and Consensus Route
ROW. The total land area of the Study Area is approximately 3,456 acres and the Consensus Route ROW is approximately 51.2 acres (5.4 square miles). The Study Area includes approximately 2, 565.4 acres of prime farmland, of which approximately 37.7 acres is within the Consensus Route ROW. The Consensus
Route ROW has approximately 13.5.acres of fallow/idle cropland (USDA, 2019).
Childress County has a small yearly production of oil and gas, but minerals do not play a major role in the local economy (TSHA). There are four oil facilities in the northeast comer of the Study Area, along the west side of the unincorporated community of Kirkland (Figure 2-2). These facilities are located southwest of County Road K1 and County Road KE, southwest of County Road K 1 and County Road
KH, east of FM 1033 and north of County Road BB, and west of 22 and north of County Road KB. The status of the first two locations are "cancelled and expired" and "inactive and shut-in" respectively. The status of the remaining two locations, which are crude oil facilities, are "active and producing.- In addition. one abandoned crude oil pipeline crosses the Study Area (RRC, 2019) southeasterly to
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-37 TRC Companies
78 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment northwesterly and to the north of the existing 345-kV and 138-kV transrnission lines, and an active crude oil pipeline is located just south of the Study Area and crosses in a southeasterly to northwesterly direction (refer to Figure 2-2).
Solar developrnents that are currently under construction or in the planning stages constitute a significant land use within the Study Area. The Misae Solar Park I is currently under construction to the north and west of the Study Area and the existing Tesla Station. This development is planned to interconnect in the northwest corner of the existing Tesla Station. The proposed Project will interconnect generation from Misae Solar Park 11 located to the east, in the southeast corner of the existing Tesla Station. Another solar developer also is proposing solar generation to the south and east of the Tesla Station however. details are not currently available on its project schedule.
3.10.3 Recreation A review of the Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan (TORP), federal, state, and local maps, an Internet search. and field reconnaissance did not reveal any national, state, county. or municipal parks, forests/grasslands, wildlife refuges, wildlife rnanagernent areas, or preserves within the Study Area (TPWD, 1984, 2017). Recreational activities such as hunting may occur on private properties within the Study Area, but these properties are not open to the public.
3.10.4 Agriculture The soils in Childress County are a mix of sandy loam and alluvial sands that originate from the creeks and rivers. These soils support a variety of native grasses as well as cotton, wheat, and sorghurn. The number of farms in Childress County is approximately 200; there are approximately 10,000 cattle with approximately 7,500 being beef cattle; approxirnately 10,000 acres of wheat for grain; and approximately 35,000 acres of harvested cotton in 2017 (USDA, 2017).
3.10.5 Transportation and Aviation The major transportation feature located within the Study Area is U.S. Highway 287, the BNSF railroad, and FM 1033. U.S. Highway 287 extends approximately 2 miles (10.850 feet) northwest to southeast across the northern portion of the Study Area as does the BNSF railroad. The length of FM 1033 along the east boundary of the Study Area is approximately 2.6 miles, as it extends southward from U.S. Highway 287 to the southern boundary of the Study Area. The remaining portion of the eastern boundary, which is approxirnately 1.1 rniles of the eastern boundary of the Study Area is County Road 22. The west boundary of the Study Area is FM 2638 that extends approximately 2.9 rniles south from
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-38 TRC Companies
79 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
U.S. Highway 287 to the southern boundary of the Study Area. Other roads located within the Study Area are county FM roads and private roads (refer to Figure 2-1).
A review of the Dallas/North Fort Worth Sectional Aeronautical Chart (FAA, 2019), the TxDOT Airport Directory (TxDOT, 2019), aerial photography, USGS maps, field reconnaissance, and Internet sources revealed no FAA-registered airports within 20,000 feet or heliports located within 5,000 feet of the proposed route. Additionally, no private airstrips or heliports were identified within the Study Area.
No known private airstrips are within 10,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route. No known airports registered with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) with at least one runway more than 3,200 feet in length are within 20,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route. The only airport is the Childress Municipal Airport located approximately 10 miles northwest of the Study Area.
No known FAA-registered airports having no runway more than 3,200 feet in length are within 10,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route.
No heliports are within 5,000 feet of the centerline of the Consensus Route. The only known heliport is at the Childress Regional Medical Center located approximately 7.5 miles northwest of the Study Area.
3.10.6 Communication Towers A search of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) website, online cell tower search engines, and field reconnaissance revealed no commercial AM or FM radio towers, cellular towers, or any other electronic communication towers within the Study Area (FCC, 2019; Antenna Search, 2019; Cell Reception, 2019).
3.10.7 Existing Utilities Existing utilities within the Study Area include electric facilities owned and operated by ETT and AEP Texas, an abandoned crude oil pipeline, and County-rnaintained rural roadways. Electric distribution lines owned by AEP Texas or South Plains Electric Cooperative are located along major roads and in the unincorporated Kirkland community serving electricity to local homes, farm and ranch operations, and commerci0 properties. The Red River Authority has water pipeline facilities in the Study Area (refer to Figure 2-2).
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-39 TRC Companies
80 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.10.8 Aesthetic Values Aesthetics is included as a factor for consideration in the evaluation of transrnission facilities in PURA § 37.056(c)(4). The term aesthetics refers to the subjective perception of natural beauty in the landscape, and this section of the docurnent atternpts to define and measure the Study Area's scenic qualities.
Consideration of the visual environment includes a determination of aesthetic values where the major potential effect of the Project on the resource is considered aesthetic or where the location of a transmission line could affect the scenic enjoyment of a recreation area.
The aesthetic analysis considers potential visual impacts to the public. Areas visible frorn major roads and highways, or publicly owned or accessible lands (e.g., parks or privately-owned recreation areas open to the public) were analyzed. Several factors are taken into consideration when attempting to define the potential irnpact to a scenic resource that would result from the construction of the proposed transrnission line. Among these are:
• topographical variation (hills, valleys, etc.) • prominence of water in the landscape • vegetation variety (forests, pasture, etc.) • diversity of scenic elements • degree of human development or alteration • overall uniqueness of the scenic environment cornpared to the larger region
The THC operates the Texas Heritage Trails Prograrn, a statewide heritage tourism program based on 10 scenic driving trails originally created by TxDOT. This program operates throughout 10 regions of Texas and enables people to learn about, and be surrounded by, local custorns, traditions, history, and culture of the different regions. The Study Area is located within the Plains Trail Region, which contains 52 counties and covers approximately 50,000 square miles consisting of short grass prairie and canyon vistas. There are 106 historical sites in Childress County, of which 11 have historical markers. Eight of the rnarkers are within or near the City of Childress, Texas. None of the markers are located within the Study Area (THC, 2019).
