Resource Concepts, Inc.

  • USDA
  • United States Department of Agriculture
  • Forest Service
  • Pacific Southwest Region
  • Eldorado National Forest
  • R5-MB-237
  • January 2012
  • USFS
  • State Clearing House #2009022100
  • KMPUD

Final
Environmental Impact Statement/
Environmental Impact Report

Kirkwood Meadows Power Line Reliability

Eldorado National Forest
Placerville, California 95667

Kirkwood Meadows Public Utility District
Kirkwood, California 95646

The files in this report are in Portable Document Format (PDF). To read them, you will need Adobe Reader or a similar PDF viewer. For best results, right-click the titles and choose Save As to download the files to your computer before reading.

 

  • Download Entire Report (.ZIP) (93 MB)
  • Volume I & II Master Table of Contents
  • VOLUME I
    • Volume I - Front Cover / Abstract / Executive Summary
    • Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need for Action
    • Chapter 2 - Project Description and Alternatives
    • Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
      ↓click to expand↓
      • Part 1 Introduction
      • Part 2 Land Use and Planning
      • Part 3 Aesthetics and Visual Resources
      • Part 4 Recreation
      • Part 5 Cultural (Heritage) Resources
      • Part 6 Traffic and Transportation
      • Part 7 Air Quality
      • Part 8 Greenhouse Gases
      • Part 9 Noise
      • Part 10 Vegetation Resources
      • Part 11 Fire and Fuels
      • Part 12 Geology
      • Part 13 Soil Resources
      • Part 14 Hydrology & Watershed Resources
      • Part 15 Aquatic Wildlife
      • Part 16 Terrestrial Wildlife
      • Part 17 Management Indicator Species
      • Part 18 Special Status Plant Species
      • Part 19 Noxious and Invasive Weeds
      • Part 20 Agricultural Resources
      • Part 21 Public Health and Safety
      • Part 22 Social and Economic Conditions
      • Part 23 Environmental Justice
      • Part 24 Other NEPA and CEQA Considerations and Issues
    • Chapter 4 - Monitoring
    • Chapter 5 - Consultation and Coordination
  • VOLUME II
    • Volume II - Front Cover/Abstract / Vol II Table of Contents
    • 1-Figures ↓click to expand↓
      • List of Figures
      • Figure 1 Vicinity Map
      • Figure 2.1 Alternatives 2, 3, & 4
      • Figure 2.2 Alternatives 2 & 3
      • Figure 2.3 Alternatives 2 & 3
      • Figure 3.1 KM Green Substation Plan View
      • Figure 3.2 KM Green Substation Vertical Profile
      • Figure 4 Representative Photosimulation of KM Green Substation Immediately After Construction
      • Figure 5 Sectionalizing Cabinet Detail
      • Figure 6 Power Line Buried Vault Detail
      • Figure 7 Volcano Telecommunications Vault Detail
      • Figure 8 Typical Transmission Line Construction Activities
      • Figure 9 Single Pole Structure with 115kV Overbuild
      • Figure 10 Single Pole Structure With 34.5kV Overbuild
      • Figure 11 Basic Transmission Line Wire-Handling Equipment
      • Figure 12 Typical Direct Burial Installation Detail
      • Figure 13 Typical Direct Burial Installation Profile
      • Figure 14 Typical 6” Conduit in Paved Road Installation Detail
      • Figure 14a Typical 6” Conduit with Spare Conduit
      • Figure 15 Buried Line in Paved Roadways Typical Equipment Staging
      • Figure 16 Typical KMPUD/Volcano Shared Trench Installation Detail
      • Figure 17 Steel Bridge Crossing Section
      • Figure 18 Typical Bridge Crossing Section
      • Figure 19 Trench Breakers
      • Figure 20 Meyers Service Route Alternatives
      • Figure 21 Minden Service Route Alternatives
      • Figure 22 Land Use Map
      • Figure 23 Zoning Map
      • Figure 24.1 Adopted Visual Quality Objectives
      • Figure 24.2 Adopted Visual Quality Objectives
      • Figure 24.3 Adopted Visual Quality Objectives
      • Figure 25 Developed Recreation Areas & Trails
      • Figure 26 California Wildlife Habitat Relationship Type
      • Figure 27 Fire History
      • Figure 28.1 Soil Mapping Units
      • Figure 28.2 Soil Mapping Units
      • Figure 28.3 Soil Mapping Units
      • Figure 29 Soil Erosion Hazard Rating
      • Figure 30 Distribution of Soil Disturbance Types
      • Figure 31 Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 7th Field Watersheds
      • Figure 32 Special Status Aquatic Species and Habitat
      • Figure 33 California Spotted Owl Protection Activity Centers and Home Range Core Areas
      • Figure 34 Special Status Plant Species and Fen Occurrences
      • Figure 35 Noxious and Invasive Weed Occurrences
      • Figure 36 Eldorado National Forest Grazing Allotments
      • Figure 37.1 Preferred Alternative
      • Figure 37.2 Preferred Alternative
      • Figure 37.3 Preferred Alternative
    • 2-References Cited (and cover sheet)
    • 3-Glossary (and cover sheet)
    • 4-Appendices ↓click to expand↓
      • List of Appendices
      • Appendix A Project Design Features and Selected USFS Best Management Practices (BMPs)
      • Appendix B State and Local BMPs Applicable Within Non-Federal Land
      • Appendix C Equipment Cleaning Clause
      • Appendix D Compaction Risk
      • Appendix E Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions
      • Appendix F The USDA Forest Service Visual Management System (VMS)
      • Appendix G Visual Resources Existing Condition Report
      • Appendix H Calculations for Evaluation of Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases
      • Appendix H Attachments
        • Attachment A. Year 1, Underground, Unpaved Conduit
        • Attachment B. Year 1, Underground, Paved Conduit
        • Attachment C. Year 1, Underground, Direct Bury
        • Attachment D. Year 1, Overhead
        • Attachment E. Year 1, KM Green
        • Attachment F. Year 1, KM Blue
      • Appendix I Hydrologic Information
      • Appendix J Instructions, California Soil Survey Committee (CSSC) Erosion Hazard Rating (EHR) System for Sheet and Rill Erosion
      • Appendix K Soil Map Unit Descriptions
      • Appendix L Response to Comments
  •  
  • Record of Decision
  •  

