2.0 PROPOSED ACTION 

2.1 PROPOSED FACILITIES 

The proposed Project would consist of a 28-mile-long pipeline loop, one new compressor station, 

modifications to four existing compressor stations, and other associated aboveground facilities. 

Figure 1-1 is an overview map depicting the proposed locations of Project facilities; more detailed maps 

with the proposed locations of the pipeline route and aboveground facilities are provided in Appendix B. 

2.1.1 Pipeline Facilities 

Kern River proposes to construct, operate, and maintain approximately 28.0 miles of new 

36-inch-diameter interstate natural gas transmission pipeline in Utah (termed the Wasatch Loop). The 

proposed Wasatch Loop would extend southwest from a connection to the existing Kern River Gas 

Transmission System pipeline at existing Kern River milepost (KRMP) 96.4 in Morgan County (Wasatch 

Loop milepost [MP] 0.0), traverse Davis and Salt Lake Counties, and end at a connection to the existing 

Kern River Gas Transmission System pipeline at KRMP 124.5 (MP 28.0) in Salt Lake County. 

Figure 2.1.1-1 depicts the proposed route of the Wasatch Loop. 

The pipeline would be designed to provide approximately 266 MMcf/d of natural gas. The 

maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of the pipeline would be 1,333 pounds per square inch 

gauge (psig). 

2.1.2 Aboveground Facilities 

The Project would include one new compressor station; one new gas-fired, turbine-driven, 

centrifugal compressor at each of three existing compressor stations; replacement of a compressor at an 

existing compressor station; six MLVs to control the flow of gas within the pipeline; three pig launchers 

and two pig receivers. Table 2.1.2-1 lists aboveground facilities by facility type, milepost, and county. 

The proposed Milford Compressor Station would be located in Beaver County, Utah. Major 

equipment to be installed at the Milford Compressor Station includes a new Titan 250 compressor, three 

filet/separator units, a gas cooler, two MLVs, two pig launchers, and two pig receivers. A site plan for the 

proposed Milford Compressor Station is presented in figure 2.1.2-1. Additional compression would be 

installed at the Coyote Creek Compressor Station in Uinta County, Wyoming; the Elberta Compressor 

Station in Utah County, Utah; and the Dry Lake Compressor Station in Clark County, Nevada. At each of 

those compressor stations, a new Mars 100 compressor would be installed and the existing compressors at 

those stations would be “restaged” (adjusted) to accommodate the reduced flow through the existing 

compressors that would occur with use of both the existing compressors and the new compressors. The 

replacement compressor would be installed at the Fillmore Compressor Station in Millard County, Utah. 

Table 2.1.2-1 lists the locations and horsepower of the compressor stations. 

During a previous looping project, Kern River installed equipment in anticipation of a future loop 

to close the gap between KRMP 96.4 and KRMP 124.5. One of the two existing MLVs at MLV 

station 96 would be connected to the proposed pipeline at MP 0.0, and one of the MLVs at MLV 

station 124 would be connected to the Wasatch Loop at MP 28.0. Two new additional MLVs would be 

installed along the route at MPs 7.1 and 24.6. At the Milford Compressor Station, two new MLVs would 

be installed, one on each of the two existing Kern River pipelines (the mainline and the existing loop 

line). Table 2.1.2-1 lists the locations of each of the MLVs. 

2-1
!A

!A

!A

!A !A

!A

215

§ ̈¦

15

§ ̈¦

65 UV

66 UV

Bountiful

Farmington

Canyon Rim

Centerville

Salt Lake City

South Salt Lake

5 

28 25

20

15

10

CA

AZ

NV

NM

OR

CO

WY

UT

Date: March 2010 

APEX EXPAN

PROPOSED W

0 2.5 5 1.25

Miles

Project Area

 ̄

Legend

!A Milepost

Proposed Wasatch Loop

Utility Corridor

UWCNF-proclaimed boundary

Private lands within the UWCNF-proclaimed boundary

USFS-managed lands within the UWCNF-proclaimed boundary

Roadless Areas

2-2
TABLE 2.1.2-1 

Aboveground Facilities for the Proposed Apex Expansion Project 

Horsepowera

Facility 

County and 

State Milepostb Existing Additional 

New Milford Compressor Station Beaver, Utah KRMP 326.9 - 30,000 

Additional Compressor, Existing 

Coyote Creek Compressor Station 

Uinta, Wyoming KRMP 60.1 15,000 16,000 

Additional Compressor, Existing 

Elberta Compressor Station 

Utah, Utah KRMP 191.6 15,000 16,000 

Additional Compressor, Existing 

Dry Lake Compressor Station 

Clark, Nevada KRMP 500.1 15,000 16,000 

Replace Compressor, Existing 

Fillmore Compressor Station 

Millard, Utah KRMP 276.7 30,000 - 

MLV 96B Morgan, Utah MP 0.0c - - 

MLV 103B Morgan, Utah MP 7.1 - - 

MLV 121B Salt Lake, Utah MP 24.6 - - 

MLV 124B Salt Lake, Utah MP 28.0c - - 

2 MLVs at the Milford Compressor 

Station (one on the mainline, one 

on the existing loop line) 

Beaver, Utah KRMP 326.9 - - 

1 Pig Launcher Morgan, Utah MP 0.0 - - 

2 Pig Launchers and Pig 

Receivers at the Milford 

Compressor Station 

Beaver, Utah KRMP 326.9 - - 

____________ 

Notes: 

a

 Horsepower presented as ISO (International Organization for Standardization) rating. 

b

 KRMP = mainline (Kern River gas transmission pipeline) milepost; MP = Wasatch Loop milepost. 

c

 Mainline Valve (MLV) 96B and MLV 124B were constructed during a previous action but would be connected to the 

Wasatch Loop as a part of the proposed Apex Expansion Project. 

2-3
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Plot Plan for the Proposed Milford Compressor Station

Figure 2.1.2-1

PacifiCorp Electrical Distribution Line

2-4
An existing pig launcher barrel at MLV station 124 (MP 28.0) would be relocated to MLV 

station 96 (MP 0.0). Figure 2.1.2-2 is a plan view of the MLV and pig launcher and pig receiver at 

MP 0.0. Two new pig launchers and pig receivers would be installed at the Milford Compressor Station, 

one on the mainline and one on the existing loop line (see figure 2.1.2-1). 

There would not be any metering stations installed for the Apex Expansion Project. 

2.1.3 Cathodic Protection System 

The pipeline would be protected from corrosion by an impressed current cathodic protection 

system in accordance with USDOT Regulations under 49 CFR 192 (Transportation of Natural and Other 

Gas by Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety Standards). The cathodic protection system impresses a direct 

current on the pipe and a ground-bed of sacrificial anodes that would corrode instead of the pipe. The 

main components of the system are anode beds, rectifiers, and test stations. 

As specified by 49 CFR 192, aboveground cathodic protection system test stations would be 

located at about 1-mile intervals along the pipeline route. A cathodic protection system test station 

typically consists of test wires within a metal conduit, leading to a junction box. The conduit is supported 

with a painted metal punched post. 

A testing terminal is located at the top of the pipe that can be accessed by operations personnel to 

measure the current and determine the potential for corrosion. Kern River proposes to use the existing 

cathodic protection sites that are on the existing Kern River system. If testing indicates that additions to 

the system are necessary, Kern River would identify new sites or upgrade the existing system. New sites 

for the Project would be within either the existing Kern River right-of-way or the proposed Project rightof-way. 

2.1.4 PacifiCorp Electrical Distribution Line 

PacifiCorp would construct an approximately 1.4-mile-long 7.2 kV electrical distribution line 

from an existing 46-kV electrical sub-transmission line out of the South Milford Substation. This line 

would extend south from the substation along Imperial Avenue to the proposed Milford Compressor 

Station. The line would be supported on single wood pole “EJ” (raptor safe) type structures. The 

transmission line would cross about 1.1 miles (encompassing 3.43 acres) of BLM public land located in 

Beaver County, Utah. PacifiCorp proposes a right-of-way width of 25 feet, with the transmission line 

centered within the right-of-way. The power line is designed for and would operate at 72 kV for 30 years. 

The power line would require 23-single wood pole structures on BLM public land, and 9-single wood 

pole structures on private lands; no access road would be required for the placement of poles. All areas 

necessary for the construction and maintenance of the transmission line would be within the 25-foot-wide 

right-of-way. No toxic substances are proposed for use or storage, or would be generated or used during 

any phase of construction, and/or used for any phase of the electrical distribution line. Where 

appropriate, specific effects from the construction and operation of the electrical distribution line may be 

analyzed separately within the resource discussions throughout this EIS. However, if the effects are 

similar to those associated with the proposed Milford Compressor Station, then the analysis will be 

detailed within the discussion of the compressor station. 