In 1998, TxDOT published a list of some of the best "Scenic Overlooks and Rest Areas" in Texas, each of which presented particularly strong aesthetic views or settings (TxDOT, 1998). A review of this list found that no highlighted scenic overlook or rest area is located within the Study Area. No other outstanding aesthetic resources, designated scenic views, or unique visual elements were identified from the literature review or frorn ground reconnaissance of the Study Area.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-40 TRC Companies
81 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Based on these criteria, the Study Area exhibits a low to moderate degree of aesthetic quality for the region. The majority of the Study Area is agricultural, categorized by a flat topography, cropland, and no significant water bodies. The closest habitable structure to the Consensus Route is east of FM 2638 and north of County Road BB. Other habitable structures in the Study Area are located in the unincorporated community of Kirkland in the northeast corner of the Study Area more than 0.5 mile from the Consensus Route. In addition, there are four habitable structures outside of the Study Area on the east side of FM 1033, and one habitable structure and several campers outside of the Study Area on the west side of FM 2638. There is no commercial development in the Study Area and the landscape has experienced a moderate degree of alteration due to the existing Tesla Station and transmission lines, the large Misae Solar Park I development currently under construction, and the U.S. Highway 287 and BNSF railroad transportation corridor to the north.
3.11 Cultural Resources As shown on Figure 3-6, Childress County occurs in the Texas Plains Planning Region as delineated by the THC (Mercado-Allinger et al., 1996). Archaeologically, the Study Area is in the High Plains region of the Texas Panhandle that is classified physiographically as Rolling Plains and the vegetation is classified as Warm Temperate Grassland (Perttula 2004:7-8). There have been 12 previous cultural resource investigations that recorded 146 archaeological sites and 102 historic properties in Childress County.
3.11.1 Cultural Overview Various authors have classified the archaeological record of the High Plains region of the Texas Panhandle. Most agree the region is characterized by five major periods: Paleoindian (9500-6500 B.C.). Archaic (6500 B.C.—A.D. 1). Ceramic (A.D. 1-1550), Protohistoric (A.D. 1550-1750), and Historic (A.D. 1750—present) (Johnson and Holliday 1995:521; 2004:284; Perttula 2004:9). The following sections describe in more detail each of the five major periods.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-41 TRC Companies
82 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Figure 3-6: Location of Childress County in Relation to the Cultural Resources Planning Regions of Texas
OM= PLAINS 'PLANNINGT REGION — —
„
TRANS-PECO — CENTRAL 8;: PLANNING 'SOUTHEfiNt. REGION - PLANNING REGIO-N
CiaLVTAL CORRIDOR 711 AltCHEOLOGICAL REGION RIO GRANDE PLAI ARCHEOLOGICAL REGION
Figure 3-6 Err Location of Childress County in Relation Electne Tramonstausto Ttxas to the Cultural Resources Planning Regions of Texas 115 230 Proposed Tesla to Fagus tiles Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV 1 Irth -115 tWs TRC Transmission Line in Childress County
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-42 TRC Companies
83 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.11.2 Paleoindian Period (9500-6500 B.c.) The earliest evidence for humans on the Rolling Plains and High Plains (Llano Estacado) of Texas is represented by the Paleoindian period when the Pleistocene-Holocene transition in climatic conditions occurred. This transition was marked by a change frorn a somewhat cool period, with little seasonal differentiation, to one with warrner ternperatures and more seasonal differentiation (Johnson and Holliday 1995:521.523-524,2004:284,286; Quigg et al. 1993). The Paleoindian period (9500-6000 B.c.), is divided into three subperiods or complexes — Clovis (9500-9000 B.c.), Folsom (9000-8000 B.c.). and Plano (8000-6500 B.C.) — named for different cultural groupings. Stylistically distinct projectile points associated with late Pleistocene and early Holocene megafauna characterize these complexes (Johnson and Holliday 1995,2004; Bousrnan et al. 2004:15-100; Wendorf and Hester 1962).
Low population densities prevailed among the region's early inhabitants, highly mobile hunting and gathering groups that were probably small and socially fluid. Currently, many researchers view Clovis peoples as more generalized hunter-gatherers who also exploited a variety of floral and smaller faunal resources (Cordell 1997:96,99; Ferring 1995; Haynes and Haury 1982; Johnson 1987; Johnson and Holliday 1995:532,2004:294-295; Moore 1996:40; Bousman et al. 2004:15-100). Recent research by Waguespack and Surovell (2003), however, suggests Clovis hunting behavior was more specialized (i.e., focal) rather than generalized (i.e., diffuse) (Moore 1996:40). By the end of the period, only modern fauna remained (Perrtula 2004:10).
3.11.3 Clovis Complex (9500- 9000 B.C.) Clovis cornponents are characterized by large lanceolate spear points that exhibit a single short basal flute on both faces. The Clovis tool kit also includes spurred end scrapers, large unifacially flaked side scrapers, keeled scrapers on large blades. flake knives. backed worked blades, gravers, perforators, shaft straighteners, and bone points and foreshafts (Gunnerson 1987:10). The Clovis type site, Blackwater Draw. is between the towns of Clovis and Portales, New Mexico, considerably west of the Study Area (Bousman et al. 2004:52,66: Holliday et al. 1983,1985; Johnson 1987; Bousman et al. 2004:15-100).
3.11.4 Folsom Complex (9000- 8000 B.c.) The Folsom type site is in northeastern New Mexico, near the town of Folsoin. The diagnostic artifact for Folsorn assemblages is the small. finely rnade lanceolate Folsom projectile point, which has a single flute on each face extending ahnost the entire length of the point. In addition, Folsom points exhibit finer flaking and have thinner cross sections than Clovis points (Bousman et al. 2004:17). The Folsom tool kit also includes unfluted Midland points, knives, pointed scrapers. choppers, drills, gravers, spokeshaves,
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-43 TRC Companies 84 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment abrading stones, awls, and needles (Gunnerson 1987:13). Folsom assemblages are "oriented toward butchery and the working of hides, bone and wood" (Amick 1996:411).
The Lake Theo (41B170) site in nearby Briscoe County has a Folsom component that was excavated in the late 1970s. Excavations revealed two bison bone beds with the lower (earlier) bone bed clearly associated with Folsom points in direct association with now extinct Bison antiquus (Bousman et al. 2004:44). The association of Folsom points with Bison antiquus—a late Pleistocene bison that was larger than modern bison (Bison bison) and formed smaller herds (McDonald 1981:204-205)--suggests Folsom groups were primarily bison hunters (Amick 1994, 1996; Figgins 1927: Staley and Turnbow 1995), but pronghorn, canid, and rabbit bones have also been recovered from Folsom sites (Frison 1978, 1991). The earliest evidence for comrnunal hunts occurs with Folsom assemblages. These cornmunal hunts required greater social organization and control than that evidenced in Clovis sites (Frison 1978:243-250, 1991:276-288).
