HomeMy WebLinkAboutRevegetation and Reclamation PlanREVEGETATION AND RECLAMATION PLAN
PGX DOT CONVERSION PROJECT
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
MAY 2017
Prepared for:
BARGATH, LLC
Parachute, Colorado
APPENDIX E
REVEGETATION AND RECLAMATION PLAN
REVEGETATION AND RECLAMATION PLAN
PGX DOT CONVERSION PROJECT
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
MAY 2017
Prepared for:
BARGATH, LLC
2717 County Road 215, STE 200
Parachute, Colorado 81635
Prepared by:
LT ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
4600 West 60th Avenue
Arvada, Colorado 80003
(303) 433-9788
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 3
2.0 SOIL HANDLING............................................................................................................ 6
2.1 SALVAGE OF ON-SITE TOPSOIL.............................................................................. 6
2.2 ESTIMATED TIMETABLE.......................................................................................... 6
2.3 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS.................................................................. 6
2.4 DUST SUPRESSION MEASURES............................................................................... 7
2.5 SOIL REPLACEMENT.................................................................................................. 7
3.0 WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN.....................................................................................8
3.1 NOXIOUS WEEDS........................................................................................................ 8
3.2 OBSERVATIONS.......................................................................................................... 8
3.3 INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT..................................................................... 9
3.3.1 Prevention and Assessment of Noxious Weed Infestations ........................................ 9
3.4 TREATMENT AND CONTROL OF NOXIOUS WEED INFESTATIONS .............. 10
3.4.1 Herbicides................................................................................................................. 10
3.4.2 Mechanical Treatment.............................................................................................. 10
3.4.3 Grazing.....................................................................................................................10
3.4.4 Alternative Methods.................................................................................................. 10
3.5 RECOMMENDED TREATMENT STRATEGIES..................................................... 11
3.6 MONITORING.............................................................................................................13
4.0 SURFACE RECLAMATION PLAN............................................................................14
4.1 DISTURBANCE AREA............................................................................................... 14
4.2 RECLAMATION OBJECTIVES................................................................................. 14
4.3 REVEGETATION AND RESTORATION................................................................. 14
5.0 COST ESTIMATE.......................................................................................................... 16
6.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................17
3
1.1
PROJECT LOCATION..................................................................................................
1.2
EXISTING CONDITIONS............................................................................................. 3
1.3
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES................................................................................... 4
2.0 SOIL HANDLING............................................................................................................ 6
2.1 SALVAGE OF ON-SITE TOPSOIL.............................................................................. 6
2.2 ESTIMATED TIMETABLE.......................................................................................... 6
2.3 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS.................................................................. 6
2.4 DUST SUPRESSION MEASURES............................................................................... 7
2.5 SOIL REPLACEMENT.................................................................................................. 7
3.0 WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN.....................................................................................8
3.1 NOXIOUS WEEDS........................................................................................................ 8
3.2 OBSERVATIONS.......................................................................................................... 8
3.3 INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT..................................................................... 9
3.3.1 Prevention and Assessment of Noxious Weed Infestations ........................................ 9
3.4 TREATMENT AND CONTROL OF NOXIOUS WEED INFESTATIONS .............. 10
3.4.1 Herbicides................................................................................................................. 10
3.4.2 Mechanical Treatment.............................................................................................. 10
3.4.3 Grazing.....................................................................................................................10
3.4.4 Alternative Methods.................................................................................................. 10
3.5 RECOMMENDED TREATMENT STRATEGIES..................................................... 11
3.6 MONITORING.............................................................................................................13
4.0 SURFACE RECLAMATION PLAN............................................................................14
4.1 DISTURBANCE AREA............................................................................................... 14
4.2 RECLAMATION OBJECTIVES................................................................................. 14
4.3 REVEGETATION AND RESTORATION................................................................. 14
5.0 COST ESTIMATE.......................................................................................................... 16
6.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................17
FIGURE
FIGURE I PGX DOT CONVERSION PROJECT STORMWATER NOXIOUS
WEED LOCATIONS
Cxrtw?