2-5
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Plot Plan for the Mainline Valve, Pig Launcher, and Pig 

Receiver at Milepost 0.0

Figure 2.1.2-2

2-6
2.2 LAND REQUIREMENTS 

Construction of the proposed pipeline would disturb a total of about 395.5 acres of land, 

including the pipeline construction right-of-way and additional temporary workspaces (ATWSs). Pipe 

yards, staging areas, contractor yards, and offloading sites would disturb 213.5 acres of land depending on 

which sites are selected, as described below. Construction of the Milford Compressor Station would 

disturb about 33.2 acres of land, and construction of 1 new temporary access road and modifications to 

35 existing roads would disturb 6.0 acres of land.1

 Operation of the Project would require a total of about 

246.6 acres of which 169.5 acres would be required for the permanent pipeline right-of-way and new 

aboveground facility sites along the route, and 33.2 acres would be required for the Milford Compressor 

Station. The 169.5 acres of land required for the permanent right-of-way includes approximately 

24.8 acres of existing right-of-way from the overlapping of the Wasatch Loop right-of-way with the Kern 

River Mainline right-of-way. Finally, 15 of the existing roads encompassing 43.9 acres would be 

maintained as permanent access roads. 

A more detailed description of land use and requirements is presented in section 4.8. If the 

proposed Project is approved, Kern River’s construction and operation work areas would be limited to the 

areas described in this EIS and any subsequent Commission authorizations. 

2.2.1 Pipeline Right-of-Way 

Kern River would use a 100-foot-wide construction right-of-way for a majority of the proposed 

pipeline route. In addition to the construction right-of-way, ATWS would be required in areas such as the 

following: 

 where the proposed route crosses roadways, railroads, waterbodies, wetlands, or other 

utilities; 

 areas of steep terrain and areas with other construction constraints that require special 

construction techniques; 

 locations with soil stability concerns; 

 where topsoil segregation is required, possibly including construction along lands managed 

by the USFS or BLM; 

 truck turnarounds; 

 hydrostatic test water withdrawal and discharge locations; and 

 staging and fabrication areas. 

Figure 2.2.1-1 illustrates a typical construction right-of-way. 

In general, Kern River proposes to install the pipeline approximately 35 feet from the existing 

mainline to allow for construction activities and maintenance of soil stability around the existing pipeline. 

However, Kern River’s field investigations identified 18 locations where the proposed pipeline would be 

parallel to the mainline but construction would require a non-standard parallel offset (NSPO) greater than 

Kern River’s standard offset of 35 feet. These NSPOs range from 36 to 85 feet and would generally be 

associated with steep terrain; highway, road, and waterbody crossings; crossings of other utility lines; 

restricted right-of-way availability; or where aboveground features are within 25 feet of the existing line.

 

1

 A total of 37 existing roads (of which 35 would require modifications) and one new temporary access road

would be used during construction. 

2-7
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Cross-section of a Typical Right-of-Way

Figure 2.2.1-1

2-8
The FERC regulations (18 CFR 380.15[d][1]) give primary consideration to the use, enlargement, 

or extension of existing rights-of-way over developing a new right-of-way in order to reduce potential 

impacts on sensitive resources. In general, installation of new pipeline along existing rights-of-way that 

have been previously cleared (such as pipelines, power lines, roads, or railroads) may be environmentally 

preferable to the development of new rights-of-way. Construction-related effects and cumulative impacts 

can normally be reduced by use of previously cleared rights-of-way; however, in congested or 

environmentally sensitive areas, it may be advantageous to deviate from an existing right-of-way. 

Additionally, collocation may be infeasible in some areas due to a lack of or unsuitably oriented existing 

corridors, engineering and design considerations, or constructability issues. 

Kern River has proposed a route for the Wasatch Loop that is generally parallel to its existing 

right-of-way, the existing right-of-way of Questar Pipeline Company, and the proposed right-of-way for 

the UNEV pipeline. As currently proposed, approximately 18.4 miles (65.7 percent) of the Wasatch Loop 

would be installed near the edge of an existing right-of-way (the proposed pipeline would be 35 feet from 

the existing pipelines). This includes approximately 0.6 mile that is sited to be collocated with the 

proposed UNEV project,2

 which is expected to be constructed by December 2010. The remaining 

approximately 9.6 miles (34.3 percent) of the loop would deviate from these pipeline rights-of-way due to 

topographic and other land use constraints, requiring establishment of new rights-of-way. The lateral 

separation from the existing rights-of-way would be up to about 0.7 mile. Additional information on the 

locations of the proposed pipeline in relation to existing rights-of-way is presented in section 4.8 of the 

EIS. 

In total, the construction right-of-way for the pipeline would temporarily disturb about 

339.2 acres of land. Areas used for extra workspace along the construction right-of-way would affect a 

total of about 56.3 acres during construction. Of the total 395.5 acres, about 51.7 acres were previously 

disturbed during construction of other pipelines. 

Staging areas may be located along the construction right-of-way or off the right-of-way in 

nearby areas and would vary in size. The locations and sizes of ATWSs are presented in Appendix C. 

Restrictions on the use of workspaces and staging areas in or near waterbodies, wetlands, and woody 

riparian areas are discussed in sections 4.2.2.3, 4.3.2.4, 4.3.3.2, and 4.4.3. Although Kern River has 

identified areas where extra workspace would be required, additional or alternative areas could be 

identified in the future due to changes in site-specific construction requirements. Kern River would be 

required to file information on each of those areas for review and approval prior to use. 

Where the Wasatch Loop is collocated with the existing Kern River pipeline, the permanent rightof-way would have a 15-foot overlap where the exiting right-of-way is 50 feet wide and a 27.5-foot 

overlap where the existing right-of-way is 75 feet wide. The permanent right-of-way would require about 

169.5 acres of land. Of that area, about 24.8 acres are currently in permanent right-of-way for existing 

pipelines. After construction is completed, Kern River intends to retain a 50-foot-wide permanent rightof-way to operate the proposed pipeline. 

2.2.2 Aboveground Facilities 

The proposed aboveground facilities include one new compressor station, upgrades of four 

existing compressor stations, six MLVs, three pig launchers, and two pig receivers. Construction and 

operation at the existing compressor stations (Coyote Creek, Elberta, Fillmore, and Dry Lake) would be 

 

2

 The UNEV Pipeline is a 400-mile, 12-inch buried petroleum products line that originates near the refineries in 

North Salt Lake City and ships product from them to a distribution terminal in Iron County, Utah, and a 

terminal in North Las Vegas. The pipeline project has not yet been approved by the BLM. 

2-9
conducted within the existing fence lines and no new area would be affected. Construction and operation 

of the new Milford Compressor Station would impact a total of approximately 33.2 acres. 

Four of the MLVs and one pig launcher would be installed within the proposed pipeline 

construction right-of-way; therefore, the land requirements for those facilities are included in the 

discussion of land requirements for the proposed pipeline (section 2.2.1). The remaining two MLVs, two 

pig launchers, and two pig receivers would be constructed within the boundaries of the Milford 

Compressor Station and are included in the site’s 33.2 acres of impact. 

2.2.3 Pipe and Contractor Yards 

Kern River anticipates using two pipe storage yards and two contractor yards during construction 

of the proposed Wasatch Loop, one of each near the eastern end of the loop and one of each near the 

western end. Kern River has identified nine areas for potential use as pipe storage and contractor yards 

totaling 176.2 acres. In addition 11 areas to be used as staging areas during construction would affect 

37.3 acres. Contractor yards typically would be located away from the construction right-of-way and 

would be used for stockpiling pipe, storing materials, staging work, fabricating accessories, repairing 

equipment, housing mobile offices, and parking vehicles. Alternative staging areas would generally be 

located along the construction right-of-way or in proximity to access roads. Table 2.2.3-1 lists the 

locations and areas of the sites being considered, and the sites are depicted on the maps presented in 

Appendix BS. Following construction all yards would be restored to their pre-construction conditions, 

except where individual landowner agreements negotiated during the easement acquisition process dictate 

other acceptable restoration measures. 

Additional pipe, rail, and contractor yards beyond those currently identified could be required 

during construction of the proposed Apex Expansion Project. Prior to construction, Kern River would be 

required to file a complete and updated list of all extra work areas, including pipe, rail, and contractor 

yards (see Post-Approval Variance Process, section 2.6). 