3.11.5 Plano Complex (8000- 6500 B.c.) Adaptive changes to a rnore xeric environment are associated with the ernergence of the Plano complex. The nearby Lake Theo, Plainview (41HA I ), and Rex Rodgers (41BI42) sites have Plainview components (Bousman et al. 2004:46, 52, 54; 56, 61, 64, 66; Hartwell 1995; Holliday 1997; Holliday et al. 1983, 1985. 1999; Johnson and Holliday 1980; Johnson et al. 1982; Speer 1978). The Plano site (41HA1) in nearby Hale County was discovered in Running Water Draw in 1944 and was excavated in 1945 that exposed a large bison bone bed. Further excavations were done in 1976 and 1977 (Bousman et al. 2004: 40-42). The Lake Theo (41B170) site in nearby Briscoe County was excavated in the late 1970s (Bousman et al. 2004:44). The Rex Rodgers (41B142) site also in nearby Briscoe County was excavated in 1974 as part of the Mackenzie Reservoir investigations. Projectile points similar to Plainview and San Patrice were found associated with at least six bison (Bousman et al. 2004:46).
The Plainview complex contains laterally thinned points — Plainview, Meserve. Milnesand, and Frederick — and is generally considered the earliest Plano complex. The indented base series includes Firstview, Alberta. and Cody complex points, such as Eden and Scottsbluff. Agate Basin and Hell Gap points comprise the constricted base series (Cordell 1979:21).
3.11.6 Archaic Period (6500 B.C.—A.D. 1) The climate became warmer and more arid during the Archaic period (6500 B.C.—A.D. 1), which is generally divided into Early (6500-4000 B.C.), Middle (4000-1500 B.c.), and Late (1500 B.C.—A.D. 1) (Perttula 2004:Table 1.1). The Middle Archaic coincides with a long drought period, known as the Altitherrnal (Antevs 1955), that was characterized by low rainfall and corresponding desiccation on the
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-44 TRC Companies
85 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Plains. Several researchers (Benedict 1979; Reeves 1973; Wedel 1964) have postulated an abandonment of the Great Plains during this period (except perhaps river valleys) and movement of peoples into the foothills and mountains where climatic conditions were moister.
The Archaic adaptation was a "diffuse" economy (Judge 1982:49). With the extinction of the larger bison forms(Bison Antiquus) at the end of the Plano complex, the smaller modern form of bison, (Bison bison), emerged. The resource base included a variety of plants and the modern suite of Plains fauna (Hofman 1989:45; Judge 1982:49).
A greater dependence on plant foods is reflected in a higher frequency of grinding tools during the Archaic. Manos, metates, mortars, and other grinding tools were used for processing plants. Projectile points became smaller and probably functioned as atlatl darts. Archaic sites are usually identified as lithic scatters with fire-cracked rock, hearths, ground stone tools, and specific projectile point types. Distinctive Archaic artifacts include a variety of stemmed or corner-notched dart point styles, the Clear Fork gouge, core scrapers, and reworked projectile points used as hafted scrapers (Hofman 1989:45). Pottery is absent, as is the bow and arrow (Hofman 1989:45).
Archaic sites are uncommon in the Texas Panhandle and High Plains areas (Boyd et al. 1989: Perrtula 2004:11; Quigg et al. 1993). Recent work suggests that the paucity of identified Archaic sites in the region is likely due to geomorphic conditions rather than cultural trends. According to a model developed by Lintz et al. (1993) and further elaborated by Boyd et al. (1997), from ca. 6,000 to 3,000 years ago, the western Rolling Plains and greater Caprock-Canyonlands were subject to severe erosion that removed most of the Pleistocene and early to mid-Holocene deposits. This severe erosion left only the archaeological record from ca. 1000 B.C. to the present (Boyd et al. 1997; Lintz et al. 1993). The only excavated sites with Archaic components in northwestern Texas are Lubbock Lake (41LU1) in Lubbock County and Lake Creek in the northern part of the Panhandle (Perrtula 2004:11). The Archaic components at Lubbock Lake (41LU I ) represent the killing and butchering locus of a small bison herds spanning the Archaic period (Johnson and Holliday 1995:526, 2004:290).
The Middle Archaic coincides with the Altithermal, during which time temperatures increased and effective moisture decreased, resulting in massive eolian deposition across the region (Holliday 1989a; Johnson and Holliday 1986). In response to decreased surface water, Middle Archaic groups dug wells. Blackwater Draw Locality #1 contains 19 identified wells (Johnson and Holliday 2004:291). Marks Beach, west of the project corridor, has a probable well (Honea 1980). The Middle Archaic component at Lubbock Lake contains 28 identified activity areas — carnps and bison kill/butchering loci — and includes an oven — a large oval
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-45 TRC Companies
86 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment basin filled with ash and topped with burned caliche — that was probably used for processing plants (Johnson and Holliday 1986:41, 1995:527, 2004:291). The Middle Archaic tool kit includes large dart points with weak to barbed shoulders, concave or indented base dart points, bifaces, scrapers, drills, gouges, spokeshaves, hamrnerstones, one-hand manos, metates, and awls (Quigg et al. 1993).
By the beginning of the Late Archaic, the climate had returned to cooler, rnoister conditions, and available surface water increased (Johnson and Holliday 1995:528, 2004:291). Although surface finds of Late Archaic materials are common, Late Archaic occupations in stratified contexts are rare "because sedimentation during this time was very localized" (Johnson and Holliday 2004:292). Lubbock Lake is such a site, containing nine identified buried Late Archaic occupation surfaces (Holliday 1985; Holliday et al. 1983, 1985; Johnson and Holliday 1995:528, 2004:292).
3.11.7 Ceramic/Late Prehistoric Period (A.D. 1- 1550) The Ceramic period (A.D. 1-1550) (also known as the Late Prehistoric period) is characterized by the appearance of pottery and the introduction of the bow and arrow. These traits, however. were not uniformly adopted across the region. In the upper Texas Panhandle, the introduction of pottery and arrow points appeared nearly 2.000 years ago, whereas in north-central Texas, the earliest usage occurred about 1,200 years ago. In addition, houses and even villages are commonly found in some areas but are scarce in others. Horticulture also was unevenly adopted across the region (Quigg 2010:77-78; Quigg et al. 1993). The Ceramic period is divided into two sub-periods—Early Ceramic (A.D. 1-1000) and the Late Ceramic (A.D. 1000-1550) — based on ceramic types, projectile point forms, features, and subsistence practices (Johnson and Holliday 1995:529, 2004:292-293).