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Bargath, LLC. (Bargath) proposes to install a 6" natural gas liquids (NGL) pipeline on private
surface in their Piceance Basin field, approximately 3.9 miles northwest of the town of Parachute
in Garfield County, Colorado (PGX DOT Conversion Project). The pipeline will tie into the
existing Williams Parachute Creek Gas Processing facility to the east and connect to the existing
Williams 6" NGL pipeline, tank, and pump facility to the west. The pipeline will be installed by
trenching techniques throughout most of the pipeline, and horizontal directional drilling will be
used to bore the pipeline under Parachute Creek (Figure 1). Per Garfield County requirements, a
grading permit is required for all projects involving excavation, grading, or earthwork
construction.
The following Revegetation and Reclamation Plan has been prepared in support of Bargath's
grading permit application, in accordance with the Garfield County Vegetation & Site Reclamation
Requirements. The purpose of the plan is to ensure that the development does not result in:
• Erosion and dust generation;
• The propagation of noxious weeds;
• The excessive loss of wildlife habitat and food sources; and
• Long-term visual eyesores. The financial security allows the County to perform
reclamation in the case that the developer abandons the project or does not perform
adequate reclamation.
Temporary disturbance during construction is estimated to be 2.57 acres. Following reclamation,
the long-term disturbance will encompass approximately 0.86 acres.
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The PGX DOT Conversion Project is located in Section 33, Township 6 South, Range 96 West
(Site; Figure 1). The pipeline construction arca will occur on 3 abutting privately owned parcels
(Table 1-1).
Table 1-1. Private land parcels in the pipeline right-of-way
Parcel Owner
Garfield County Parcel
Number
Bargath, LLC
217133100023
Bargath, LLC
217133100023
TEP Rocky Mountain, LLC
217133200019
1.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The pipeline alignment is composed primarily of desert shrubland vegetation, a small riparian area
(river crossing), and bare ground associated with existing activities, roads, and other disturbances
in the area. Common plants observed in the project area are described in Table 1-2.
Table 1-2. Common Plants Observed within the Project Area
Scientific name
Common Mame
USDA Plant Code
Acer negundo
Boxelder
ACNE2
Antelanchier alrrifolia
Serviceberry
AMAL2
Artemisia tridentata
Sagebrush
ARTR2
Bassia prostrata
Kochia
BAPR5
Bromus lectorunt
Cheatgrass
BRTE
Cardaria draba
Hoary cress
CADR
Cardruts nutans
Musk thistle
CANU4
Centaurea sp.
Knapweed
CENTA
Chenopodium sp.
Lambsquarter
CHENO
Cirshan arn,ense
Canada thistle
CIAR4
Convolvuhrs arvensis
Field bindweed
COAR4
Cynoglossrtrn ofcinale
Houndstongue
CYOF
Eremop}arum triticeum
Annual wheatgrass
ERTR13
Ericameria nauseosa
Rubber rabbitbrush
ERNA10
Grindelia sp.
Gumweed
GRIND
Halogeton glomeratus
Halogeton
HAGL
Lepidium pe{foliahvn
Clasping Pepperwecd
LEPE2
Pascopvrurn srnithii
Western wheatgrass
PASM
Populus deltoides
Cottonwood
PODE3
Sali_T sp.
Willow
SALIX
Sarcohants vermiculatus
Greasewood
SAVE4
Sphaeralcea coccinea
Scarlet globemallow
SPCO
1.3 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
Ground disturbing activities will be limited to the permitted areas, including approved right-of-
ways, staging areas, and access roads. If additional areas are required for the construction project,
amendments to the permit will be obtained prior to conducting further ground disturbance.