2.2.4 Access Roads 

Kern River plans to use 38 access roads during installation of the proposed pipeline. Of these, 

37 are existing roads and one would be a new temporary access road (see Appendix C). A total of 

41.8 miles of access roads would be required for construction, including one new 410-foot-long (less than 

0.1-mile) temporary access road. A total of 62.3 acres of access roads would be required for construction 

of the Apex Expansion Project. The new temporary access road and modifications to 35 existing access 

roads would only disturb 6.0 acres of land beyond the existing access road widths. 

Kern River would use existing roads for construction and for personnel ingress and egress at the 

four existing compressor stations; no new access roads or road improvements outside of the existing 

compressor station sites would be required. The proposed site of the new Milford Compressor Station is 

adjacent to Imperial Avenue, which would be used for access to the site. Kern River would construct a 

driveway to the facility from Imperial Avenue. 

It should be noted that roads located within the National Forest that are not a part of the USFS 

road system are considered by the USFS to be non-existing, and any improvements required to these 

roads would be considered by the USFS as new construction. 

2-10
TABLE 2.2.3-1 

Potential Pipe Yards, Staging Areas, and Contractor Yards for the 

Proposed Apex Expansion Project 

Identification Number Location County 

Primary/ 

Alternate Area (acres) 

Pipe Yard 

STK-DA-1a Business Depot, Ogden Davis Primary 29.4 

STK-DA-2 Warehouse-500 N. Redwood Rd., North 

Salt Lake 

Davis Primary 2.7 

STK-MO-1 Wasatch Rail Siding, Wasatch Summit Alternate 6.5 

STK-SU-2 Henefer Frontage Rd., Henefer Summit Alternate 43.8 

STK-SL-2 Metro Group W. 900 S., Salt Lake City Salt Lake Alternate 37.2 

Staging Area 

TWS-MO-1 MP 0.0 - MLV 96 Laydown Area Morgan Primary 3.8 

TWS-MO-2 MP 2.3 - East Canyon Morgan Primary 5.2 

TWS-MO-9 MP 4.9 - Highway 66 Morgan Primary 0.8 

TWS-MO-3 MP 11.9 - North Hardscrabble Road Morgan Primary 10.1 

TWS-MO-4 MP 11.9 - South Hardscrabble Morgan Primary 1.9 

TWS-MO-6 MP 11.9 - Hardscrabble Morgan Primary 0.6 

TWS-MO-8 MP 14.8 - Skyline Davis Primary 4.6 

TWS-DA-1 MP 14.8 - North Bountiful Davis Primary 3.2 

TWS-DA-2 MP 15.8 - Questar Right-of-Way Davis Primary 4.1 

TWS-SL-1 MP 23.8 - Forest Service Salt Lake Primary 1.5 

TWS-SL-2 MP 28.0 - West Tie-In Salt Lake Primary 1.5 

Contractor Yard

CY-SU-1 Dennis Wright, Coalville Summit Primary 19.7 

CY-SU-2 Rees Enterprises, Coalville Summit Alternate 4.7 

CY-DA-1 West Parrish Ln., Centerville Davis Primary 20.9 

CY-SL-1 1500 West 150 South, Salt Lake City Salt Lake Alternate 11.3 

Total 213.5 

____________ 

Note: 

a

 Two potential sites have been identified at the Business Depot location. 

Kern River would obtain owner approval for use of all existing access roads. Other roads 

constructed by public and private entities may also be used provided they are suitable and landowner 

approval is received. Improvements would be required on some existing roads prior to hauling 

construction equipment and materials. Sections 4.5 and 4.8 provide additional information on access 

roads. 

2-11
2.3 CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES 

The proposed pipeline facilities would be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained in 

accordance with the USDOT regulations under 49 CFR 192 (Transportation of Natural and Other Gas by 

Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety Standards) and other applicable federal and state regulations. Among 

other design standards, these regulations specify pipeline material selection; minimum design 

requirements; protection from internal, external, and atmospheric corrosion; and qualification procedures 

for welders and operations personnel. More detailed safety information is provided in section 4.12. In 

addition, Kern River would comply with the siting and maintenance requirements in 18 CFR 380.15 

(Siting and Maintenance Requirements) and other applicable federal and state regulations, including the 

requirements of the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 

The OSHA regulations are intended to ensure adequate protection of the public, pipeline workers, 

contractors, and employees, and to prevent natural gas pipeline accidents and failures. 

Kern River prepared an Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation and Maintenance Plan for the 

proposed Apex Expansion Project (Kern River’s Plan). We have reviewed Kern River’s Plan and find 

that it meets or exceeds the best management practices and mitigation measures included in our Upland 

Erosion Control, Revegetation and Maintenance Plan (our Plan). The intent of Kern River’s Plan is to 

identify baseline mitigation measures for minimizing erosion and enhancing revegetation in upland areas. 

Modifications to our Plan are identified in Kern River’s Plan which includes mitigation measures 

designed to address the greater potential for erosion and sediment transport in critical slope areas found 

along the proposed alignment in the Wasatch Mountains. Kern River’s Plan is presented in Appendix D. 

Kern River also developed Wetland and Waterbody Construction and Mitigation Procedures for 

the proposed Project (Kern River’s Procedures) that meet or exceed the best management practices and 

mitigation measures included in our Wetland and Waterbody Construction and Mitigation Procedures

(our Procedures). The intent of the Kern River Procedures (Appendix E) is to identify baseline mitigation 

measures for minimizing the extent and duration of construction-related disturbance on wetlands and 

waterbodies. Kern River would implement its Plan and Procedures during construction and operation of 

the Apex Expansion Project. Modifications to our Plan and Procedures that Kern River has proposed in 

Kern River’s Plan and Procedures are addressed further in sections 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4 of this EIS. Our Plan 

and Procedures are available on the FERC Internet website at www.ferc.gov/industries/gas

/enviro/guidelines. 

In addition, Kern River would restore all BLM-managed lands in accordance with the BLMapproved Plan of Development (POD) for the proposed Project. 

Kern River also prepared a Reclamation Plan for the proposed Project (Reclamation Plan) that 

describes measures Kern River would use to return disturbed areas to their pre-construction land use and 

minimize visual impact. The Reclamation Plan, which is presented in Appendix F, adapts and expands on 

the Reclamation Plan prepared for construction of Kern River’s existing pipeline system in 1991 to 

incorporate (1) more current agency recommendations; (2) Kern River’s experience from the construction 

of the mainline; and (3) Kern River’s experience in construction and restoration of its 2003 Expansion 

Project. In addition, the Reclamation Plan addresses the vegetation conditions found in the higher 

elevation segments of the proposed Project. Where applicable, Kern River would revise the Reclamation 

Plan to incorporate new technical standards or information in consultation with the BLM, the USFS, and 

the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and in conjunction with developing the post-FERCCertificate Implementation Plan. 

Kern River would also implement the procedures included in its Noxious Weed Control Plan for 

the proposed Project, which is provided in Appendix G. As part of that plan, Kern River would clean 

2-12
vehicles and equipment prior to mobilization to Project sites and as they leave construction areas with 

identified noxious weeds. The Noxious Weed Control Plan is discussed further in section 4.4 of this EIS. 

Kern River has also developed a draft Project-specific Spill Prevention, Control and 

Countermeasure (SPCC Plan) for oil and hazardous substances for the proposed Apex Expansion Project. 

The SPCC Plan, which is presented in Appendix H, describes the management of hazardous materials, 

such as fuels, lubricants, and coolants that would be implemented during construction. 

Kern River anticipates that blasting may be necessary to construct the pipeline along portions of 

the proposed route (see section 4.1.3.4). Kern River has prepared a Blasting Plan (presented in 

Appendix I) and would follow the procedures of that plan where blasting is necessary. 

Kern River has developed an Unanticipated Discoveries Plan to guide the treatment of any 

unanticipated discoveries of cultural resources or human remains during construction (see section 4.10). 

The cooperating agencies are reviewing Kern River’s construction plans with respect to their 

areas of responsibility, and additional measures may be incorporated into agency permits to ensure that 

construction and restoration would be completed in compliance with agency standards. BLM will require 

that Kern River prepare a POD as part of the right-of-way granting process in accordance with the 

regulations at 43 CFR 2884.11. Kern River’s construction and restoration plans referenced in this EIS 

and included in the appendices would also be part of Kern River’s POD with the BLM. 