During the Early Ceramic period, the climate was wetter than during the Late Archaic. and due to less favorable conditions the Southern Plains bison numbers declined (Dillehay 1974:187; Hughes 1989:8. 30). In the Texas Panhandle region, two Ceramic complexes — Lake Creek and Palo Duro — flourished contemporaneously throughout much of the first millennium A.D. The Lake Creek complex, a Plains Woodland manifestation centered on the Canadian River (Hughes 1962, 1989), is north of the Study Area. The Palo Duro complex is centered on the Caprock-Canyonlands, which separates the High Plains (Llano Estacado) on the west from the Rolling Plains on the east (Boyd 2004:297-298) and is west of the Study Area. Palo Duro sites include residential bases. campsites, and rock shelters. Characteristic artifacts include Mogollon brownwares, Scallorn and Deadman's arrow points, and Clear Fork gouges. Other artifacts consist of bifaces, unifaces, drills, gouges, spokeshaves, manos, metates, bedrock mortars. pestles, bone awls, and mussel shell jewelry. Structures consist of oval and rectangular pithouses with or
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-46 TRC Companies
87 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment without entryways. Deer, pronghorn, bison, rabbits, freshwater mussels. and a variety of plants contributed to the diet. No cultigens have been identified (Boyd 2004:300-322).
The Late Cerarnic or Plains Village period is represented in the Texas Panhandle by the Antelope Creek focus (or phase) of the Panhandle Aspect (A.D. 1200-1500), which was focused along the Canadian and North Canadian rivers and their rnain tributaries (Brooks 2004:331). Antelope Creek sites rnay have as many as 30 or rnore rooms that are generally rectangular (Brooks 1989:81-82; Lintz 1984). Antelope Creek exhibits an interesting mix of puebloan-like masonry architecture "and a material culture bearing many sirnilarities to Central Plains village farming societies" (Brooks 2004:331). Alibates agatized dolomite was especially favored for chipped stone tools. Projectile points are side-notched, and pottery includes Pueblo tradewares—various black-on-white types, Jeddito Yellow Ware, Lincoln Black-on-red, St. Johns Polychrome, Agua Fria Glaze-on-red, and other glazewares — and cordmarked wares, especially Borger Cordmarked. Subsistence strategies consisted of horticulture, gathering, and hunting. Antelope Creek people grew corn, beans, and squash and gathered a variety of edible wild plants (e.g., purslane. goosefoot, acorns, hackberry, wild plum, prickly pear, mallow, lambsquarter. and marsh elder). Hunting focused on the procurement of bison but also included mule deer, pronghorn. and smaller game (Brooks 2004:332,338-342). Antelope Creek disappeared rapidly after ca. A.D. 1500, apparently because of severe drought conditions (Brooks 2004:343-344; Lintz 1984,1986).
The Protohistoric period (A.D. 1450-1650) is marked by significant cultural changes. The upper Panhandle region was abandoned by sedentary groups, perhaps because of advancing Apachean groups. South of the Canadian River, sites reflect trade networks between the Texas Panhandle-Plains and Southwestern Pueblos. Two Protohistoric complexes of the Texas Panhandle-Plains — Tierra Blanca and Garza — occur near or include the Study Area. Both represent distinct, contemporaneous bison hunting groups with similar lifestyles but occupied different areas (Boyd 2001; Habicht-Mauche 1992; Hughes 1989:34-36).
The Tierra Blanca complex of the northern Llano, near the Study Area, is concentrated in the Red River drainage. The chipped stone assemblage includes small triangular notched (Washita. Harrell) and unnotched (Fresno, Talco-like) arrow points, distinctive "snub-nosed" end scrapers, beveled knives, and a variety of side-scrapers, and drills (Boyd 2001:8; Habicht-Mauche 1992:251-252; Hughes 1989). Small quantities of cerarnics are also present, including thin, dark sherds of a locally made utility ware, and Rio Grande glaze wares, primarily Glaze C and D. demonstrating contact with the Rio Grande Pueblos. Based on the dates of intrusive ceramic materials and a few radiocarbon dates, the cornplex is tentatively dated between about A.D. 1450 and 1650 (Habicht-Mauche 1992:251-252).
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-47 TRC Companies 88 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
The Garza complex is centered in the lower Texas Panhandle within the upper Colorado and Brazos river drainages (Baugh 1986:176; Boyd 2001:10; Habicht-Mauche 1992:252-253; Hughes 1989:36; Johnson et al. 1977) and is dated at A.D. 1410 to 1655 (Quigg 2010:95). The lithic assemblage includes small triangular notched (Washita, Harrell, Garza, Lott) and unnotched (Fresno. Talco-like) arrow points, "snub-nosed" end scrapers. and bifacial knives (Boyd 2001:10; Habicht-Mauche 1992:253; Hughes 1989:36). Other tools include manos, metates, and bone awls and fleshing tools. No direct evidence for horticulture (i.e., macrobotanical remains), however, is currently available for the Garza complex (Baugh 1986:180). Ceramics consist of locally made. Southwestern-style utility wares, imported Rio Grande glaze wares — most of which are Glaze E and F, primarily from the Galisteo Basin — and Chupadero Black-on-white and Jornada Brown wares indicative of ties with the Jornada Mogollon and/or Salinas Pueblo areas (Habicht-Mauche 1992:253; Hughes 1989:36).
Researchers have attempted to link these archaeological complexes to named groups in the early Spanish records and to modern tribes. The Querecho are often linked to Apaches in the northern Panhandle and there is a general agreement that the Tierra Blanca complex probably correlates with the Querechos as described in the documents of the Coronado expedition (Blakeslee et al. 2003:185: Habicht-Mauche 1992:257). Habicht-Mauche (1992:257) and others (Blakeslee et al. 2003) identify the Garza complex with the Teyas. Some researchers suggest the Teyas are associated with the Caddo to the east, but others see an affiliation with the Piro pueblos to the west (Blakeslee et al. 2003:183, 185). By about 1700, both groups were displaced by the southward migration of the Cornanche (Boyd 2001:9).
3.11.8 The Apache One of the most controversial issues among anthropologists and archaeologists in the Southwest and Plains concerns the arrival of the Apache — Southem Athapaskan groups — in the region. One hypothesis suggests Apachean groups arrived in the Southwest and Southern High Plains via the High Plains shortly before the arrival of Spaniards in the area in 1540 (Carlson 1965: Gunnerson 1956, 1974; Gunnerson and Gunnerson 1971, 1988:1-2; Hester 1962; Schaafsrna 1981; Wilcox 1981). A date of ca.
