DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan and Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the Exxonmobil

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Final Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan and Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the ExxonMobil Pipeline Company July 1, 2011 Yellowstone River Oil Spill Prepared by State and Federal Trustees State of Montana and U.S. Department of the Interior January 2017 Final Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan And Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the ExxonMobil Pipeline Company July 1, 2011 Yellowstone River Oil Spill Prepared by: State and Federal Trustees State of Montana and U.S. Department of the Interior January 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On or about July 1, 2011, a 12-inch diameter pipeline (Silvertip Pipeline) owned by ExxonMobil Pipeline Company ruptured near Laurel, Montana, resulting in the discharge of crude oil into the Yellowstone River and floodplain. The discharge is estimated to have been approximately 63,000 gallons (about 1,500 barrels) of oil. The discharge occurred during a high-flow event, with oil affecting approximately 85 river miles and associated floodplain. The discharge, along with associated response activities, adversely affected natural resources within the jurisdictions of the United States and the State of Montana, the Yellowstone River and adjoining shorelines, including, but not limited to, the floodplain, shoreline, wetlands and other riparian areas, islands, fields, pastures, bottomlands, grasslands and shrublands. This final Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment for the ExxonMobil Pipeline Company July 1, 2011 Yellowstone River Oil Spill (restoration plan) has been prepared by the State of Montana and the U.S. Department of the Interior, collectively acting as Trustees for the restoration of natural resources and public use services that were exposed and/or injured by the Yellowstone River oil spill. This document is intended to inform the public about the natural resource injuries caused by the oil spill and potential restoration projects that could compensate for those injuries. The natural resource damage assessment is being performed pursuant to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) (33 USC §§ 2701, et seq.), by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), represented by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the Governor of the State of Montana, collectively known as the Trustees. The BLM and State of Montana are co-lead administrative Trustees. This final restoration plan includes several restoration project types to be undertaken on the Yellowstone River and related area. This final restoration plan also serves as an environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 USC §§ 4321, et seq.) and the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) (75-1-102, MCA, et seq.). This document addresses the potential impact of the Trustees’ proposed restoration actions on the quality of the physical, biological, and cultural environment. INJURED RESOURCES AND RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES Oil from the spill, along with spill response and cleanup activities, harmed fish, wildlife and their habitats and other natural resources in and around the Yellowstone River. The spill also impacted the recreational use of the river and public sites along the river. Categories of injuries include: Injuries to terrestrial/riparian habitat and supported biota, through exposure to oil and disturbance caused by response activities. Injuries to large woody debris piles, through exposure to oil and disturbance by response activities. Injuries to riverine aquatic habitat and supported biota, including fish injuries, caused by exposure to oil. i Injuries to birds through exposure to oil and disturbance by response activities, specifically injuries to cavity-nesters and American white pelican. Human service losses, including recreational angling and park use. The Trustees evaluated a range of restoration alternatives comprised of primary and/or compensatory restoration components that address specific injuries associated with the oil spill, and in total would make the environment and public whole. Primary restoration actions directly restore the natural resources and services to pre-spill conditions on an accelerated timeframe compared to natural recovery. Compensatory restoration actions would provide resource services to compensate the public for losses pending recovery of resources injured by the oil spill. The Trustees have identified preferred restoration alternatives designed to address the resource injuries. Project types include: Acquiring terrestrial/riparian bottomland to conserve terrestrial habitat and bird resources Acquiring and restoring terrestrial/riparian