The majority of construction would be accomplished in the spring (starting on or after May 1), 

summer, and fall of 2011. Kern River proposes to clear the entire right-of-way in the fall and winter of 

2010. Construction activities beyond just clearing, however, are anticipated in late fall and early winter 

2010 in the following areas: 

 East Canyon Creek crossing (MP 5.4); 

 Jordan River crossing (MP 27.0); 

 City Drain Canal crossing (MP 27.4); 

 Interstate 15 (I-15), Highway 89, Frontage Road crossing (MP 25.7); 

 areas of agricultural land between Interstate 215 (MP 27.6) and MP 28.0; and 

 the Milford (KRMP 326.9), Fillmore (KRMP 276.7), and Dry Lake (KRMP 500.1) 

Compressor Stations. 

In addition to the proposed winter construction in 2010, Kern River would begin preparation for 

spring, summer, and fall 2011 construction at several locations in the late fall and early winter of 2010. 

Preparatory activities would include clearing and grubbing along the proposed pipeline route, installing 

construction bridges, preparing laydown yards, and establishing a construction grade at the crossing of the 

Wasatch Fault. Clearing and grubbing activities would occur at various points along the proposed 

pipeline route, and other preparatory activities would occur in the following locations: 

 Sheep Creek (MP 6.3) and Hardscrabble Creek (MP 11.8) crossings; 

 Hardscrabble Road laydown yard (MP 8.7 or 11.9); 

 Bountiful Boulevard laydown yard (MP 16.0); and 

 Wasatch Fault crossing (MP 25.4). 

2-13
Winter construction would be conducted in accordance with the Kern River Winter Construction 

Plan for the Apex Expansion Project. The plan is provided in Appendix J. 

2.3.1 General Pipeline Construction Procedures 

Prior to initiating construction-related activities, Kern River would secure right-of-way easements 

from private landowners and managers of public lands whose properties would be crossed by the 

proposed pipeline route. All owners, tenants, and lessees of private land, and lessees and managers of 

public lands along the right-of-way would be notified in advance of construction activities that could 

affect their property, business, or operations. If the necessary land rights or easements cannot be obtained 

through good faith negotiations with private landowners and the proposed Project has been certificated by 

the FERC, Kern River may use the right of eminent domain granted to it under Section 7(h) of the NGA 

to obtain a right-of-way. Kern River would still be required to compensate the private landowners for the 

right-of-way, as well as for any damages incurred during construction. However, the level of 

compensation would be determined by the court according to state laws that set forth the procedures for 

the use of eminent domain once the FERC issues a Certificate. Kern River must proceed through the 

appropriate state court to condemn land for which it has received a Certificate from the FERC. The 

FERC does not take part in such proceedings. 

Kern River would construct the proposed pipeline along the construction right-of-way using 

sequential pipeline construction techniques, including survey, staking, and fence crossing; clearing and 

grading; trenching; pipe stringing, bending, and welding; lowering-in and backfilling; hydrostatic testing; 

cleanup and restoration; and commissioning. Conventional overland installation of the pipeline is 

essentially a moving assembly line with a construction spread (construction crew and equipment) 

proceeding along the construction right-of-way in a continuous operation, as depicted in figure 2.3.1-1. 

Kern River would construct the Wasatch Loop using a single construction spread. 

The majority of the pipeline construction process would be accomplished using conventional 

open-cut methods, which typically include the steps described below. The proposed methods for 

accomplishing pipeline installation across wetlands and waterbodies, as well as other specialized 

construction procedures, are described in section 2.3.2. 

Construction at any single point along the pipeline, from right-of-way surveying and clearing to 

backfill and finish grading, would typically last about 6 to 10 weeks. The construction process would be 

coordinated to limit the time of active disturbance of an individual area and the time the trench is open to 

limit the potential for erosion and the loss of normal use. 

2.3.1.1 Survey, Staking, and Fence Crossings 

After right-of-way easements have been obtained, the pipeline centerline, construction right-ofway, ATWSs, drainage centerlines and elevations, and highway and railroad crossings would be surveyed 

and staked. Access roads would be clearly marked using temporary signs or flagging, and wetlands and 

other environmentally sensitive areas, such as water wells and springs, would be marked. Kern River 

would contact the Utah One-Call system to locate, identify, and flag existing underground utilities (for 

example, cables, conduits, and pipelines) to prevent accidental damage during pipeline construction. 

2-14
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Typical Pipeline Construction Sequence

Figure 2.3.1-1

2-15
Where fences are encountered along the proposed construction right-of-way and require cutting 

or removal, a fence crew would install temporary fences to confine livestock to existing areas off the 

right-of-way and to prohibit or otherwise control public access across the right-of-way. This work would 

include installing new posts to brace the existing fence on either side of the cut or removed fencing to 

avoid damage to the existing fence. Temporary gates would be installed, as necessary. 

2.3.1

2.3.1

.2 Clearing and Grading 

After completion of the surveys, staking, and fence work, large obstacles, such as trees, rocks, 

brush, and logs would be removed from the right-of-way and ATWSs. Timber would be removed only 

when necessary for construction purposes. Timber and other vegetative debris may be chipped for use as 

erosion control mulch, or otherwise disposed of in accordance with applicable local regulations and 

landowner requirements. The construction right-of-way and the ATWSs would then be cleared and, 

where necessary, graded, to provide a relatively level surface for trench-excavating equipment and the 

movement of other construction equipment along the right-of-way. 

To prevent mixing of soil horizons or introduction of rock into the topsoil, topsoil would be 

removed across the full width of the construction right-of-way in agricultural and residential areas and 

segregated from the subsoil in accordance with Kern River’s Plan. It is anticipated that topsoil would be 

removed to a depth of 12 inches at most locations, or as described below if that is not possible. Topsoil 

may also be segregated if requested by landowners or land management agencies and on rangelands and 

USFS lands to enhance restoration. On those lands, Kern River would develop site-specific topsoil 

segregation and redistribution plans that would be completed in consultation with the USFS, BLM, and 

other managing agencies or landowners. Where additional topsoil stripping is required, Kern River would 

evaluate the need for additional right-of-way width to maintain separation of the topsoil and subsoil piles. 

To segregate topsoil in other areas, Kern River would remove topsoil and vegetative debris to a 

typical depth of 12 inches over the trench, the storage areas for excavated materials, and areas where cutand-fill activities would be conducted (for example, on side-slopes). Topsoil would be stockpiled along 

one side of the right-of-way, allowing the other side to be used for access, material transport, and pipe 

assembly, as illustrated in figure 2.2.1-1. Where shallow soils or soils with stony substrates are 

encountered, Kern River would reduce the depth of topsoil removal for segregating the topsoil to 

approximately 4 to 6 inches, instead of the typical 12 inches for deeper soils as specified in Kern River’s 

Plan. When soils have a high content of cobbles, rocks, or boulders, topsoil salvaging may not be 

possible. In addition, Kern River would segregate topsoil only when safe construction conditions can be 

maintained. Additional information on topsoil segregation is provided in section 4.2. 

Temporary erosion controls would be installed immediately after initial disturbance of the soil 

along the construction right-of-way and would be properly maintained throughout construction. They 

would remain in place until permanent erosion controls are installed or restoration is completed. 

.3 Trenching 

The pipeline trench would be excavated using a rotary trenching machine, a track-mounted 

excavator, or similar equipment. Excavated materials would be stockpiled along the right-of-way on the 

side of the trench away from the construction traffic and pipe assembly areas. 

Explosives would be used as necessary in areas where rock substrates occur at depths that 

interfere with conventional excavation or rock-trenching methods (generally within 5 feet of the ground 

surface). Based on its preliminary analysis, Kern River identified four areas along the proposed route 

where there is a high likelihood that blasting would be required: from MP 2.8 to 3.0, from 3.6 to 4.7, from 

2-16
6.0 to 6.8, and from 8.9 to 9.4. Kern River would conduct blasting in accordance with its Blasting Plan, 

and in accordance with all other applicable regulations. Blasting would be conducted in a manner that 

would prevent damage to underground structures (for example, cables, conduits and pipelines) or to 

springs, water wells, or other water sources. Blasting mats or soil cover would be used as necessary to 

prevent the scattering of loose rock. All blasting would be conducted during daylight hours and would 

not begin until occupants of nearby buildings, stores, residences, places of business and farms have been 

notified. Additional information on blasting is presented in section 4.1. 

The proposed pipeline would be buried below the ground surface to a depth that would meet or 

exceed the USDOT standards presented in 49 CFR 192.327. Except in rocky areas, the trench would be 

excavated to a sufficient depth to allow a minimum of 3 feet of cover between the top of the pipe and the 

final land surface after backfilling; this would exceed the USDOT general minimum depth of cover 

30 inches in soil in Class I areas. Where consolidated rock is within 18 inches of the surface, the pipeline 

would be buried to allow 2 feet of cover over the pipe; this would exceed the USDOT standard for depth 

of cover of 18 inches in consolidated rock near the surface. The minimum depth of cover in road and 

railroad drainage ditches and at stream and road crossings would be 5 feet. In addition, the bottom of the 

trench would be excavated at least 12 inches wider than the diameter of the pipe (that is, the bottom of the 

trench would be at least 48 inches wide). 