A.D. 1525 has been postulated. If this interpretation is correct, this southward Apachean migration coincided with the maximum of the "Little Ice Age." Apachean peoples may have followed bison herds along the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains (Gunnerson 1956; Gunnerson and Gunnerson 1988:2). Other researchers suggest the Apache and Navajo arrived at different times and by different routes, such as a mountain or intermountain route through Colorado or Utah and the Great Basin or west of the Continental Divide (Hall 1944; Harrington 1940; Huscher and Huscher 1942; Opler 1975; Seymour 2012; Steward 1936:62; Worcester 1951). Seymour (2012:150) notes that "[decent research in the mountainous Southwest
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-48 TRC Companies
89 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment has raised new evidence in support of a rnountain and/or intermountain route. The earliest known ancestral Athapaskan sites in the Southwest date to the A.D. 1300s and 1400s" (Seymour 2012:149).
Early Spanish chroniclers refer to the presence of several nomadic (probable Apachean) bison hunting groups — Querechos, Vaqueros, Faraones, Teyas — on the Llano Estacado. The relationship of these groups, however, with known historic native groups is problematic, given the uncertainty as to which group or groups the names apply. In September 1598, Juan de (Nate first used the word Apache as a cultural term (Opler 1983a:385-386). "[A]lthough the first use of the term included Athapaskans, it also included other tribes that were linguistically unrelated to the Athapaskan Apache but confused with them or assumed to be sufficiently similar to them to justify the same name" (Opler 1983a:386).
3.11.9 Spanish Exploration The 1540 — 1542 entrada of Francisco Vasquez de Coronado was the first official European entry onto the western plains of North America. In the spring of 1541, Coronado and a smaller force left the Tiwa villages on the Rio Grande where they had wintered and entered the plains of eastern New Mexico. Traveling northeastward, Coronado crossed the Llano Estacado and penetrated deeply into the Kansas plains. eventually reaching the vicinity of the Great Bend of the Arkansas River in eastern Kansas. Frustrated by not finding mineral riches, the expedition returned to the Rio Grande in the fall of 1541. After spending a second winter in the Tiwa pueblos, Coronado returned to Mexico City in the fall of 1542 (Athearn 1992:2-3; Jenkins and Schroeder 1974:14,17).
The Jimmy Owens site (41FL81) in Blanco Canyon of the White River in Floyd County. just southwest of the present Study Area, has produced abundant cultural materials that are directly associated with an early Spanish expedition, and is thought to be the remains of Coronado's second rnajor camp in the Texas canyonlands (Blakeslee and Blaine 2003). Twenty-four copper crossbow boltheads in the assemblage indicate clearly that the Jimmy Owens site is a Coronado campsite. The 1540 Coronado expedition is the only land expedition into the Southwest known to have carried crossbows (Gagne 2003:243; Blakeslee and Blaine 2003:210). Supporting evidence comes in the form of nails of a unique style and horseshoes of distinctly Spanish design (Blakeslee and Blaine 2003:216).
Juan de (Mate, leading a group of colonists into the Rio Grande Valley in 1598, founded the first European settlement — San Gabriel — in New Mexico. This was the beginning of a permanent Spanish presence in northern New Spain (Athearn 1992:4; Jenkins and Schroeder 1974:19). In 1599, Vicente de Zaldivar, along with 60 men, was sent by Oriate to the bison plains to capture a few bison. He reached the Canadian River — known then as the Rio de la Magdalene — but was unable to capture any bison.
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-49 TRC Companies
90 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Zaldivar and his men, therefore, hunted bison. collecting more than a ton of tallow (Rathjen 1998:52). In
1601, Ciliate crossed the Panhandle on his way to Quivira. During his expedition. Oriate encountered numerous Indians whom he called "Apaches." Following Ofiate's exploration, the Panhandle was relegated to a hinterland of New Mexico (Rathjen 1998:52-53).
Battles for control of the Southern Plains, including the Southern High Plains of Texas, the Caprock
Canyonlands, and the Panhandle, predated the arrival of the Spanish (Nickerson 2003:187). Sixteenth century wars and skirmishes among the Querechos and Teyas, observed by the Spanish, continued through the seventeenth century, escalating when the Comanche entered the territory. The war for the
Plains was. in effect, so fierce that no Spanish settlement has ever been identified on the Southern Plains.
(Wishart 2004:345).
A further effect of the movement of people and goods involves disease. Spanish expeditions, warfare, and settlements, and their biological vectors of horses, other goods, and people can bring "immense biological terrors" (Morris 2003:229). This is particularly marked in the case of the permanent Spanish occupation of the Greater Southwest; however, no direct biological effect has yet been directly correlated with the
1540 Coronado expedition. As noted by Morris (2003:230), if the indigenous people of the Southern
Plains escaped contagion in 1541, it is largely because the expedition did not linger.
3.11.10 Historic Period (A.D. 1650—Present)
As defined by Johnson and Holliday (1995:530, 2004:293), the Historic period (A.D. 1650—present) "is marked by the appearance of European trade goods and modern horse remains" and is divided into
"aboriginal Historic and Anglo-Historic times." The former includes the Comanche, Kiowa, and Kiowa
Apache. As presented herein though, the latter also includes Hispanic occupation of the Southern High
Plains. The first Euro-Americans "were buffalo hunters and U.S. military units, followed by sheepherders
(pastores), traders, ranchers, and settlers" (Johnson and Holliday 1995:530, 2004:293).
3.11.11 The Comanche
The Comanche are Shoshonean-speakers who probably split from the Shoshoni ca. A.D. 1550. The
Shoshoni occupied parts of Wyoming. The earliest Spanish record of the Comanche was in 1706, after which date they were mentioned frequently. By 1730, after pushing the Cuartelejo and Jicarilla Apache farther south, the Comanche dominated the High Plains (Gunnerson and Gunnerson 1988:29). By the mid-I 800s, the Oklahoma and Texas panhandles became the domain of the Comanche (Gunnerson
1987:127). The Comanche functioned as independent bands. In 1767, the Comanche became hostile toward the Spanish and remained so until 1787 (Gunnerson and Gunnerson 1988:30). By 1810, the
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-50 TRC Companies
91 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Comanche began to lose their domination of the Central High Plains as more northerly tribes — Arapaho,
Cheyenne. Kiowa, Kiowa Apache. Dakota (Sioux), Crow, and Shoshoni — moved south to the Arkansas
River and beyond. The Comanche also felt pressure from eastern tribes, such as the Pawnee and Wichita. who ventured onto the High Plains in pursuit of bison (Gunnerson and Gunnerson 1988:32). By the late
1820s. the Cheyenne and Arapaho had forced the Comanche south, from the upper Arkansas River region, to the Canadian River (Kavanagh 2001:888).
