Keystone XL Pipeline Project: Environmental Protection Plan
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, Limited Partnership Environmental Protection Plan Keystone XL Pipeline Project January 2019 APPENDIX 1I GREAT SANDHILLS RECLAMATION PLAN Page 1I-1 TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, Limited Partnership Environmental Protection Plan Keystone XL Pipeline Project January 2019 Page 1I-2 Keystone XL Pipeline Project Great Sandhills Reclamation Plan Revision 1 August 2018 Prepared for: TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, Limited Partnership Calgary, Alberta Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. Calgary, Alberta Project Number: 123512870 KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PROJECT GREAT SANDHILLS RECLAMATION PLAN Table of Contents 1.0 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................. 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ........................................................................................ 3 1.3 RESEARCH FINDINGS ................................................................................................. 3 1.3.1 Key Principles ................................................................................................3 1.3.2 Pipeline Revegetation Studies – NOVA .......................................................... 4 1.3.3 Revegetation Studies – Express Pipeline ....................................................... 6 1.4 APPLICATION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS TO RECLAMATION OF THE KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PROJECT ............................................................................ 8 1.5 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 9 1.5.1 Literature Cited ..............................................................................................9 1.5.2 Personal Communication ............................................................................. 10 2.0 MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................................................11 3.0 CONSULTATION ..........................................................................................................13 LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1 Mean Percent Cover for Herbaceous Species at Two Sandy Soil Sites along the Express Pipeline Year 1 to Year 5 Post-Construction (1997-2001)1 .......................................................................................................... 8 Table 3-1 Summary of Regulatory Consultation ....................................................................13 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 Great Sandhills Boundary ...................................................................................... 2 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A DOCUMENTATION OF REGULATORY CONSULTATION A.1 Documentation of Consultation with Saskatchewan Environment ................................ A.1 A.2 Documentation of Consultation with the Great Sand Hills Regional Planning Commission................................................................................................................. A.4 A.3 Documentation of Consultation with RM Piapot ........................................................... A.7 KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PROJECT GREAT SANDHILLS RECLAMATION PLAN KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PROJECT GREAT SANDHILLS RECLAMATION PLAN Literature Review August 2018 1.0 LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 INTRODUCTION TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, Limited Partnership’s (Keystone) Keystone XL Pipeline Project (the Project) originates in Hardisty, AB, from where it is routed south to Burstall on the Alberta-Saskatchewan border and then southeast through Saskatchewan to the U.S. border at Monchy. In Saskatchewan, the vast majority of the route will parallel the Foothills Pipeline constructed in 1981 as part of the Alaska Highway Gas Pipeline Foothills Prebuild. The Foothills Pipeline is a wholly owned subsidiary of TransCanada PipeLine Limited. In Saskatchewan, the Project passes along the southwestern corner of the Great Sandhills (GSH) and crosses into the designated boundary of the GSH for a short distance (3.1 km) in the southern portion of Township (TWP) 13 (see Figure 1-1). The land along this section of the Project right-of-way (ROW), within the designated boundary of the GSH, (NW 31 and SW & SE 2-13-24 W3M) is very gently undulating. Land use includes native range interspersed with cultivated land and hay/tame pasture. Land in the northern portion of Township 13 (beyond the GSH boundary) is comprised of rangeland with stabilized dunes and variable topography. Sections of the pipeline in TWP 13 were paralleled n 1997, resulting in a new disturbance immediately adjacent (to the south/west) to the existing