Laserfiche WebLink
Vantage to Pomona Heights Executive Summary <br />230 kV Transmission Line Project FEIS October 2016 <br /> PAGE ES-vii <br />Cultural Resources and Native American Concerns <br />Total ground disturbance and, therefore, potential for disturbance of cultural sites would be least for the <br />Agency Preferred Alternative (204 acres) and most for Alternative F (349.9 acres). The Agency Preferred <br />Alternative corresponds to the highest total number of previously identified cultural resources including: <br />traditional cultural properties; archaeological sites; isolated finds; architectural resources; and ineligible <br />(or assumed ineligible), recommended, unevaluated or determined eligible National Register Sites within <br />75 feet of the proposed Project centerline. Comprehensive surveys along all Project Action Alternatives <br />have not been completed and, therefore, the total number of cultural resources could change if future <br />surveys are conducted. However, the majority of the NNR Alternative has been previously surveyed for <br />cultural resources and portions of some route segments have been surveyed recently by the Yakama <br />Nation Cultural Resource Program for this Project. <br />It has been assumed that visually sensitive cultural resources include those with burials, rock features <br />(cairns, alignments), talus pits, rock art (pictographs and petroglyphs), and rockshelters. The numbers of <br />visually sensitive cultural resources are similar for the Agency Preferred Alternative and other NNR <br />Alternative options (24). Alternatives B and C have the highest number of resources that may be <br />potentially visually sensitive (32) closely followed by Alternatives E and G (31). Alternatives F and H <br />have the least number or resources (6) that may be potentially visually sensitive. <br />Wildland Fire <br />The Agency Preferred Alternative and NNR Alternative – Underground Design Option have the lowest <br />number of miles with moderate impacts (5.3 miles each) and the lowest number of miles identified as no <br />identifiable impacts (2.0 each). Alternative H has the highest number of miles with moderate impacts <br />(21.8 miles), which is attributed to locations with higher firefighting complexity due to the presence of <br />multiple transmission lines. Alternative A has the highest number of miles with low impacts (39.5) and <br />Alternative G has the lowest number of miles with low impacts (26.2). Alternative G has the highest <br />number of miles identified as no identifiable impacts (21.9). High impact levels are not anticipated for <br />any of the Action Alternatives. <br />Climate and Air Quality <br />Implementation of any of the Action Alternatives would have similar emissions and impacts on air <br />quality. The same or similar construction equipment would be used and construction would occur over <br />approximately the same time frame. Potential differences could occur in the amount of fugitive dust <br />generated from earth-moving operations associated with the Action Alternatives and design options <br />because these options would have varying amounts of surface disturbance and differences in terrain. <br />Underground construction activities would disturb more land than overhead construction activities due to <br />total vegetation removal and trenching of the ROW for installation of the underground cable duct bank. <br />Impacts to air quality are expected to be short-term, localized and low. <br />Impacts to global climate change associated with implementation of the proposed Project cannot be <br />determined because established mechanisms to accurately predict the effect of resource management- <br />level decisions do not exist. However, as the proposed Project would result in minimal long-term <br />emissions of greenhouse gases, primarily associated with maintenance activities, the long-term climate <br />impacts would not be considered adverse. <br />Water Resources <br />No long-term disturbance to water resources would occur with the construction, operation, and <br />maintenance of any of the Action Alternatives. Differences in impact levels are very similar for all Action <br />Alternatives with the majority of the impacts categorized as no identifiable. The NNR Alternative – MR