In 1855, Colonel John Garland reported the Comanche on the eastern border of New Mexico because they were being forced west from Texas (Gunnerson and Gunnerson 1988:32-34). A reservation was established for the Comanche in southwestern Oklahoma in 1867. By 1875, the Comanche, as well as the
Kiowa and Kiowa Apache, had settled on it (Gunnerson and Gunnerson 1988: 34).
3.11.12 The Kiowa and Kiowa Apache
By the early 1800s, the Kiowa and Kiowa Apache were frequently in the Oklahoma and Texas panhandles (Gunnerson 1987:127). The Kiowa are Kiowa-Tanoan-speakers who formerly lived near the headwaters of the Yellowstone River in western Montana. The Tanoans may have separated from the ancestral Kiowa prior to the Kiowa arrival on the Plains. In 1805, the Kiowa were near the North Platte
River. Spanish sources, however, place the Kiowa on the Plains in 1732 and the Kiowa may have been hunting bison on horseback as early as 1725 (Levy 2001:907). Gunnerson and Gunnerson (1988:11) suggest the Plains Apache joined the Kiowa around 1700. The Kiowa Apache functioned as a separate
Kiowa band, while retaining their own language. In the early 1800s, the Kiowa and Kiowa Apache lived in the Arkansas River area, and by the mid-1800s, they had moved into Kansas. Oklahoma, and Texas
(Gunnerson and Gunnerson 1988:11). After forming an alliance with the Comanche in 1806, the Kiowa
(including the Kiowa Apache) and Comanche shared a common territory (Levy 2001:908).
In about 1 802, contacts with American traders began, and by the late 1820s, trading posts had been established for the Kiowa, Comanche, and Wichita. In the early 1840s, Bent's Post was built on the South
Canadian River in the Texas Panhandle. This post was near main Kiowa trails (Levy 2001:915).
The Kiowa signed formal treaties with the United States in 1837, 1853, and 1865. The 1853 treaty — the
Treaty of Fort Atkinson — acknowledged the U.S. government's right to build roads and military posts in
Kiowa and Comanche territory and both tribes agreed to peace with the United States and Mexico. Both tribes maintained relatively good relations with the government; however, both continued to raid into
Texas, New Mexico, and Mexico. In 1864, federal troops under Lt. Col. Kit Carson attacked and burned a
Kiowa village near Adobe Walls, the ruins of Bent's Post on the South Canadian River. The 1865 treaty
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-51 TRC Companies
92 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
— the Little Arkansas Treaty — attempted to restore peace with the Kiowa (Levy 2001:915). By this treaty, "the Kiowa agreed to accept a reservation in western Oklahoma and Texas jointly with the Comanche" (Levy 2001:915). In 1867, the Treaty of Medicine Lodge reduced the size of the reservation and in a second treaty, the Plains Apache united with the Kiowa and Comanche (Kavanagh 2001:889: Levy 2001:915-916). In 1869, Fort Sill was built in the middle of the Kiowa, Plains Apache, and Comanche Reservation. The Kiowa and Comanche, however, continued raids into Texas during the early 1870s due to U.S. violations of the Medicine Lodge Treaty, especially the slaughtering of bison "by the thousands by White hunters on lands designated as Indian hunting territory" (Levy 2001:916).
3.11.13 Euro-American Historic Period The Euro-American (Hispanic and Anglo) Historic period begins with occupation of the Southern High Plains. As mentioned previously, the first Euro-Americans "were buffalo hunters and U.S. military units, followed by sheepherders (pastores), traders, ranchers, and settlers" (Johnson and Holliday 1995:530, 2004:293).
In 1821, Mexico declared its independence from Spain, and the Republic of Mexico was established in January 1822. Consequently, the Llano Estacado and adjacent areas became part of the Mexican nation. The establishment of the Republic of Texas in 1836 and the annexation of Texas by the United States in 1844 led to poor relations between Mexico and the United States and eventually resulted in the outbreak of war in 1846. The Treaty of Guadalupe'Hidalgo ended the Mexican War in 1848 (Jenkins and Schroeder 1974).
Several U.S. military expeditions during the first half of the nineteenth century included portions of the Texas Panhandle. During an 1820 expedition to explore the Platte. Arkansas, and Red rivers, Major Stephen Harriman Long became the first Anglo-American explorer to enter the Panhandle (Rathjen 1998:83-88). In 1845, a military reconnaissance expedition led by Lt. James W. Abert crossed the Texas Panhandle along the Canadian River, north of the Study Area. through Comanche and Kiowa territory (Abert 1999; Rathjen 1998:89-97). An army expedition led by Captain Randolph B. Marcy from Fort Smith to Santa Fe in 1849 followed the south bank of the Canadian River through Oklahoma and the Texas Panhandle (Gordon 1988:17; Rathjen 1998:98-104). In 1852, Marcy led an expedition — which included brevet Captain George B. McClellan — to explore the Red River and to discover its headwaters, which were on the eastern edge of the Llano Estacado (Rathjen 1998:105-109). During a survey of a potential transcontinental railroad route across the Southwest along the 35t1 parallel in 1853-1854, the Whipple Expedition traveled through the Texas Panhandle along the Canadian River (Gordon 1988;
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-52 TRC Companies
93 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
Rathjen 1998:110-112). Whipple's expedition "marks the end of the formal antebellum exploration of the Panhandle" (Rathjen 1998:112).
Following the Civil War, "the Panhandle, especially its canyonlands, remained a remote, sprawling fortress for the southern Plains tribes, a refuge where safety could be found ... and from which raids deep into Texas and Mexico could be plotted and launched" (Rathjen 1998:141). The Medicine Lodge treaties (see above) of 1867 did not stop raiding by Indians. Accelerating hostilities between the southern Plains tribes and Anglo-Americans culminated in the Red River War of 1874-1875 (Rathjen 1998:164). Several major battles occurred in the Panhandle in 1874. In September, Mackenzie destroyed a large Comanche village in Palo Duro Canyon (Rathjen 1998:173). Mackenzie's attack in the Palo Duro was the last of the large engagements of the Red River War (Rathjen 1998:174).
Up until 1870. Argentine cattle hides were used for essentially all leather items in the United States. Hoof and mouth disease. however, had nearly destroyed the Argentine trade by 1870 (Bowser 1999). "In 1871 tanners developed a process for turning bison hides into leather ... to meet the soaring demand in the East for buffalo hides, professional hunters killed millions of the animals and drove the once vast herds to the brink of extinction" (Schultz 1986:141).