Stormwater controls may be placed outside the permitted areas as long as they do not interfere
with normal operations or sensitive areas. Table 1-3 describes the proposed schedule of activities:
Table 1-3. Estimated construction schedule
Task
Estimated Start Date*
Estimated End Date*
Contractor Mobilization
July 7, 2017
July 14, 2017
One -Call & Locates Completed
July 12, 2017
July 20, 2017
ROW Clearing & Grading
July 21, 2017
August 1, 2017
Horizontal Directional Drill Construction
August 3, 2017
August 16, 2017 f
Pipeline Construction
August 3, 2017
September 1, 2017
ROW Cleanup/Reclamation
September 4, 2017
September S, 2017
*Dates are subject to change pending receipt of all project permits and approvals.
�Xri.Off
2.0 SOIL HANDLING
Ground disturbing activities associated with the PGX DOT Conversion Project will include
construction areas as well as areas used for staging of personnel, equipment, and material necessary
for the project (Figure 1). Trenching will be utilized to bury the pipeline, except where it will be
bored under a section of Parachute Creek. Stormwater controls for the project activities are
outlined in detail in the Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP).
2.1 SALVAGE OF ON-SITE TOPSOIL
Removal and segregation of topsoil from areas required for material staging, directional boring, or
trenching during the construction project will be performed as follows:
• Strip topsoil from staging areas.
• The topsoil horizon or the top six inches, whichever is deeper, but no greater than six feet
will be stripped and stockpiled on location.
• Topsoil will be removed and stockpiled on location in an area that does not interfere with
day-to-day operations.
• Topsoil will be segregated from subsurface soils and characterized by changes in texture,
color, and/or consistency.
• Areas with little to no topsoil will be segregated as thoroughly as possible and stockpiled
as previously mentioned.
• Soil removal from trenching operations will be excavated using industry standard methods.
Excavated material will placed on the high side of the trench based on topography.
2.2 ESTIMATED TIMETABLE
Topsoil salvage piles will be replaced following trenching and boring activities, within
approximately 60 days following the start of construction (Table 1-2). If soils are not replaced
within 90 days from the initial excavation date, they will be compacted and tracked in using a track
dozer where tracks are perpendicular to water flow, to protect them from wind and runoff erosion.
Refer to the SWMP Appendix C — BMP Manual for design criteria.
2.3 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS
Sediment controls will be placed at the base of soil stockpiles. Sediment controls may include, but
are not limited to berms, straw wattle, or ditches. Combinations of these methods may be employed
as necessary for sediment control of runoff.
Seeding of the soils may be employed as a stabilization method to guard against erosion if soils
are not replaced within 90 days from the initial excavation date. A certified weed free seed mix
with a fast-growing cover crop may be used to establish a temporary vegetative cover of the soil
during the construction project.
2.4 DUST SUPRESSION MEASURES
Roads will be surfaced or dust inhibitors will be used if appropriate (e.g., surfacing materials, non -
saline dust suppressants, water, etc.). They will be used on roads and construction areas where
soils are susceptible to wind erosion, to reduce the amount of fugitive dust generated by traffic or
other activities. Speed limits will be enforced to the extent practicable on roads in and adjacent to
the project area, to further reduce fugitive dust.
2.5 SOIL REPLACEMENT
When the construction of the pipeline is complete and the staging areas are no longer needed,
segregated soils will be replaced as close as practicable to their original position. Topsoil will not
be used as fill or padding material for the pipeline or for roads. Reclamation of the site will be
performed per Section 4.0 below.
Jjr:it7v
3.0 WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN
A noxious weed survey was conducted within the proposed pipeline right-of-way on May 10,
2017. During the survey, common plant species were noted, and locations of identified State and
County listed noxious weeds were recorded using a handheld GPS Unit.
3.1 NOXIOUS WEEDS
Noxious weeds are plants that arc not native to an area and considered harmful to animals or the
environment. Most noxious weed species were introduced from Europe or Asia, either
accidentally or as ornamentals that have escaped. Once these non -natives are established in a new
environment they tend to spread quickly because the insects, diseases, and animals that normally
control them are absent. Noxious weeds are spread by man, animals, water, and wind. Prime
locations for the establishment of noxious weeds include: roadsides, sites cleared for construction,
areas that are overused by animals or humans, wetlands, and riparian corridors. Subsequent to
soil disturbances, vegetation communities can be susceptible to infestations of invasive or exotic
weed species. Vegetation removal and soil disturbance during construction can create optimal
conditions for the establishment of invasive non-native species. Construction equipment traveling
from weed infested areas into weed free areas could disperse noxious or invasive weed seeds and
propagates, resulting in the establishment of these weeds in previously weed free areas.