habitat Controlling invasive woody species on state and federal lands Acquiring channel migration or other easements or fee title land acquisitions to provide areas for large woody debris recruitment Removing flanked riprap from the river Removing side channel blockages and reactivating old oxbows and backchannels Providing fish passage around fish barriers Restoring and stabilizing river banks using soft bank restoration techniques Increasing American white pelican production through improvement of breeding and nesting areas Improving city parks and public lands bordering the Yellowstone River Improving urban fishing opportunities adjacent to the Yellowstone River Developing additional access locations or preserving existing access on the Yellowstone River Table ES-1 summarizes the injuries and restoration alternatives considered by the Trustees. DOCUMENT SUMMARY This final restoration plan presents information about the release, response, legal authorities, proposed settlement with the responsible party ExxonMobil Pipeline Company, and public involvement (Chapter 1), information about the affected environment (Chapter 2), the Trustees’ ii estimates of exposure and/or injury and service losses to natural resources caused by the oil spill (Chapter 3) and the Trustees’ proposed preferred restoration alternatives (Chapter 4). Analysis of the restoration alternatives under OPA selection criteria is in Chapter 5. Analysis of the proposed Trustee actions pursuant to NEPA and MEPA is provided in Chapter 6. A restoration implementation plan, including project selection, is included in Chapter 7. Preparers and entities consulted are listed in Chapter 8, applicable laws and policies are listed in Chapter 9. References are included in Chapter 10. Maps are located after the references. Seven technical appendices are also attached: Appendix A is an environmental assessment checklist template; Appendix B is a list of scientific and common names of species on the Yellowstone River, including Montana species of concern; Appendix C summarizes terrestrial/riparian, large woody debris, and riverine aquatic injuries; Appendix D summarizes bird injuries; Appendix E provides analysis of the lost recreational uses; Appendix F contains a more detailed explanation of the process the State Trustee will use to implement projects; and Appendix G contains the public comments received on the draft restoration plan and the Trustees’ responses to comments. PUBLIC COMMENT Public review of the draft restoration plan is an integral component of the restoration planning process. The Trustees encouraged public input on the draft restoration plan. The public comment period was 41 days, and was announced when the plan was released. The public comment period was announced via a press release, and the document was posted on the Montana Department of Justice web page (https://dojmt.gov/lands/yellowstone-river-oil-spill/) and BLM web page (http://www.blm.gov/mt/st/en/fo/billings_field_office.html). Written comments on the draft restoration plan were sent via e-mail to: [email protected] with “Yellowstone restoration plan comment” in the subject line. Or by U.S. mail to: Natural Resource Damage Program Attn: Yellowstone Restoration Plan PO Box 201425 Helena, MT 59620-1425 The Trustees reviewed and considered comments received during the public comment period while preparing the final restoration plan. All comments submitted during the period for public comment were considered by the Trustees prior to finalizing the restoration plan. The public comment period for the draft restoration plan ran from September 21, 2016 through 5:00 PM on October 31, 2016. Starting on September 21, the document was available electronically through the Montana Natural Resource Damage Program website: https://dojmt.gov/lands/yellowstone-river-oil-spill-July-2011/. The Trustees held a press conference in Laurel, Montana on September 21, 2016, to announce a proposed settlement between the federal and State governments and Exxon, and availability of the draft restoration plan. The press event and document release resulted in several articles in local and nationally established media outlets. The availability of the draft and comment opportunity were referenced in a Federal Register Notice of Availability published on September 28, 2016, and legal notices published on September 28, 2016 in the Billings Gazette, Helena Independent Record, Missoula’s Missoulian, and Butte’s Montana Standard newspapers. On September 22, 2016, the Trustees sent notices of the draft restoration plan comment opportunity to over 50 individuals and entities on its mailing list. On October 12, 2016, the Trustees presented the draft iii restoration plan at a public meeting in Billings and took verbal comments. Over 30 people attended the meeting. The public meeting was advertised
Recommended publications
  • Follow the Story

