Laserfiche WebLink
Vantage to Pomona Heights Executive Summary <br />230 kV Transmission Line Project FEIS October 2016 <br /> PAGE ES-iii <br />As proposed by Pacific Power, most of the proposed transmission line would be constructed on H-frame <br />wood pole structures between 65 and 90 feet tall and spaced approximately 650 to 1,000 feet apart <br />depending on terrain. The H-frame structures would typically be used in open flat to gently rolling terrain. <br />In developed or agricultural areas, single wood or steel monopole structures would be used. The single <br />pole structures would be between 70 and 110 feet tall and spaced approximately 400 to 700 feet apart. <br />The ROW width required for the H-frame structure type would range between 125 to 150 feet. The ROW <br />width for the single pole structure would range between 75 to 100 feet. Dead-end or angle structures <br />would require additional ROW width to accommodate guy wires and anchors. For the Columbia River <br />crossing below the Wanapum Dam or below the Priest Rapids Dam (depending on the Action <br />Alternative), steel lattice structures approximately 200 feet tall would be used to safely span the <br />approximate 2,800-foot crossing. The Project would also require upgrades to the Pomona Heights <br />Substation located east of Selah and the Vantage Substation located east of the Wanapum Dam. <br />Construction techniques considered in this FEIS are based on industry standards and methods used on <br />other transmission line projects. <br />ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS <br />Potential environmental impacts of the Action Alternatives are related to: vegetation and special status <br />plants; general wildlife and Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; Sage-Grouse) and their <br />habitat; agricultural, residential, and military land uses; recreational activities and the displacement of <br />recreational land uses; the visibility of the transmission line and roads from sensitive viewers; scenic <br />views and changes in natural scenery; potential incompatibility with the visual character of existing <br />development; transportation and roadway systems; archaeological resources and properties listed on the <br />National Register of Historic Places (National Register); sensitive Native American areas and uses; <br />communities and landowner economic effects; public health and safety; air quality, climate and global <br />warming; and Special Management Areas. Impacts are analyzed considering the implementation of <br />Required Design Features (RDFs) and other mitigation measures where applicable as discussed in <br />Chapter 2 and Chapter 4. <br />Vegetation <br />Long-term disturbance to vegetation would be similar for all the Action Alternatives ranging from <br />Alternative G with the least amount of disturbance (139.7 acres) to Alternative A with the most amount of <br />disturbance (210.1 acres). The Agency Preferred Alternative (NNR Alternative – Overhead Design <br />Option) would result in 163.5 acres of long-term disturbance. The Agency Preferred Alternative would <br />result in moderate impacts to 28.6 miles of vegetation, primarily associated with long-term disturbance to <br />sagebrush/perennial grassland communities. The scope and intensity of vegetation impacts would fall <br />near the middle range of all Action Alternatives considered. <br />The Agency Preferred Alternative would cross 8.4 miles of Washington Natural Heritage Program <br />(WNHP) special status plant species polygons, 2.7 miles of special status plant occurrences found during <br />Project-specific surveys, and no WNHP priority ecosystems. Of the nine Project Action Alternatives, the <br />Agency Preferred Alternative has among the lowest impacts to special status plant species and potential <br />special status plants suitable habitat. <br />Wildlife <br />The Agency Preferred Alternative would result in the least amount of direct disturbance to wildlife habitat <br />(204 acres, exclusive of Sage-Grouse habitat) and Sage-Grouse habitat (192 acres). This alternative would <br />also require the second fewest number of transmission structures (328). By comparison, the NNR <br />Alternative - Underground Design Option would require the fewest number of new structures (251),