In the early fall of 1873, J. Wright Mooar, John W. Mooar, and eight hired men entered the Texas Panhandle and set up a successful bison hunting camp on the Canadian River. However, due to a clash with Comancheros, the Mooars moved their operation north to Palo Duro Creek in present Hansford County. Based on the success of these outfits, many hunters flocked to the Panhandle. In addition, A. C. Myers established Adobe Walls as a trading post in 1874 on the Canadian River in Hutchinson County, near old Bent's Fort (Rathjen 1998:123-125).
Due to the intrusion of White hunters upon traditional bison hunting grounds, the tribes began to retaliate. Members of small buffalo hunting parties were killed. As news of the Indian attacks spread. hunters gathered at Adobe Walls for refuge and to assess the situation. The hunters formed larger parties for defense and returned to the buffalo range. However, in the early morning of June 27. a force of 200 to 250 Indians — primarily Comanche and Cheyenne and a few Kiowa — attacked Adobe Walls, the defenders used long-range weapons and fine marksmanship to repulse the Indians. The attack on Adobe Walls led later in 1874 to the Red River War (Rathjen 1998:126-131).
In 1875,25 six-man outfits reportedly operated in the eastern Panhandle and a new trade center — Hidetown — was established just east of present Mobeetie (Rathjen 1998:131). "Hidetown received thousands of hides for freighting to the railroad at Dodge City by way of the Jones-Plummer trail
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-53 TRC Companies 94 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment connecting the eastern Panhandle with Dodge- (Rathjen 1998:132). The founding of Mobeetie, one of the three original Panhandle towns, was directly related to the buffalo trade (Rathjen 1998:132. 137).
The slaughter of the bison paved the way for the cultural development of the Panhandle (Rathjen 1998:132-137).
Although a small group of New Mexico families reportedly established a settlement on the Canadian River in present Oldham County during the 1860s, it was short-lived (Anderson 2013). Pastores, Hispanic sheepherders from New Mexico, began moving into the Texas Panhandle in the early 1870s, forming small settlements (Anderson 2013; Johnson and Holliday 1995:530-531, 2004:293). Ventural and Justo Borrego led probably the first significant group ofpastores to the Panhandle in ca. 1874. The group abandoned the area briefly when the Red River War broke out. In early 1876, Borrego brought several Taos families to a site just south of Atascosa Springs, where they built a small plaza consisting of a single line of rock and adobe houses (Anderson 2013).
Eventually, more than 12 plazas were scattered along the Canadian Valley, with most in present Oldham County (Anderson 2013). Irrigation ditches were dug to water gardens. Sandstone sheep corrals were constructed nearby. Many of the hired hands lived in crude dugouts (Anderson 2013).
In November 1876, Casimero Romero, a long-time resident of Mora County, led probably the largest group ofpastores into the Panhandle via a probable Comanchero trail and settled on the Canadian, near Atascosa Creek. The site eventually became the town of Tascosa, one of the original Panhandle towns. Other pastores came to the area during the remainder of the 1870s. By 1880, almost 300 Hispanics lived in the Tascosa area and flocks of sheep were scattered along the Canadian River and its tributaries (Anderson 2013; Rathjen 1998:80-82).
The 1880 census reported about 400 pastores with about 108,000 sheep in the Panhandle (Anderson 2013). The presence of the pastores, however, was short-lived. As the presence of cattlemen increased in the area, they displaced the pastores by acquiring or claiming title to the land and subsequently building fences. Consequently, with the disappearance of free range, most of the pastores retumed to New Mexico, where free range was still available (Anderson 2013; Rathjen 1998:81).
In 1846, the First Legislature of the State of Texas established the Bexar Land District, which included essentially all of present West Texas. In 1876. the district was divided into numerous counties "narned to honor Texas heroes from various periods in the state's history" (Rathjen 1998:190). Childress County is one of those counties. Childress County. comprising approximately 696 square miles of rolling prairies
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-54 TRC Companies
95 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
and river bottoms, is named for George C. Childress. author of the Texas Declaration of Independence.
Childress County was formed in 1876. The major perennial drainage is Prairie Dog Town Fork of the Red
River. This and other tributaries render much of central and northern Childress County unfit for farming, thus ranching is a major economic activity in the local economy (Abbe 2019).
The OX Ranch, owned by A. Forsythe and Doss D. Swearingen, was established in 1879 and encompassed the entire southern half of Childress County and parts of Cottle and Motley counties. The
Shoe Nail Ranch, owned by Chicago meat packer Gustavus Franklin Swift, was established in 1883 in the northern part of Childress County while the Mill Iron Ranch encompassed the northwestern part of
Childress County and part of Collingsworth County. These sparsely populated ranches dominated the local economy until farmers began arriving during the early twentieth century. Farms began appearing in the 1880s after the arrival of the Fort Worth and Denver City Railroad in April 1887. A competition for county seat developed between Childress City, which was favored by most county residents, and Henry, which was favored by the railroad. Childress City was chosen county seat in an election held in April
1887, but voters changed their rninds to accommodate demands and threats. The Fort Worth and Denver
City Railroad threatened not to stop in Childress City unless the election results were reversed, and they sweetened its demand by offering lot owners in Childress City equal lots in Henry. Using these tactics, the FW&DC forced a new election in July 1887, and Henry became the county seat. Its narne was changed to Childress, and old "Childress City- disappeared as all its buildings were moved to the new town of Childress (formerly Henry) (Abbe 2019).
The U.S. 1880 Census enumerated 25 people, and the 1890 Census enumerated 153 farrns and ranches in
Childress County. By the 1910 Census, there were 961 farms and ranches. By World War I all readily tillable land in the county had been sold to farmers, while ranching remained important in those areas of the county not tillable. By 1930. poultry developed as an important economic factor, with nearly 71.000 chickens and 289,000 dozen eggs sold, along with more than 18,719 cattle(Abbe 2019).
During 1901 and 1902 the FW&DC moved its division point and shops from Clarendon to Childress.
From 1827 to 1928, construction of the Fort Worth and Denver South Plains Railway from Estelline to
Plainview and Lubbock further stimulated the Childress County economy, since Childress served as the terminal for that branch line. Transportation improvements during the 1920s later linked Childress to
Wichita Falls, originally U.S. Highway 370, which is now U.S. 287. In addition, U.S. 83 passed through
Childress (Abbe 2019).
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-55 TRC Companies
96 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
The Great Depression and Dust Bowl greatly reduced the ranching and agricultural economy of Childress County. The number of farms shrank from 1,348 to 904 from 1920 to 1930. The presence of the Childress Army Air Base during World War 11 increased the number of residents, but with its closure after the war the county population continued to decline throughout the latter half of the twentieth century to a population of 5.953 in 1992. However, by 2014 the population grew to 7,089 (Abbe 2019).