    Follow the Story

    FOLLOW THE STORY What is history, if not a collection of stories told through different perspectives? In Southeast Montana, natural beauty blends with the rich history of the Old West, along with the TRACE HISTORY IN SOUTHEAST MONTANA traditions of the Crow and Northern Cheyenne tribes, to transport you to storied days gone by. Walk over the battlefields where brave warriors and soldiers laid down their lives. Follow the courageous footsteps of Lewis and Clark. Or, experience the dynamics that ranching and railroad brought to these rolling prairies. 8 Frontier Gateway Museum There is no doubt that the individuals, families and native peoples who made Southeast Montana Glendive 14 Pierre Wibaux Museum their home were a hardy bunch. As you peruse the many museums, heritage centers and historic MAKOSHIKA STATE PARK sites across Southeast Montana, put yourself in their shoes, read their stories and understand their 253 journeys. That is what makes history. Wibaux 94 For, without history, we have no story. Write yours Out Here. 34 Miles to Theodore Terry Roosevelt MUSEUM, VISITOR CENTER OR HISTORICAL SOCIETY Fallon National Park Prairie County Museum Preserving the past of Southeast Montana 11 and Evelyn Cameron Gallery 7 NATIONAL MONUMENT OR STATE PARK 87 11 Evelyn Cameron Heritage A landscape of historical treasures Visitor Information Center 12 Melstone Ingomar 94 Montana State Park PIROGUE Ismay ISLAND 9 O’Fallon Historical Museum 12 12 Plevna Harlowton Miles City Baker 1 Range Riders Museum Roundup 12 89 12 Treasure County Rosebud County
  • Yellowstone County Long Range Plan 2019

    Yellowstone County Long Range Plan 2019

    Yellowstone County USDA-NRCS Long Range Plan Seanna Torske, Supervisory District Conservationist, Hardin Shalaine Watson, District Conservationist, Billings Crow Agency, Hardin, and Billings Work Unit UIndex: USection I. Introduction USection II. Natural Resource Inventory • Humans o Land Cover o Ownership o Montana Ag Statistics o County Demographics • Soils o Major Land Resource Areas (MLRAs) • Water o Climate o Watersheds/Streams o Irrigated Lands, Water Rights, Irrigation Districts o 303(d) Listed Streams o Geology and Groundwater • Air & Energy • Plants & Animals o Animal Feeding Operations/Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (AFO/CAFO) o Wildlife o Fish o Threatened & Endangered Species USection III. Conservation Activity Analysis USection IV. Natural Resource Problems and Desired Future Outcomes • Dry Cropland • Irrigated Cropland • Pasture • Rangeland • Headquarters • Forestland • Resource Inventory o Soil Erosion o Soil Quality o Water Quality/Quantity o Plants o Animal USection V. Prioritization of Natural Resource Problems and Desired Outcomes • Local Working Group Meeting Minutes • Local Working Group Questionnaire USection VI. Focused Conservation Strategies and Education Outreach • Targeted Implementation Plans • Education/Outreach USection VII. References and Maps • References • Maps Yellowstone County Long Range Plan USection I. Introduction – Vision: Commitment to local action, achieving effective land stewardship. Mission: Successfully collaborate on watershed or landscape-wide conservation projects in order to address resource concerns in Yellowstone County. Plan Purpose: To provide an overview of the condition of natural resources, provide a community profile, and highlight the resource concerns for each land use in Yellowstone County. This includes about a quarter of the Crow Indian Reservation. Entities Who Have Participated in the Development of this Plan: • USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service • Yellowstone Conservation District Estimated Timeframe Covered by this Plan: Fiscal Years 2020 through 2030.
  • Information to Users

    Information to Users

    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. ProQuest Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 UMI UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE DAMMING THE BIGHORN: INDIAN RESERVED WATER RIGHTS ON THE CROW RESERVATION, 1900-2000 A dissertation SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By MEGAN KATHLEEN BENSON Norman, Oklahoma 2003 UMI Number: 3082949 UMI* UMI Microform 3082949 Copyright 2003 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 © Copyright by MEGAN BENSON 2003 All Rights Reserved DAMMING THE BIGHORN: INDIAN RESERVED WATER RIGHTS ON THE CROW RESERVATION, 1900-2000 A Dissertation APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY BY Donald J.
  • Gbound Wateb in Yellowstone and Tseasube Counties Montana