Trench breakers (barriers to subsurface water flow placed in the trench) would be used to create 

segments within the open trench to reduce erosion and allow access across the trench. Trench breakers 

would typically consist of sandbags or polyurethane foam placed across the ditch and would be installed 

in accordance with the Kern River Plan and Procedures. 

2.3.1.4 Pipe Stringing, Bending, and Welding 

After trenching, sections of straight steel pipe, generally either 40 feet long or 80 feet long, would 

be transported to the right-of-way by truck or helicopter and placed along the excavated trench in a single, 

continuous line on the working side of the trench, opposite the side where the excavated materials are 

stockpiled (termed “stringing”). For river crossings, pipe would be stockpiled in ATWSs in close 

proximity to the river. Pipe sections would be protected on the outside and inside with a factory-applied 

fusion-bonded epoxy coating; the beveled ends of the sections would be uncoated to allow for welding. 

Some pipe sections would be bent at the work site to follow the natural grade and direction 

changes of the right-of-way. Bending would be accomplished using track-mounted hydraulic bending 

machines. Where multiple or complex bends are required, bending would be conducted at the pipe 

fabrication factory, and the pipe would be shipped to the work sites pre-bent. 

The pipe joints would be aligned, welded together into a long segment, and placed on temporary 

supports at the edge of the trench. Welders would use multiple passes to provide a full-penetration weld. 

Kern River would only use experienced welders who are qualified according to applicable American 

Welding Society, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), and American Petroleum Institute 

(API) standards. 

Each weld would be visually inspected and non-destructively tested using radiographic (x-ray) or 

other approved test methods in accordance with API standards. Welds with flaws would be repaired or 

cut out and re-welded. After welding is completed, a coating crew would coat the area around the weld. 

Pipeline companies use several different types of coating in the field, the most common being fusionbonded epoxy. Prior to application, the coating crew would thoroughly clean the bare pipe (the welded 

area) with a power wire brush or sandblast machine to remove dirt, mill scale, and debris. The crew 

would then apply the coating and allow the coating to dry. The pipeline would be inspected electronically 

2-17
(also referred to as “jeeped”) for faults or voids in the coating and would be visually inspected for faults, 

scratches, or other defects. If damage to the coating is discovered, it would be repaired before the pipe is 

lowered into the trench. 

2.3.1

2.3.1

.5 Lowering-In and Backfilling 

Prior to lowering the proposed pipeline, the trench would be cleaned of debris and foreign 

material. The pipe and trench would also be inspected to ensure that the pipe and trench configurations 

are compatible. During construction, the open trench may accumulate water either from groundwater 

intrusion or precipitation and would be dewatered periodically to allow for proper and safe construction, 

particularly during tie-ins. During trench dewatering, water would be pumped from the trench into stable 

upland areas through a filter bag, straw bales, or equivalent to remove sediment. The rate of flow from 

the pump would be regulated and energy dissipation devices would be used as necessary to prevent 

erosion from runoff and to prevent the flow of heavily silt-laden water directly into adjacent waterbodies. 

Dewatering would be conducted in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local permitting 

requirements and in accordance with Kern River’s Procedures. 

In areas of rock, the bottom of the trench may be padded with sandbags or support pillows to 

protect the pipe coating. Topsoil would not be used as padding material. Where the previously excavated 

material contains large rocks or other materials that could damage the pipe or its coating, screened fill or 

protective coating would be placed around the pipe prior to backfilling. The pipeline would then be 

lowered into the trench by appropriately spaced, sideboom tractors working in unison to avoid buckling of 

the pipe. In accordance with Kern River’s Plan and Procedures, trench breakers would be installed at 

regular intervals where appropriate to prevent subsurface erosion and flow of water between the trench 

and crossed waterbodies, wetlands, and near-surface groundwater. 

After the proposed pipeline is lowered into the trench and adequately protected, previously 

excavated materials would be used to backfill the trench using bladed equipment or excavators. Subsoil 

in all cultivated areas and on BLM lands would be decompacted after backfilling and prior to replacing 

topsoil. If decompaction is necessary after topsoil has been replaced, Kern River would use a tiller (or 

similar equipment) to loosen compacted areas. Topsoil previously segregated from the trench material in 

all agricultural and residential areas would be returned as nearly as possible to its original horizon. The 

right-of-way, ATWSs, and other disturbed areas would be finish graded and restored as closely as 

possible to pre-construction contours and to conform with adjacent areas, with some crowning over the 

trench outside of wetland areas to accommodate soil settlement. Any excess excavated materials or 

materials deemed unsuitable for backfill would be evenly spread over the right-of-way or disposed of in 

accordance with applicable regulations and landowner requirements. 

.6 Hydrostatic Testing 

Once installation and backfilling are completed and before the proposed Project begins operation, 

the pipeline would be hydrostatically pressure tested in accordance with USDOT safety standards 

(49 CFR 192) to verify its integrity and to ensure its ability to withstand the MAOP. Hydrostatic testing 

consists of installing a hydrostatic test cap and manifold, filling the pipeline with water, pressurizing the 

pipeline to 125 percent of its MAOP, and maintaining that test pressure for a specified minimum period 

of time. Kern River would test segments of the pipeline and wherever possible would transfer the 

hydrostatic test water to the next segment for re-use. Any leaks or loss of pressure detected during the 

test would be repaired, and that segment of pipeline would be re-tested. 

When discharged, the test water would be released adjacent to the construction right-of-way 

through an energy-dissipating device such as a splash plate, and a straw bale filter or sediment bag. Test 

2-18
water would not be discharged directly into surface waters. Discharge sites would be in stable, wellvegetated upland areas in the vicinity of the same water source it is taken from to avoid transferring nonnative species into a new area. Test water for the proposed Project would contact only new pipe and no 

chemicals would be added. 

Hydrostatic test water would be obtained and discharged in accordance with applicable state and 

local regulations, and in accordance with Kern River’s Procedures. Additional information on hydrostatic 

testing, including potential sources of hydrostatic test water, is presented in section 4.3 of this EIS. 

2.3.1

2.3.1

.7 Cleanup and Restoration 

After the proposed pipeline has been successfully tested, the trash, debris, surplus materials, and 

temporary structures present along the construction right-of-way would be removed and disposed of in 

accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Permanent erosion control measures, 

such as diversion terraces and slope breakers, would be installed during this phase in accordance with 

Kern River’s Plan and Procedures. Disturbed areas would be seeded in accordance with the Kern River’s 

Reclamation Plan and written recommendations for seed mixes, rates, and dates, obtained from the local 

soil conservation authority or as requested by the landowner or land management agency. Additional 

information on restoration and revegetation procedures in wetland and upland areas is provided in 

sections 4.3 and 4.4, respectively. Measures that Kern River would incorporate into the proposed Project 

to limit the spread of noxious weeds are presented in its Noxious Weed Control Plan. Final seedbed 

preparation, as required, and seeding and planting are planned for September and October 2011 and 

would coincide with the optimal periods for dormant seeding and planting. In addition, designated 

locations of noxious weeds would be treated prior to reclamation in accordance with the Noxious Weed 

Control Plan. Seeding would be completed, along with other erosion control, by the onset of winter 2011. 

Disturbed pavement and other road surfaces along access roads would be restored to preconstruction or better conditions, unless otherwise specified by the property owner and approved by 

applicable regulatory agencies. Likewise, any private or public property damaged during construction, 

such as fences, gates, and driveways, would be restored to original or better condition, consistent with 

individual landowner agreements. 

Pipeline markers and/or warning signs would be installed along the pipeline centerline at 

specified intervals to identify the pipeline location, specify Kern River as the operator of the pipeline, and 

provide telephone numbers for emergencies and inquiries. 

.8 Commissioning 

Test manifolds would be removed and final pipeline tie-ins would be completed after hydrostatic 

testing. The pipeline then would be cleaned and dried using pigs that are moved through the pipeline with 

pressurized dry air. Pigs also would be used to internally inspect the pipeline to detect whether the pipe 

was damaged during construction. Damaged pipe segments would be dug up, repaired, and retested. 

Pipeline commissioning would then commence. Commissioning involves verifying that equipment has 

been properly installed and is working, verifying that controls and communications systems are 

functioning, and confirming that the pipeline is ready for service. In the final step, the pipeline would be 

prepared for service by purging the pipeline of air and loading it with natural gas. Kern River would not 

be authorized to place its pipeline into service until it has received written in-service approval from the 

FERC Director of the Office of Energy Projects (OEP). 