The Fort Worth and Denver Railway Company was chartered on May 26, 1873. as the Fort Worth and Denver City Railway Company. The Fort Worth and Denver City and the Denver and New Orleans Railroad Company agreed in April 1881 to connect at the Texas-New Mexico border. Construction began just north of Fort Worth, on November 27. 1881, and by September 1882, 110 miles of track were completed to Wichita Falls. In 1885 the line was extended 34 miles west of Wichita Falls to Harrold. In 1886, the line was extended 31 miles to Chillicothe. In April 1887 tracks were laid to Childress and eventually to the Canadian River. In 1888 the line was built to the Texas state line (Billingsley 2013).
On April 1, 1888, service commenced between Fort Worth and Denver. In 1890 the Denver. Texas, and Fort Worth became part of the Union Pacific, Denver, and Gulf Railway Company. In 1895. the Fort Worth and Denver City was reorganized under the same name and charter, which prohibited the construction of branch lines. Therefore, new companies were formed to construct the branch lines (Billingsley 2013).
The Fort Worth and Denver City Railroad (now the BN&SF) greatly influenced economic growth. The construction of stockyards at Wichita Falls and later railheads made long cattle drives obsolete. The railroad promoted winter wheat as food for cattle and the introduction of cotton to the area. The line was closely associated with land development firms that provided land at extremely liberal terms as a way to attract settlers. During the drought of the 1890s. the railroad provided free seed to farmers to keep them in business. In addition, the railroad acted as a banker and accepted crop liens as collateral for loans (Billingsley 2013).
On June 13, 1952, except for the Burlington-Rock Island, all of the other Colorado and Southern properties in Texas were merged into the Fort Worth and Denver. The Fort Worth and Denver abandoned the line in 1976 with other abandonments following. On December 31, 1982, the Fort Worth and Denver was rnerged into the Burlington Northern (BN). In 1989, the former Fort Worth and Denver South Plains line between Estelline and Lubbock was abandoned by the BN in favor of trackage rights over the Santa Fe (Billingsley 2013).
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-56 TRC Companies
97 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
3.11.14 Previous Investigations TRC conducted an examination of the Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory (TARL) restricted archaeological site database to identify previous cultural resources investigations within the Study Area.
The review identified one previous survey within 1 mile of the originally proposed Study Area (1,11,1e 1 (,). The survey was done by SWCA Environmental in May 2011. They recorded one archaeological site (41C1136) located along the western boundary of the originally proposed Study Area. There are no surveys or documented cultural resources within 1 mile of the consensus route.
Table 3-8: Previous Investigations Within 1 Mile of the Study Area
Atlas Number Survey Date Investigating Firm Sponsor Project 8500019884 5/20/2011 SWCA Public Utilities Cross Texas Transmission Commission High Probability Survey
3.11.15 Results of the Background Review To identify historical and archaeological sites in the Study Area, TRC researched the records and maps available online through the Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory (TARL) restricted archaeological site database and Texas Historical Commission's publicly accessible Texas Historic Sites Atlas database. The two databases provide information and location regarding: listed and eligible National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) properties, sites, and districts; Official Texas Historical Markers; State Archaeological Landmarks; National Historic Landmarks; National Monuments; National Memorials; National Historic Sites; National Historical Parks; museums; cemeteries; historical highways; and courthouses. The review found 12 previous systematic cultural resource surveys of Childress County, of which only one, by SWCA, has been done in proximity to the proposed project. The search also found 146 archaeological sites and 102 historic resources have been documented in Childress County. Of the 102 historic properties, 9 are cemeteries, 11 are historical rnarkers, 81 are neighborhood surveys, and 1 is a National Register property.
This review identified no sites within 1 mile of proposed routes (Table 3-8). The nearest archaeological sites outside of the Study Area are between 1 and 1.5 miles away from any of the proposed routes or substation locations. The nearest historic resource, Kirkland Cernetery, is nearly 2 miles away. The one archaeological site — 41C1136 — within the original Study Area occurs along a previously surveyed existing transmission line that has been identified as an alternative route at the western edge of the Study Area. The Consensus Route is 1.5 miles to the east; therefore, 41C1136 is outside the boundary of the Consensus Route. Two additional archaeological sites, 41C1146 and 410147, are 1.6 and 1.06 miles
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-57 TRC Companies
98 Proposed Tesla to Fagus Double-Circuit Capable 345-kV Transmission Line Existing Environment
southeast of the south end of the Consensus Route. The proposed transmission line along the Consensus Route will have no effect upon either of these two archaeological sites.
Table 3-9: Archeological Sites Within 1 Mile of the Study Area
Categories Information/Determinations USGS 7.5 Quad Kirkland South Cultural Resource Archaeological Site 41C1136 Cultural Affiliation Unknown Prehistoric NRHP Eligible? Determined ineligible by SHPO (Determination ID 13659, 8/11/2011). No additional investigation recommended. Distance and Direction Within Study Area, 28 m due west of yellow alternate route Description The site has a single prehistoric component of unknown cultural or temporal affiliation. According to the site file. the site consists of "a very small and sparse scatter oflithics on an eroded surface' that lacks deposition, features, burned rock and diagnostic artifacts. The limited artifact assemblage includes six flakes and one possible chert unifacial tool.
41C1136 is a prehistoric site of undetermined temporal/cultural affiliation. The site consists of a sparse scatter of flaked stone on eroded terrain that lacks deposition. The assernblage includes six flakes and one possible chert unifacial implement. The site has been determined ineligible for listing on the National Register by the Texas SHPO (Determination ID 13659, dated 8/11/2011). The proposed consensus transmission line route is 1.5 miles east of the site and will have no effect upon cultural remains associated with 41C1136.
3.12 Paleontological Resources The paleontological record of Texas spans nearly the entire geologic column from Precambrian to Pleistocene. The most common fossil is shark teeth, because Texas was covered by a sea during the Paleozoic era. Little is known about the Devonian and early Carboniferous periods. During the late Carboniferous period, the state had marine life, land plants, and early reptiles. For Childress County, the Permian is well represented. During this time, the oceans shrank. with coral reefs and coastal plains inhabited by early relatives of rnammals like Dimetrodon and Edaphosaurus. The Triassic period in Texas was characterized by a great river system that was inhabited by crocodile-like phytosaurs. Little is known about the Jurassic with ammonites being one of the few animals occurring. The early Cretaceous is represented by large sauropods and theropods who left their footprints. During the late Cretaceous Texas was covered by the Western Interior Seaway that was home to mosasaurs, and plesiosaurs. The
Electric Transmission Texas, LLC 3-58 TRC Companies
99