    Gbound Wateb in Yellowstone and Tseasube Counties Montana

    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bar Lyman Wilbnr, Secretary U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY George Otto Smith, Director Water-Supply Paper 599 GBOUND WATEB IN YELLOWSTONE AND TSEASUBE COUNTIES MONTANA BY GEORGE M. HALL AND C. S, HOWARD Prepared in cooperation with the State Engineer; the Department of Chemistry of the Montana State Cortege, Bozeman; and the Water Laboratory of the Montana State Board of Health 'V UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1929 ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION HAT BE PROCURED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 25 CENTS PEE COPY CONTENTS Page ^Preface, by 0. E. Meinzer.___.__.__.... ___ v Introduction_______________________________ __ _._____. I Drainage.. ________________ _ ________________ _______ 3 Physiography, __ ___________________________ ____ 4 Situation and subdivisions.----.------------ _________________ 4 Bull Mountain upland_--______-_---_-_----_-_-___-----__ ___ 4 Plains.._______________________ __________ 6 Yellowstone River valley_-_--________---_____-----___-____--_- 7 Terraces.____________________________________________________ 8 Lake basins___________-_-_---_______-________________________ " 10 Faulted zone_________-_--__ ____-_-__-_-_-___-___-_-_-______. 13 Quality of water___________-__-_______-_-__________--_____________ 15 Rock formations and their water-bearing properties__ _--_-___-____ 28 General section______________-____-__-_________----______-_.__ 28 Quaternary alluvium__.,___---___-__--_-_-__-.------__-__---__-_ 32
  • Pompeys Pillar

    Pompeys Pillar

    Here is what you can do at CROSSROADS Pompeys Pillar: POMPEYS 1 1 PAST AND PRESENT, Facilities/ Summer Off Services Season* Season** Comments PRESFRv ED FOR YOU Visitor Center • PILLAR Gift Shop • How many times have you traveled somewhere and thought about who had been there before? Pompeys Drinking Water • Pillar is like a sandstone history book that reads like a who's who of western frontier history. Look on the NATIONAL HISTORIC rockface for the remains of animal drawings created by people who used the area for rendezvous, campsites, Interpretive Off season tours Tours O available by request LANDMARK and hunting. Restrooms • o Open year round Explorers also left their carvings on this "remarkable rock" with Captain William Clark's signature as the Boardwalk most notable. In 1804, President Thomas Jefferson sent the Lewis and Clark Expedition to explore the land to Signature O o Open year round acquired from France known as the Louisiana Purchase. RV Parking O MONTANA Picnicking O Wildlife Viewing o o Year round opportunities Bureau of Land Management ^Memorial Day weekend to September 30 **October 1 to Memorial Day weekend - gate closed, site open to Montana/Dakotas "I marked my name and the day of the month walk-in access, one mile walk and year," wrote Captain William Clark in his O - available • - available - fully accessible journal on Friday, July 25, 1806. This inscrip­ tion is the only surviving on-site physical remains of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. NEED MORE INFORMATION? Clark named this rock Pompy's Tower. Pompy — Call or visit us — was Clark's nickname for young Baptiste Charbonneau whose mother, Sacagawea, was Pompeys Pillar Visitor Center the party's interpreter.

  • Crow Indian Irrigation Project, Montana

    Crow Project Indian Projects Garrit Voggesser Bureau of Reclamation 2001 Table of Contents The Crow Project..............................................................2 Introduction to the Crow Project ............................................2 Project Location.........................................................3 Historic Setting .........................................................3 Project Authorization.....................................................7 Construction History .....................................................7 Reclamation......................................................8 Fort Custer Division................................................8 Waco-Sanders Division.............................................9 Big Horn Division................................................10 Summing Up Reclamation Work.....................................11 Construction By Indian Service............................................12 Settlement on Project Lands ..............................................14 Conclusion............................................................14 About the Author .............................................................15 Bibliography ................................................................16 Government Documents .................................................16 Books ................................................................16 Court Cases and Journal Articles...........................................17 Index ......................................................................18
  • Billings Tf/J&S