The Colorado Noxious Weed Act (State of Colorado 2005) requires local governing bodies to
develop noxious weed management plans. The State of Colorado and Garfield County maintain
a list of plants that are considered noxious weeds. The State of Colorado noxious weed list
includes three categories: List A, List B, and List C. List A species must be eradicated whenever
detected. List B species include weeds whose spread should be halted. List C species are
widespread, but the State will assist local jurisdictions which choose to manage those weeds.
Garfield County has developed a weed management program and has compiled a list of noxious
weeds in their county. List C species are not treated as noxious weeds for the purpose of this
document.
3.2 OBSERVATIONS
Twelve infestations of noxious weeds were observed in and around the project area on May 10,
2017. The twelve infestations consisted of five Colorado List B species, these included Canada
thistle (Cirshon arvense), hoary cress (Cardaria draha), houndstongue (Cynoglossunt officinale),
knapweed sp. (Centacrrea sp.) and musk thistle (Cardinrs nutans) (Table 3-1; Figure 1).
Table 3-1. Noxious Weeds Observed in Project Area
Common Name
USDA
Plant Code
1 �Approx.
I Latitude Longitude
Number
of Individuals
Hoary Cress
CADR
39.485559
-108.110981
50
75
Hoary Cress
CADR
39.485557
-108.110752
Knapweed sp.
CENTA 39.484921
-108.110315
30
�7
Table 3-1. Noxious Weeds Observed in Project Area
Common Name
USDA
Plant Code
Latitude
Longitude
Approx. Number
of Individuals
Knapweed sp.
CENTA
39.484818
-108.110536
30
Hoary Cress
CADR
39.484760
-108.110246
40
Hoary Cress
CADR
39.484402
-108.111420
70
Hoary Cress
CADR
39.484384
-108.110861
>100
Knapweed sp.
CENTA
39.484171
-108.111631
20
Canada Thistle
CIAR4
39.484042
-108.111850
10
Musk Thistle
CANU4
39.484004
-108.111961
100
Houndstongue
CYOF
39.483994
-108.111940
30
Knapweed sp.
CENTA
39.483723
-108.112265
30
3.3 INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT
Control of invasive species is a difficult task and requires intensive ongoing control measures.
Care must be taken to prevent damage to desirable plant species during treatments to avoid further
infestations by other pioneer invaders. Weed management is best achieved through a variety of
methods over a long period of time including: inventory (surveys), direct treatments, prevention
through best management practices, monitoring of treatment efficacy, and subsequent detection
efforts. Weed management strategies are utilized primarily to control existing species and to
prevent further infestations (existing and new species) rather than eradication. After successful and
effective management, decreases in infestation size and density can be expected, and after several
years of successful management practices, eradication is sometimes possible.
3.3.1 Prevention and Assessment of Noxious Weed Infestations
Weed management is costly and heavy infestations may exceed the economic threshold for
practical treatment_ Prevention is especially valuable in the case of noxious weed management.
Several simple practices should be employed to prevent most weed infestations. The following
practices should be adopted for any activity to reduce the costs of noxious weed control through
prevention:
• Prior to delivery to the site, equipment will be thoroughly cleaned of soils remaining from
previous construction sites which may be contaminated with noxious weeds.
• If working in sites with weed seed contaminated soil, equipment will be cleaned of
potentially seed bearing soils and vegetative debris at the infested area prior to moving to
uncontaminated terrain.
0 All maintenance vehicles will be regularly cleaned of soil.
• Avoid driving vehicles through areas where weed infestations exist.