2-19
2.3.2 Special Pipeline Construction Procedures 

Special construction techniques would be required when constructing across most 

environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands and waterbodies where there is existing infrastructure 

such as roadways and railroads, or in other areas where the open-cut construction methods described in 

section 2.3.1 are not appropriate. The special construction methods Kern River proposes to use for the 

Apex Expansion Project are described below. ATWSs adjacent to the construction right-of-way would be 

used at most of these areas for staging construction, storing materials, maneuvering equipment, 

fabricating pipe, and stockpiling spoil. 

2.3.2.1 Wetlands 

Construction of the proposed Project pipeline across wetlands would be conducted in accordance 

with applicable permit requirements and Kern River’s Procedures. Overall, the wetland crossing methods 

and mitigation measures identified in Kern River’s Procedures are designed to minimize the extent and 

duration of construction-related disturbance within wetlands. The site-specific crossing procedures used 

to install the pipeline across wetlands would vary dependent on the level of soil stability and saturation 

encountered during construction. 

All wetlands crossed by the proposed Project are scrub-shrub, forested, or emergent. Wetland 

vegetation would be cut to ground level within the construction right-of-way through wetland areas. 

Grading and stump removal would be performed only over the trench, except where otherwise required 

for safety. To minimize erosion and promote revegetation within the wetland, removal of the root mass 

of woody vegetation would be allowed only directly over the trench area or where required for safety. 

Silt fences would be installed at the edges of the construction right-of-way in wetlands where 

there would be a possibility for materials excavated from the trench to flow into undisturbed areas of the 

wetland. If the previously excavated trench adjacent to the wetland contains water, trench plugs would be 

left in the trench at the edge of the entry into the wetland. In addition, where necessary to maintain the 

hydrologic integrity of the wetland, trench breakers would be installed where the trench enters and exits 

the wetland. 

A typical wetland crossing parallel to an existing pipeline is depicted in figure 2.3.2-1. 

Construction procedures across wetlands that are unsaturated at the time of construction would be 

similar to those used in upland areas. However, Kern River would use low ground-pressure equipment 

and would install equipment mats to minimize compaction of wetland soils and rutting within wetlands. 

In unsaturated wetlands, up to 12 inches of topsoil would be segregated over the pipeline trench. If 

saturated wetlands with standing water or unstable soils are encountered, stable temporary work surfaces 

of timber mats would be constructed within the construction right-of-way adjacent to the area to be 

excavated. Construction would then proceed as in unsaturated wetlands, except topsoil segregation would 

not be possible because of saturation. Pipe stringing and fabrication may occur within the construction 

right-of-way within the wetland adjacent to the trench or adjacent to the wetland in a designated ATWS. 

Permanent erosion control structures that may alter hydrology (for example, slope breakers) 

would not be installed within wetland boundaries, but would be used in the adjacent upland areas to 

control erosion and sedimentation. Materials such as equipment mats placed in wetlands during 

construction would be removed during final cleanup, and the pre-construction contours of the wetland 

would be restored. Stockpiled topsoil removed from directly over the trench would be placed over the 

backfilled trench to as close as feasible to its original horizon. Excess backfill material would be spread 

2-20
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Typical Wetland Crossing Adjacent to an 

Existing Pipeline

Figure 2.3.2-1

If applicable

2-21
over adjacent upland areas and stabilized. Permanent erosion control measures would be installed, and 

disturbed areas within the wetland would be temporarily stabilized by seeding with native, annual wetland 

grasses. 

The transferring of liquids and refueling would occur only in pre-designated locations at least 

100 feet from all wetlands and waterbodies as required by Kern River’s SPCC Plan. Where conditions 

require that construction equipment such as trench dewatering pumps or hydrostatic test water pumps be 

refueled within 100 feet of wetlands or waterbodies, these operations would be manned continuously to 

ensure that over filling, leaks, or spills do not occur. Where stationary equipment must remain within 

100 feet of a waterbody or wetland, adequate secondary containment would be provided. 

Section 4.3 addresses wetlands, including the wetland restoration and mitigation procedures and 

the draft Wetland Remedial Revegetation Plan (Appendix K) that would be implemented by Kern River. 

2.3.2.2 Waterbodies 

This section describes the methods used to construct pipeline crossings of waterbodies and the 

methods used to install equipment bridges over waterbodies. 

Pipeline Crossings and Equipment Bridges 

The Kern River Procedures define a waterbody as (1) any natural or artificial stream, river, or 

drainage with perceptible flow at the time of crossing and (2) permanent waterbodies such as ponds and 

lakes. Installation of the proposed pipeline across rivers and streams and the installation and removal of 

equipment bridges across waterbodies would be accomplished in accordance with Kern River’s 

Procedures and all applicable permit requirements. Kern River’s Procedures identify the baseline 

mitigation measures, from pre-construction planning through construction, restoration, and monitoring, 

for minimizing the extent and duration of Project-related disturbance to waterbodies. The waterbody 

crossing measures specified in Kern River’s Procedures are based on industry standard practices. 

The proposed route would cross 21 waterbodies, including 7 intermittent streams, 12 perennial 

streams, and 2 ephemeral streams. Kern River proposes to cross three of these waterbodies (City Drain, 

Jordan River, and Northwest Oil Drain) using the conventional horizontal boring method; two 

waterbodies using the dam-and-pump method; and the remainder using the flume method. If waterbodies 

are dry or exhibit no flow at the time of construction, Kern River would use an open-cut construction 

method. 

In general, an open-cut waterbody crossing is accomplished using methods similar to 

conventional open-cut trenching methods used in upland areas. The open-cut construction method 

involves excavation of the pipeline trench across the waterbody; installation of a prefabricated segment of 

pipeline; and backfilling of the trench with native material, with no effort to isolate flow, if any, from 

construction activities. Figure 2.3.2-2 illustrates a typical open-cut waterbody crossing. Excavation and 

backfilling of the trench would generally be accomplished using backhoes operating from one or both 

banks of the waterbody. All construction equipment would cross the waterbody using equipment bridges, 

if water was present. 

2-22
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Typical Non-flowing Waterbody Crossing

Figure 2.3.2-2

2-23
The flume method involves establishing dams upstream and downstream of the crossing area and 

installing one or more pipes (flumes) that would extend along the course of the waterbody and through 

both dams. Streamflow would be carried through the construction area by the flume pipes. Additional 

information on the flume method is provided below. The East Canyon Creek Crossing would be 

constructed using the flume method. Kern River has indicated that the actual method of waterbody 

crossing would be subject to change based on the site-specific conditions (water flow) encountered at the 

time of construction. The conventional horizontal bore, flume, and dam-and-pump methods are described 

below. 

All waterbody crossings that Kern River does not intend to construct using the conventional bore 

or dam-and-pump methods would be prepared as flume crossings, regardless of whether or not water is 

present. Because Kern River is proposing construction in the summer and fall at most crossing sites, 

many of the intermittent streams may be dry at the time of construction. Waterbodies, without flow at the 

time of construction would be constructed using the open-cut method. If water is not present at the time 

of construction and precipitation is not forecast, the flume pipe would be removed and the crossing would 

be constructed using the open-cut method. In the event that unexpected flow occurs during construction, 

the flume pipe would be replaced and construction would proceed using the flume method. If water is 

present in a crossing at the time of construction, the crossing would be constructed using the flume 

method. 

Mitigation measures described in Kern River’s Procedures would be implemented to minimize 

impacts on the aquatic environment during construction, especially if water is present in the channel. 

This would include installing mats across the wetland adjacent to the East Canyon Creek and Jordan 

River crossing sites to prevent excessive rutting and to protect the vegetative material and topsoil. 

Construction would be scheduled so that the trench would be excavated immediately prior to 

pipelaying activities. In accordance with Kern River’s Procedures, excavated materials would be 

stockpiled in the construction right-of-way at least 10 feet from the streambank or in approved ATWSs 

and would be surrounded by sediment control devices to prevent sediment from returning to the 

waterbody. 

All streambeds and banks would be restored to pre-construction contours as part of restoration 

activities. The methods that would be used for equipment bridges and for constructing waterbody 

crossings are described below. As previously indicated, Kern River proposes to cross East Canyon Creek, 

the Jordan River, and the City Drain in the fall or winter of 2010 prior to mainline construction in 2011, 

and a description of its proposed crossing method for these waterbodies is included below. Any 

modification to the methods described in this EIS and Kern River’s filings would require review and 

approval by the FERC and possibly other agencies. Additional information on the proposed waterbody 

crossing procedures and potential environmental consequences is presented in section 4.3. 