Foothills ROW. The GSH area is recognized as being environmentally sensitive and potentially difficult to reclaim after surface disturbances, due to the arid climate and the high sand content in the soils (GSHES 2007). The Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) filed as part of TransCanada Keystone’s Section 52 Application indicates (Specific Measures, Page A-48) that a “detailed Reclamation Plan” will be developed for the GSH in consultation with regulatory agencies. Saskatchewan Environment, in a Letter of Comment to the NEB, dated 27 July (SE 2009), has requested, among other items, that “the plan should include experience gained from reclamation research associated with construction of the Foothills Pipeline in the same area (e.g., vegetation trials undertaken by Dr. David Walker)”. The following provides an overview of the GSH environmental setting and findings of revegetation research on sandy soils in southern Alberta and Saskatchewan. The majority of the information is drawn from the comprehensive pipeline revegetation study conducted by Walker (1987). Revegetation results of a more recent pipeline (the Express Pipeline) that passes through sandy soils are also included to provide information on revegetation of sandy soils using of a seed mix comprised entirely of species native to the area, as required by more current regulatory guidelines. 1 RGE. 26 RGE. 25 RGE. 24 RGE. 23 RGE. 22 RGE. 21 RGE. 20 TWP. 19 TWP. 18 TWP. 17 TWP. 16 TWP. 15 TWP. 14 TWP. 13 TWP. 12 Keystone XL Pipeline Great Sand Hills Boundary ES1 ES2 0 2 4 6 8 TWP. 11 Kilometres Kilometres - 1:400,000 JW-1028274-356 PREPARED BY TransCanada Keystone Pipeline GP Ltd. AB PREPARED FOR SK BC Area of Interest Great Sand Hills Boundary FIGURE NO. USA Acknowledgements: Cimarron Engineering Ltd.; Base data supplied by the Government of Saskatchewan. -1 1 Last Modified: Feb.19, 2010 By:rmeyers KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PROJECT GREAT SANDHILLS RECLAMATION PLAN Literature Review August 2018 1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Topography in the northern portion of TWP 13, in the area of the Walker (1987) study site, ranges from sand flats to gently to strongly rolling sand dunes, the most prominent being two transverse dunes at Keystone XL Fox Valley Section KP 31.4 and KP 32.0. The proposed Project ROW is stable with a natural cover of mixed grasses and forbs with stands of aspen poplar (Populus tremuloides) in low-lying areas and open stands of western snowberry (Symphoricarpus occidentalis) and wolf-willow (Elaeagnus commutata). An unstable dune that will not be affected by the Project, approximately 200 m from the Project ROW (at KP 31.2) consists of an active blowout bowl that supports a thin cover of vegetation dominated by lance-leaf psoralea (Psoralea lanceolata). A dense stand of chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) and Wood’s rose (Rosa woodsii) stabilize the leeward slopes of the dune. Unstable dunes that occur in the area are vegetated by northern wheatgrass (Agropyron dasystachyum), and pioneer species such as lance-leaf psoralea, sand grass (Calamovilfa longifolia), Canada wild rye grass (Elymus canadensis), Indian rice grass (Oryzopsis hymenoides) and sand dropseed (Sporobolus cryptandrus). As the area stabilizes over time, the vegetation shifts to those species more common in mixed prairie, such as spear grass (Stipa comata), Junegrass (Koeleria macrantha), sedge (Carex eleocharis) and pasture sage (Artemisia frigida). Soils in the area are characterized as dune sands with a medium to fine-grained texture. Soil profile development is weak (KXL ESA, Section 8: Soils). The existing Foothills Pipeline ROW are stable. Much of the 1981 ROW and some of the 1997 ROW in the GSH remain fenced and are covered with a dense cover of grasses underlain by a thick cover of plant litter. Sections where the fence has been removed support plant cover similar to the adjacent native prairie; however, plant cover on the 1997 ROW is noticeably less abundant, given the difference in time since reclamation (13 years vs 29 years). Lance-leafed psoralea and other pioneering species are more common on the more recent ROW. 1.3 RESEARCH FINDINGS 1.3.1 Key Principles The key to erosion control of sandy soils is the reestablishment of a dense cover of perennial plants adapted to the environmental conditions of the region (Stoesz and Brown 1957). Several conditions must first be met: • The source of any incoming sand must be controlled or included in the area being stabilized. • The topography must be returned to the original shape or at least conform to the surrounding area. • The movement of sand must be controlled temporarily to allow time for the permanent vegetation to establish. 3 KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PROJECT GREAT SANDHILLS RECLAMATION PLAN Literature Review August 2018 1.3.2 Pipeline Revegetation Studies – NOVA A pipeline revegetation