    Billings Tf/J&S

    Myaer House HABS No. MT-69-A 2747 Old Hardin Road • Lockwood Flats Billings tf/j&S Yellowstone County /^o.v ' Montana ,v mL </ . p} ; PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA Historical American Buildings Survey National Park Service Rocky Mountain Regional Office Department of the Interior P.O. Box 25287 * Denver, Colorado 80225 MYAER HOUSE HABS No. MT-69-A &C -fk\LL Location: 2747 Old Hardin Road, Lockwood (area), Billings, Yellow- ' stone County, Montana 59101. SEiSEiSWi Section 19, ''A~ Township 1 North, Range 27 East; UTM: 12/7OO870/5O7633O Present Owner: The site is owned by Mr. & Mrs. Gene Myaer (1809 Old Sorrel Trail, Billings) and Mr. & Mrs. Vernon Hoff, It is rented by Dudley and Dawn Lutton. Present Use: The site is a rural/suburban residence presently having no agricultural use. At the end of June, 1986, the present owners began to dismantle the barn, piece by piece. The barn no longer stands. The residence remains, but the proximity of the Johnson Lane Interchange on Interstate Highway 90 encourages commercial development of the property. Statement of Significance: The site is locally significant for its architectural importance as a representative example of Craftsman style house and barn combination construction, popularized by building guides and farm journals in Montana during the homesteading period, 1890-1930. It was determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places on January 2, 1986. PART I. HISTORICAL INFORMATION Date of Erection: The date(s) of construction is unknown, but is estimated to be between 1909 and 1919. The architectural style, site history, and agricultural history of the western United States indicate that the two structures were built at about that time.
  • ID O'donnell, Civic Capitalism, and the US Reclamation Service in the Ye

    ID O'donnell, Civic Capitalism, and the US Reclamation Service in the Ye

    1 Creating an Irrigator’s Reclamation Service: I. D. O’Donnell, Civic Capitalism, and the U. S. Reclamation Service in the Yellowstone Valley, 1900-1930 By Carroll Van West The capitalist transformation of rural America in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries is a central issue in American history. The economic development of the Yellowstone Valley of the northern plains between 1880 and 1920 mirrors the wider American experience in its intersection of governmental policy, the decisions of major corporate interests and international bankers, and the actions of local leaders. Throughout the Yellowstone, the passage of the Newlands Reclamation Act in 1902 and the creation of the United States Reclamation Service (USRS) encouraged local interests to think of their communities and their futures in new ways. Twenty years of agriculture in the valley was proof enough that farmers could not tame the region’s demanding environment, but they could replace nature with massive engineering works that they could control. Although privately funded ventures had started the valley’s irrigation, key civic capitalists in the Yellowstone were eager to exchange private development for federal funds and expertise to build a physical infrastructure for modern, market-driven farming. This exchange, however, was not a simple top-down reordering of the landscape and local economic priorities as dictated by federal policy. Rather, the goals and needs of local interests shaped the reclamation projects of the Yellowstone from the beginning, and the interaction between federal policy and local interests eventually led to basic change—a heightened regard for both irrigation and the individual farmer--in the United States Reclamation Service itself.
  • Summaries of Risk and Preparedness 4 Overview

    Summaries of Risk and Preparedness 4 Overview

    Chapter 4: Summaries of Risk and Preparedness 4 Overview 4.1 Wildland Fire Characteristics An informed discussion of fire mitigation is not complete until basic concepts that govern fire behavior are understood. In the broadest sense, wildland fire behavior describes how fires burn, the manner in which fuels ignite, how flames develop and how fire spreads across the landscape. The three major physical components that determine fire behavior are the fuels supporting the fire, the topography in which the fire is burning, and the weather and atmospheric conditions during a fire event. At the landscape level, both topography and weather are beyond our control. We are powerless to control winds, temperature, relative humidity, atmospheric instability, slope, aspect, elevation, and landforms. It is beyond our control to alter these conditions, and thus impossible to alter fire behavior through their manipulation. When we attempt to alter how fires burn, we are left with manipulating the third component of the fire environment, the fuels which support the fire. By altering fuel loading and fuel continuity across the landscape, we have the best opportunity to determine how fires burn. A brief description of each of the fire environment elements follows in order to illustrate their effect on fire behavior. 4.1.1 Weather Weather conditions are ultimately responsible for determining fire behavior. Moisture, temperature, and relative humidity determine the rates at which fuels dry and vegetation cures, and whether fuel conditions become dry enough to sustain an ignition. Once conditions are capable of sustaining a fire, atmospheric stability and wind speed and direction can have a significant affect on fire behavior.