Equipment Bridges 

Kern River would install temporary equipment bridges across waterbodies for access along the 

proposed right-of-way. The bridges would be installed in accordance with Kern River’s Procedures. 

Except at East Canyon Creek and the City Drain, equipment bridges would generally be constructed of 

culverts (or flumes) and equipment pads (or geotextiles) or culverts (flumes) and clean rock fill. A 

culvert or flume bridge involves using flume pipes to convey the flow of water, with the number of 

flumes needed dependent on the potential flow of water at the time of construction. The flumes would be 

laid on the river bed and the equipment pads or clean rock, purchased from a commercial source, would 

be used to cover the flumes up to the level of the streambank to provide a travel surface for construction 

equipment. If excessively soft soils are encountered in the streambed, or if high-water flows occur, 

2-24
portable bridges (flexi-float bridges) may be used at minor stream crossings in lieu of culverts. At East 

Canyon Creek and the City Drain, a flat railroad car frame or similar type of portable bridge would be 

used. Except at the City Drain, equipment bridges would be maintained throughout construction, and 

construction traffic would be required to use the equipment bridge if water is present in the channel. The 

bridge at the City Drain would be removed immediately after the bored crossing is completed. 

Each bridge would be designed to accommodate the highest streamflow expected to occur and 

would be maintained to prevent soil from entering the waterbody and to prevent restriction of flow, bank 

erosion and stream scour during the period of time that the bridge is in use. After the bridges are 

removed, all disturbed areas would be restored to pre-installation conditions. 

Conventional Bore Crossing Method

Conventional (horizontal) boring requires the excavation of entry and exit pits on either side of 

the crossing for a boring machine to install the pipeline beneath the feature. The machines would bore a 

horizontal hole equivalent to the diameter of the pipe. The pipeline section would then be pushed through 

the bore hole. If additional pipeline sections are required, they would be welded to the first section of the 

pipeline in the bore pit before being pushed through the bore hole. A typical conventional bore crossing 

is shown in figure 2.3.2-3. 

Flume Crossing Method

Kern River would install flumes with sufficient capacity to transport the maximum flows that 

could be generated seasonally within the waterbody. The flumes, typically 40 to 60 feet long, would be 

installed before trenching and aligned to prevent impounding of water upstream of the construction area 

or to cause back-erosion downstream. The upstream and downstream ends of the flumes would be 

incorporated into dams made of sandbags or plastic dams. Upstream dams would be installed first and 

would funnel streamflow into the flumes. Downstream dams then would be constructed to prevent water 

from flowing back into the area to be trenched. Kern River would monitor the dams and adjust them as 

necessary to minimize leakage. The flumes would remain in place during pipeline installation, 

backfilling, and streambank restoration. A typical flume crossing is shown in figure 2.3.2-4. 

Prior to trenching, the area between the dams typically would be dewatered. Water from any 

trench dewatering activities would be released into the adjacent upland area using a water discharge 

device and sediment barriers, in accordance with Kern River’s Plan and Procedures. Backhoes working 

from one or both banks would excavate the trench across the waterbody and under the flume pipes. 

Sediment containment devices, such as silt fences and straw bales, would be installed to contain the 

excavated material and to minimize the potential for sediment to migrate into the waterbody. 

After the trench is excavated to the proper depth, a prefabricated section of pipe would be 

positioned and lowered into the trench. The trench then would be backfilled with the excavated material 

from the stream unless otherwise specified in stream crossing permits. Prior to removing the dams and 

flume pipes and restoring streamflow, water that accumulated in the construction area would be pumped 

into a straw bale structure or similar dewatering device, and the bottom contours of the streambed and the 

streambanks would be restored as close as practical to pre-construction contours. 

2-25
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Conventional Bore Crossing Method

Figure 2.3.2-3

2-26
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Flume Crossing Method

Figure 2.3.2-4

8

2-27
Dam-and-Pump Method 

The dam-and-pump method involves installing temporary dams upstream and downstream of the 

proposed waterbody crossing. The temporary dams would typically be constructed using sandbags or 

plastic dams. After dam installation, appropriately sized pumps would be used to transport the 

streamflow around the construction work area. Figure 2.3.2-5 illustrates a typical dam-and-pump 

waterbody crossing. Intake screens would be installed at the pump inlets to prevent or limit entrainment 

of aquatic life, and energy-dissipating devices would be installed at the pump discharge point to minimize 

erosion and streambed scour. Trench excavation and pipeline installation would then commence in the 

dewatered portion of the waterbody channel. 

Horizontal Directional Drilling Crossing Method 

Horizontal directional drilling (HDD) is a trenchless crossing method that may be used to avoid 

direct impacts o sensitive resources, such as waterbodies and wetlands, by directionally drilling beneath 

them. HDD is typically used for crossing major waterbodies (greater than 100 feet wide). However, the 

proposed route does not cross any waterbodies of that width, and Kern River does not propose the use of 

HDD at any locations at this time. If further engineering analysis indicates that HDD is the preferred 

installation method at any location, Kern River would notify the FERC. 

East Canyon Creek Crossing 

During construction of the Kern River mainline in 1991, a conventional bore was proposed for 

crossing East Canyon Creek. The boring was not successful and installation was accomplished using 

open-cut installation techniques. East Canyon Creek has significant surface flow and groundwater flow 

throughout much of the year, but flow is generally lowest late in the year. As a result, Kern River has 

developed a site-specific crossing plan to construct the crossing in late fall or early winter of 2010, when 

surface and groundwater levels are expected to be low in the creek. If construction extends into winter, it 

would be conducted in accordance with Kern River’s Winter Construction Plan. In addition to lower 

flows, winter construction with partially frozen or frozen soil with an insulating snow cover would reduce 

the potential for impacts to the adjacent wetlands as compared to summer and fall conditions. 

Kern River proposes to use the flume crossing method at East Canyon Creek. After the pipe is 

lowered into the trench, the ends of the pipe sections near the beginning of the sag bend would be capped 

until tie-ins can be completed in 2011. After capping, trench breakers would be installed on each side of 

the East Canyon Creek crossing and the trench, banks would be backfilled to restore the channel and 

banks to stable slopes and contours, and the flume pipes would be removed. Where the backfill material 

may have become partially frozen, portable diesel-fired drying units may be used for thawing and 

removing ice and snow prior to backfill to avoid the potential for excessive settling, or clean fill would be 

imported. The banks would be stabilized with cobbles or boulders to provide protection from hydraulic 

erosion in higher flow periods until permanent seeding and installation of erosion control matting could 

be completed in the 2011 construction season. 

The temporary equipment bridge at the crossing site would remain in place for the 2011 

construction season. The bridge would be removed when reclamation of adjacent portions of the right-ofway and ATWSs have been completed. 

2-28
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Dam-and-Pump Crossing Method

Figure 2.3.2-5

2-29
Temporary mulch would be applied to the disturbed portion of the construction right-of-way and 

the ATWSs. The sediment barriers would be left in place and inspected as described in Kern River’s Plan 

and Procedures or during and immediately following a period of thawing and higher runoff. The bridge 

would be maintained as necessary. The crossing would require approximately 2 to 3 weeks to complete. 

Jordan River and City Drain Crossings 

The Jordan River and City Drain crossings would be constructed using the conventional 

horizontal bore method. Construction at both crossings would be initiated in the fall of 2010, but may 

extend into winter. If construction extends into winter, it would be conducted in accordance with the 

Kern River’s Winter Construction Plan. In the fall and early winter, groundwater levels would be lower 

than at other times of the year and would result in better bore pit stability and less disturbance to the 

adjacent wetlands. 

Kern River anticipates that excavation of bore pits would proceed similarly to that for 

conventional non-winter construction. Frozen soils near the surface are not expected to impede 

excavation or use of conventional equipment. Topsoil and subsoil would be stockpiled separately as 

described for standard pipeline construction (section 2.3.1). The bore pits would be excavated outside of 

existing levees, and the levees would not be disturbed during construction. The bore pits would be 

dewatered as necessary. Water would be released into the adjacent upland area using a water discharge 

device and sediment barriers in accordance with Kern River’s Plan and Procedures. Kern River would 

remove snow from the bore pits to allow visual inspection of the trench and bore pits and to allow work in 

the bore pits. Excavated material from the boring may be covered with Visqueen or a similar product to 

protect it from excessive snow accumulation and from mixing with the snow removed from the bore pits. 

