DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NORTHERN BORDER REMOTE RADIO LINK PILOT PROJECT ESSEX AND ORLEANS COUNTIES, VERMONT February 2019 Lead Agency: U.S. Customs and Border Protection 24000 Avila Road, Suite 5020 Laguna Niguel, California 92677 Prepared by: Gulf South Research Corporation 8081 Innovation Park Drive Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70820 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background and Purpose and Need The area near the U.S./Canada International border in Vermont is extremely remote and contains dense forest and steep terrain intersected by numerous streams, lakes, and bogs. These conditions make it very difficult for U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) agents to patrol the area and communicate with each other and station personnel while on patrol. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Science and Technology Directorate (S&T), has developed a prototypical Remote Radio Link Project that includes the installation of a buried communications cable to enhance the communications capability and safety of Border Patrol agents who are conducting enforcement activities in these areas. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is assisting S&T in developing this Environmental Assessment (EA) to address the proposed installation and operation of the pilot project. The purpose of this pilot project is to determine the effectiveness of this type of remote radio link system in four-season weather. The need for the project is to identify such reliable communication methods that can enhance USBP enforcement activities and agent safety. Proposed Action The Proposed Action includes the installation, operation, and maintenance of a Remote Radio Link Pilot Project along the U.S./Canada International border west of Norton, Vermont. The project consists of the installation of a buried fiber-optic communication system within the International boundary, known as the Slash. The cable is proposed to be installed using a cable plow, trenchers, rock cutters, and directional drilling equipment and would extend for approximately 7 miles westward beginning about 1.5 miles west of the Norton Port of Entry. Three existing two-track access routes currently used as skidder trails would be improved to provide project access. Equipment and material would be staged during the installation phase at the existing Sugar Barn in a disturbed area that is routinely used for logging and syrup production equipment. In addition, electrical power is available at the Sugar Barn and would be used to power the fiber optic cable. Swanton Sector Remote ES-1 Draft EA Radio Link Pilot Project February 2019 Alternatives In addition to the No Action Alternative, two action items have been carried forward for analysis. The Full Build Alternative would be implemented for the entire 7-mile corridor. The Limited Build Alternative (Preferred Alternative) would involve installation of the cable as described above, but would be shortened in length to a total of approximately 5.5 miles. That is, the cable on the western side of Line Pond would be eliminated. The shorter amount of cable would still provide valuable information regarding the efficacy of the system and data collected from the pilot project could be used in developing similar projects in other northern regions of the United States. Environmental Consequences Based on review of past investigations and the Archaeological Resources Assessment prepared for the Proposed Action, no historic properties are anticipated to be adversely affected by the cable installation. Minor and temporary effects on soils, water quality, and air quality would occur during the cable installation activities. No effects on floodplains would occur although an estimated 4.9 acres of potentially jurisdictional waters of the U.S., including wetlands, are located along the project corridor. Impacts on these resources would be avoided or minimized by the use of ground protection matting, laying weighted cable on the bottom of streams or ponds with no trenching, or by conducting directional drilling. There are no activities that require dredge or fill activities anticipated for this project. Negligible to minor impacts on vegetation communities would occur, primarily due to two-track access route clearing. Some small saplings and brush that have grown up in canopy openings may be cleared. The Slash clearing is currently maintained by the International Boundary Commission, so no additional clearing of vegetation would be required to allow for installation of the cable. Wildlife could be temporarily disturbed by the sight or noise of installation equipment. No long-term adverse impacts would be expected. Two Federally listed species, Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) and northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), could occur near the project corridor. Limiting the cable installation activities to daylight hours, limiting the amount of habitat disturbed, and avoiding potential roost trees that could be used by bats would minimize potential effects on these two species and result in discountable impacts. Swanton Sector Remote ES-2 Draft EA Radio Link Pilot Project February 2019 Negligible and temporary beneficial effects would occur on socioeconomic resources as sales taxes and materials purchases would slightly increase during the project installation activities. No disproportionate impacts on minority or low-income populations, or children, would occur. Swanton Sector Remote ES-3 Draft EA Radio Link Pilot Project February 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... ES-1 1.0 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSED ACTION ........................................................... 1-1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION ......................... 1-2 1.4 SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND DECISION TO BE MADE .................................................................................................................. 1-2 1.5 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS . 1-4 1.6 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ................................................................................. 1-7 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ............ 2-1 2.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................................... 2-1 2.2 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES CARRIED FORWARD FOR ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 2-4 2.2.1 Alternative 1: No Action Alternative ...................................................... 2-4 2.2.2 Alternative 2: Full Build Alternative ...................................................... 2-5 2.2.3 Alternative 3: Limited Build Alternative (Preferred Alternative) .......... 2-5 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ... 3-1 3.1 CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................ 3-3 3.1.1 Affected Environment .............................................................................. 3-3 3.1.2 Environmental Consequences .................................................................. 3-7 3.1.2.1 Alternative 1. No Action Alternative ....................................... 3-7 3.1.2.2 Alternative 2. Full Build Alternative ....................................... 3-7 3.1.2.3 Alternative 3. Limited Build Alternative (Preferred Alternative) ............................................................................... 3-8 3.2 GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................................... 3-8 3.2.1 Affected Environment .............................................................................. 3-8 3.2.1.1 Geology ..................................................................................... 3-8 3.2.1.2 Soils .......................................................................................... 3-9 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................ 3-10 3.2.2.1 Alternative 1. No Action Alternative ..................................... 3-10 3.2.2.2 Alternative 2. Full Build Alternative ..................................... 3-10 3.2.2.3 Alternative 3. Limited Build Alternative (Preferred Alternative) ............................................................................. 3-12 3.3 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ....................................................... 3-12 3.3.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................ 3-12 3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................ 3-16 3.3.2.1 Alternative 1. No Action Alternative ..................................... 3-16 3.3.2.2 Alternative 2. Full Build Alternative ..................................... 3-16 3.3.2.3 Alternative 3. Limited Build Alternative (Preferred Alternative) ............................................................................. 3-17 3.4 AIR QUALITY .................................................................................................. 3-18 3.4.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................ 3-18 Swanton Sector Remote i Draft EA Radio Link Pilot Project February 2019 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences ...............................................................