Assessment of the existence and extent of noxious weeds for an area is essential for the
development of an integrated weed management plan. This report provides an initial assessment
of the occurrence of noxious weeds for the project area. To continue effective management of
noxious weeds, further inventory and analysis is necessary to 1) determine the effectiveness of
past treatment strategies; 2) modify the treatment plan if necessary; and 3) detect new infestations
early, resulting in more economical treatments.
3.4 TREATMENT AND CONTROL OF NOXIOUS WEED INFESTATIONS
There are several methods that are commonly used to treat noxious weed infestations. An overview
of the use of herbicides, mechanical treatment, grazing, and alternative methods is presented
below.
3.4.1 Herbicides
Annual and biennial weeds are best controlled at the pre -bud stage after germination or in the
spring of the second year. Several of the species identified in the survey are susceptible to
commercially available herbicides. Selective herbicides are recommended to minimize damage to
desirable grass species.
Professionals or landowners using herbicides must use the concentration specified on the label of
the container in hand. Herbicides generally do not work better at higher concentrations. Most
herbicide failures observed are related to incomplete control caused by high concentrations killing
top growth before the active ingredient can be transported to the roots through the nutrient
translocation process. Most herbicide applications should use a surfactant, if directed on the
herbicide label, or other adjuvant as called for on the herbicide label. A certified commercial
applicator is a good choice for herbicide control efforts. Restricted herbicides require a state
licensed applicator. An applicator has the full range of knowledge, skills, equipment, and
experience desired when dealing with noxious weeds.
3.4.2 Mechanical Treatment
Small isolated infestations of weed species can often be controlled with cutting and digging by
hand. For dense or more extensive infestations, mechanical treatments can be useful in
combination with chemical control. Effectiveness of mechanical control can often be increased
by severing the root just below the crown of noxious weeds. Weeds that easily re -sprout from
rootstocks, such as Canada thistle and Russian knapweed, may increase rather than decrease if
mechanical control is the only method used.
3.4.3 Grazing
In the event grazing is allowed in the project area it will be deferred in reclaimed areas until the
desired plant species that have been seeded are established.
3.4.4 Alternative Methods
Biological control of noxious weeds may be feasible for some weed species found along the
proposed pipeline alignment. The musk thistle seed head weevil, Rhinoc}illus couicus, for example,
A��
is a biological control agent for musk thistle (Roduner et al. 2003). This weevil may be useful for
reducing musk thistle, but significant results may take several years.
An alternative method to assist revegetation, particularly where there is poor or destroyed topsoil,
is the application of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, typically referred to as AMF. These
fungi, mostly of the genus Glomus, are symbiotic with about 80 percent of all vegetation. Endo-
mycorrhizal fungi are associated mostly with grasses and forbs and could be helpful when
reclaiming this project. In symbiosis, the fungi increase water and nutrient transfer capacity of the
host root system by as much as several orders of magnitude (Barrow and McCasIin 1995).
Over-the-counter commercial AMF products, which are better adapted to coating seeds when
reseeding and treating roots of live seedling trees and shrubs at time of planting, come in powder -
form and are available from many different sources. Some also come in granular form to be spread
with seed from a broadcast spreader. The best AMF products should contain more than one species.
All Colorado State Forest Salida District tree and shrub plantings include the application of AMF
(Tischler 2006). Most, if not all, Colorado Department of Transportation revegetationlreseeding
projects now require use of AMF and BioSol, a certified by-product of the penicillin manufacturing
process composed primarily of mycelium.
Compacted soils respond well to fossilized humic substances and by-products called humates.
These humates, including humic and fulvic acids and humin were formed from pre -historic plant
and animal deposits and work especially well on compacted soils when applied as directed.
3.5 RECOMMENDED TREATMENT STRATEGIES
Treatment strategies are different depending on plant type, and are summarized below. It is
important to know whether the target is an annual, biennial, or perennial to select strategies for
effective control and eradication. Both biennial and perennial weeds were observed during the
May 2017 weed survey (Table 3-2).
In general, recommended treatment strategies for annual and biennial noxious weeds to prevent
seed production include:
Hand grub (pull), hoe, till, cultivate in rosette stage and before flowering or seed maturity.