Final
Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report

Kirkwood Meadows Power Line Reliability Project

Amador, Alpine & El Dorado Counties, California

NEPA Lead Agency:

USDA Forest Service

CEQA Lead Agency:

Kirkwood Meadows Public Utility District

Responsible Official:

Kathryn D. Hardy, Forest Supervisor
Eldorado National Forest
100 Forni Road, Placerville CA 95667

For Information Contact:

Susan A. Rodman, Forest Planner
Eldorado National Forest
100 Forni Road, Placerville CA 95667
(530) 621-5298

 

Abstract: The Kirkwood Meadows Public Utility District proposes to construct a 34.5 kV power line for approximately 28 miles from interconnection to an existing PG&E-owned 115 kV power line near Salt Springs Reservoir in Amador County to Kirkwood, California. The project includes construction of two new KMPUD-owned substations and supporting power line facilities.

This Final Environmental Impact Statement / Report documents the analysis of four project alternatives. Alternative 1 is the No Action / No Project Alternative, and electric power for the Kirkwood Valley and mountain resort would continue to be generated by an in-valley powerhouse operated on diesel generators. Alternative 2 proposes a power line route that utilizes existing disturbance corridors to the greatest extent possible, while minimizing encroachment within the Caltrans right-of-way. Alternative 3 includes the same general route as Alternative 2, but provides several interchangeable segment alignments within Highway 88 to avoid environmental, cultural, and land ownership concerns. Alternative 4 is an alternative substation location that was developed in response to public scoping comments received which would reduce impacts to recreation and visual resources. Alternative 4 could be implemented in conjunction with either power line route described in Alternatives 2 and 3. The Agency Preferred Alternative selects segments from Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 power line routes and incorporates the Alternative 4 KM Green substation location at Cole Creek Road. The Agency Preferred Alternative would balance the encroachment of the Caltrans right-of-way with avoidance of impacts to cultural and natural resources. The Preferred Alternative would also reduce the hazard risk for snow mobile users, avoid potential impacts to recreational residence cabin owners, and reduce visual effects to recreation users and scenic resources.

Copyright ©1997-2012 Resource Concepts, Inc.