If seeds develop, cut and bag seed heads.
• Cut roots with a spade just below soil level.
• Treat with herbicide in rosette or bolting stage, before flowering.
Mow biennials after bolting stage but before seed set. Mowing annuals will not prevent
flowering but can reduce total seed production. (Sirota 2004)
Treatment strategies for perennials to deplete nutrient reserves in root system and prevent seed
production:
• Allow plants to expend as much energy from the root system as possible. Do not treat when
first emerging in spring, but allow growth to bud/bloom stage. if seeds develop cut and
bag if possible.
• Herbicide treatment at bud to bloom stage or in the fall (recommended after August 15
when natural precipitation is present). In the fall, plants draw nutrients into the roots for
winter storage. Herbicides will be drawn down to the roots more efficiently at this time due
to translocation of nutrients to roots rather than leaves. If the weed patch has been present
for a long period of time another season of seed production is not as important as getting
the herbicide into the root system. Spraying in fall (after middle August) will kill the
following year's shoots, which are being formed on the roots at this time.
Mowing usually is not recommended because the plants will flower anyway, rather, seed
production should be reduced. Many studies have shown that mowing perennials and
spraying the regrowth is not as effective as spraying without mowing. Effect of mowing is
species dependent therefore it is imperative to know the species and its basic biology.
Timing of application must be done when biologically appropriate, which is not necessarily
convenient.
• Tillage may or may not be effective. Most perennial roots can sprout from pieces only 0.5-
1.0 inches long. Clean machinery thoroughly before leaving the infested area.
• Hand pulling is generally not recommended for perennial species unless you know the
plants are seedlings and not established plants. Hand pulling can be effective on small
patches but is very labor intensive because it must be done repeatedly (Sirota 2004).
Note that herbicides should not always be the first treatment of choice when other methods can be
effectively employed.
Recommended control methods for the listed noxious weed species found in the project area are
described in Table 3-2.
Table 3-2. Recommended Weed Control Methods
Common Name
Scientific Name
(USDA Plant Code)
Type*
Control Methods
Canada Thistle Reseeding with competitive plants is necessary; mowing
Cirsium arvense P every 2 weeks over 3 growing seasons; mowing followed by
(CIAR4) fall herbicide application.
Houndstongue Reseed disturbed sites with fast growing grasses, physical
Cpnoglossuin ofCinale B removal of plants at flowering or early seed formation,
(CYOF) herbicides at pre -bud or rosette stage.
Hoary Cress
Cardaria draba P Apply herbicide in the fall. Plant competitive grasses.
(CADR)
Knapweed Reseeding with competitive plants, mowing every 2 weeks
Centaurea sp. P over 3 growing seasons, mowing followed by fall herbicide
(CENTA) application.
�Xrit.07F
Table 3-2. Recommended Weed Control Methods
Common Name
Scientific Name
Type*
Control Methods
(USDA Plant Code)
e
M Thistle k
MusThis
Apply herbicide in the fall. Plant competitive grasses. Musk
nutans
B
thistle seed head weevil.
(CANU4)
* B = biennial; P perennial
3.6 MONITORING
Areas where noxious weed infestations are identified and treated will be inspected over time to
ensure that control methods are working to reduce and suppress the identified infestation. The
sites will be monitored until the infestations are eliminated or reduced to acceptable levels. These
inspections can then be used to prioritize future weed control efforts.
4.0 SURFACE RECLAMATION PLAN
The SWMP contains mitigation measures designed to reduce or eliminate sediment moving off-
site or into area drainage ways prior to site stabilization. Interim reclamation activities, including
reestablishment of vegetation cover will facilitate stabilization of the disturbed areas and, once
accomplished, will eliminate the potential for sediment transport from areas disturbed by project
activities. Changes and additions to a Surface Reclamation Plan may be necessary over the lifetime
of a site to achieve the reclamation objectives and standards. Disturbed areas will be reclaimed
after construction is complete.
4.1 DISTURBANCE AREA
The total area of surface disturbance at the site is approximately 2.57 acres. The total disturbance
area includes 0.86 acres of permanent ROW, 1.26 acres of construction workspace, and 0.45 acres
of temporary work space. The disturbance area calculations do not include 0.21 acres of permanent
ROW where the pipeline will be installed using horizontal directional drilling as surface
disturbance is not anticipated. The site boundaries, and areas of disturbance are identified on
Figure 1.
4.2 RECLAMATION OBJECTIVES
The objective of final surface reclamation is to return the land, following use for energy
development, to a condition approximating that which existed prior to disturbance. This includes
restoration of the landform and natural vegetative community, hydrologic systems, ecological
function and other natural resource values to maintain healthy, biologically active topsoil; to
control erosion and sediment transport; and to minimize loss of habitat, forage, and visual
resources. Surface reclamation will be judged successful when disturbed areas have been re-
contoured, stabilized, and re -vegetated with a self-sustaining, vigorous, diverse, native (or
otherwise approved) plant community sufficient to minimize visual impacts, provide forage,
stabilize soils, and impede the invasion of noxious weeds.
4.3 REVEGETATION AND RESTORATION
Disturbed areas will be seeded using seed mixes appropriate to the location (Table 4-1), based on
the common plants observed during the May 2017 weed survey (Table 1-2). Prior to seeding, local
soil conservation authorities with the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service, surface
owners and/or reclamation contractors familiar with the area may be consulted regarding other
seed mixes to be utilized. The seed mix is subject to change.
Table 4-1. Recommended Seed Mix to Be Used for Revegetation
v -7
AV
lii7�'.w
Drilled
Scientific Name
Common Name
Variety
Application Rate
PLS lbs./acre)
Atr iplet canescens
Four -winged saltbush
Rincon
3.70
Atr•ipler co fer7ifolia
Shadscale saltbush
2.00
v -7
AV
lii7�'.w
Arteruisia tridentata subsp.
fJ�yomin ensis
Wyoming big sagebrush
Hobble
Creek
0.05
Pascop iwni surithii
Western wheatgrass
Arriba
3.00
Pleuraphis janresii
Galleta
Viva
1.80
Sporobohrs airoides
Alkali sacaton
Salado
0.20
Poa secunda
Sandberg bluegrass
0.40
Onobrychis viciifolia
Sainfoin
Eski
7.30
Total
18.45
Weed -free seeds will be planted in the amount specified in pounds of pure live seed (PLS) per
acre. No primary or secondary noxious weeds will be in the seed mix. The re-establishment of
vegetative cover as well as watershed stabilization measures will be scheduled during the working
season and before the succeeding winter. Re -vegetation will be accomplished as soon as practical
following the reclamation of a pipeline. Mulch will be laid down during re -vegetation as
appropriate. The cut vegetation and rocks will act like mulch in the areas where they are applied.
Where straw or hay mulch is applied, the mulch will be applied and crimped into the soil.
Seeding rate should be doubled for broadcast application. The preferred seeding method is multiple
seed bin rangeland drill. In areas with slope greater than 3%, imprinting of the seed bed is
recommended. Imprinting can be in the form of dozer tracks or furrows perpendicular to the
direction of slope. When hydro -seeding or mulching, imprinting should be done prior to seeding
unless the mulch is to be crimped into the soil surface. If broadcast seeding and harrowing,
imprinting should be done as part of the harrowing. Furrowing can be done by several methods,
the simplest of which is to drill seed perpendicular to the direction of slope in a prepared bed.
Other simple imprinting methods include deep hand raking and harrowing, always perpendicular
to the direction of slope.
Alternative seeding methods include, but are not limited to:
• Harrow with just enough soil moisture to create a rough surface, broadcast seed and re -
harrow, preferably at a 90 -degree angle to the first harrow.
• Hydro -seeding (most economical in terms of seed cost).
• Hand raking and broadcast followed by re -raking at a 90 -degree angle to the first raking.
The need for fertilizers will be determined in conjunction with the landowner. If fertilization is
necessary, the rates of application will be based on site-specific requirements of the soil.