Portable drying units may be used to thaw and remove snow and ice from the excavated material prior to 

backfilling the bore pits in order to prevent excessive settling. In addition, Kern River may import clean 

topsoil if required to restore the original contours. After the pipeline is installed under the waterbody, it 

would be capped and the bore bits would be backfilled. The right-of-way and ATWSs would be covered 

with mulch to reduce the potential for erosion during snowmelt and other runoff. 

The pits would be re-excavated in 2011 to complete tie-ins with the adjacent pipe segments and 

restored with the adjacent segments of the construction right-of-way in accordance with Kern River’s 

Procedures and Reclamation Plan. 

2.3.2

2.3.2

.3 Agricultural Areas 

The proposed pipeline route would cross about 1.1 miles of agricultural areas. In these areas, 

Kern River proposes to segregate the topsoil across the entire width of the construction workspace. To 

mitigate impacts on topsoil in these areas, Kern River proposes to separate the topsoil to its actual depth, 

to a maximum depth of 12 inches. The topsoil would be stockpiled separately from the subsoil to prevent 

mixing. Kern River would also bury the pipeline to a depth that would result in at least 5 feet of cover in 

agricultural areas. 

.4 Roads, Highways, and Railroads 

The proposed pipeline route would cross paved and unpaved roads, highways, and railroads. 

Construction across these features would be accomplished in accordance with Kern River’s Plan and the 

requirements of all applicable crossing permits and approvals. During roadway construction, Kern River 

would incorporate safety precautions required by federal, state, and local transportation agencies. 

2-30
Railroads and major paved highways would be crossed using conventional subsurface boring 

techniques where feasible (conventional horizontal bore technique, described in section 2.3.2.2 and 

table 2.3.2-1). Figures 2.3.2-6 and 2.3.2-7 are plan views of typical road and railroad bored crossings, 

respectively. With this method, the pipeline would pass under the railroad or roadway with little or no 

disturbance to traffic along the roadway. The crossing of Interstate 15 would be accomplished during the 

late fall and would extend into early winter. 

TABLE 2.3.2-1 

Proposed Horizontal Bore Locations for the 

Proposed Apex Expansion Project 

State County Feature Crossed Milepost 

Roadways

Utah Morgan State Highway 65 1.2 

Morgan State Highway 66 5.0 

Davis South Frontage Road 25.7 

Davis State Highway 89 25.7 

Davis Interstate 15 25.7 

Davis Interstate 15 Southbound Ramp 25.8 

Davis Beck Street Ramp 25.8 

Davis Redwood Road 27.0 

Davis Pony Express Court 27.0 

Salt Lake Interstate 215 27.6 

Salt Lake 2200 W. Street 28.0 

Railroads 

Utah Davis Union Pacific and UTA Railroads (4) 25.8 – 25.9 

Davis Chevron Rail Spur 26.5 

Pipeline crossings of lightly traveled paved and unimproved rural dirt roads would typically be 

crossed using the open-cut installation method. If open-cut road construction requires extensive 

construction time, provisions would be made for detours or other measures to permit traffic flow during 

construction. If reasonable detours are not feasible, a minimum of one lane would be kept open to traffic, 

except for brief periods when it is essential to close the road to lay the pipeline or weld pipeline segments 

together. To the extent possible, roads would not be closed during peak traffic hours. After the pipeline 

is installed, the roadway would be restored to its pre-construction condition or better. 

With either method, the pipeline would be buried to a depth of at least 5 feet below the road or 

railroad surface and designed to withstand the anticipated external loads. 

Section 4.8 provides additional information on the proposed road and railroad crossings. 

2-31
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Conventional Horizontal Boring for 

Roadway Crossing

Figure 2.3.2-6

2-32
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Conventional Horizontal Boring for 

Railroad Crossing

Figure 2.3.2-7

2-33
2.3.2

2.3.2

2.3.2

.5 Residences within 50 Feet of the Construction Right-of-Way 

Kern River identified two residences and one barn within 50 feet of the proposed construction 

right-of-way. The residence at MP 27.5 is located adjacent to Kern River’s existing right-of-way. Kern 

River would reduce the pipeline offset or the construction workspace as practicable to minimize 

inconvenience to property owners. If construction requires the removal of private property features such 

as gates or fences, Kern River would coordinate with the landowner or tenant on the best methods to use. 

Kern River is currently coordinating with the property landowners to avoid and minimize impacts 

on the residential properties. Kern River would coordinate construction work schedules with affected 

landowners prior to starting construction. To minimize impacts on residential areas within the vicinity of 

construction work areas, Kern River would implement measures as described in section 4.8.2.3 on a siteby-site basis. Kern River developed site-specific residential construction plans to inform affected 

landowners of proposed measures to minimize disruption and to maintain access to the two residences 

located within 50 feet of the construction right-of-way (see appendix L). These site-specific construction 

plans include a dimensioned drawing depicting the residence in relation to the pipeline; workspace 

boundaries; the proposed permanent right-of-way. We have reviewed the site-specific residential 

construction plans and find them acceptable. We are, however, specifically seeking comments on these 

plans. 

After completion of major construction, the property would be restored as reasonably as 

practicable as requested by the landowner to the extent that the landowner’s requirements are compatible 

with existing regulations and with Kern River’s standards regarding right-of-way restoration and 

maintenance. 

.6 Commercial and Industrial Areas 

Industrial and commercial land is present in the vicinity of the proposed route between MP 25.0 

and 27.0. No industrial or commercial buildings are located within 50 feet of the proposed construction 

right-of-way. Kern River would coordinate with business owners to maintain access; reduce construction 

duration to the extent possible; and generally minimize impacts and inconveniences to business owners, 

employees, and customers. 

.7 Areas of Steep Terrain 

Portions of the proposed Project would traverse areas of side slopes and rolling terrain that could 

require additional right-of-way to create level and safe workspaces. Where steep slopes (greater than 

15 percent) are parallel to the proposed pipeline right-of-way, Kern River would use industry-accepted 

steep slope construction methods. This would involve cutting the uphill side of the construction right-ofway during grading. The material removed from the cut would be used to fill the downhill side of the 

construction right-of-way to provide a safe and level surface from which to operate heavy equipment. 

The pipeline trench would then be excavated along the newly graded right-of-way at the appropriate 

depth beneath the original grade. 

After pipeline installation and backfill of the trench, excavated material would be placed back in 

the cut and appropriately compacted to restore the approximate original contours. All disturbed areas 

would then be stabilized in accordance with Kern River’s Plan. This would include seeding and 

installation of erosion control matting or fabric to provide a higher degree of protection from surface 

erosion until vegetation becomes established. 

2-34
Where steep slopes are generally perpendicular to the right-of-way, erosion control structures 

including slope and trench breakers would be used in accordance with Kern River’s Reclamation Plan and 

the provisions of Kern River’s Plan. The restored right-of-way would be monitored for restoration 

success and corrective action would be implemented in any areas of active erosion. 

Figure 2.3.2-8 provides a typical cross-section of the steep slope construction technique. This 

construction technique would likely require ATWSs to accommodate the additional volumes of fill 

material generated by this technique. Figure 2.3.2-9 depicts a typical right-of-way for construction areas 

on steep slopes. 

2.3.2

2.3.3

.8 Areas with Geologic Faults 

The proposed route would cross one active fault, the Warm Springs Fault, at about MP 25.6. The 

other faults crossed by the pipeline route are considered to be geologically older and inactive. Analyses 

conducted for the Warm Springs Fault and construction of the existing Kern River pipeline at this location 

indicate that special construction methods would be needed for the proposed Project. Kern River would 

use the design and construction procedures that were employed for the Kern River mainline crossing of 

the Warm Springs Fault, including the following specific fault-rupture mitigation measures:

 Install extra-heavy wall, Grade X65 steel pipe; 

 Surround the pipe with select sand backfill along a distance of 450 feet west of the fault trace 

and 750 feet east of the fault trace; and 

 Excavate the pipe trench to a depth of 10 feet below the pipe and place a 4-foot-deep layer of 

select sand backfill in the trench along a distance of 100 feet west of the fault trace and 

200 feet east of the fault trace. 

Section 4.1 provides additional information on the proposed crossing of the faults and geologic 

hazards. 

2.3.3 Construction Procedures for Aboveground Facilities 

Aboveground facilities for the proposed Project include one new compressor station (Milford 

Compressor Station), one new compressor at each of three existing compressor stations (Coyote Creek, 

Elberta, and Dry Lake Compressor Stations), replacement of an existing compressor at an existing 

compressor station (Fillmore Compressor Station), six MLVs, three pig launchers, and two pig receivers. 

The pipeline construction crew would install four MLVs and one pig launcher along the proposed 

pipeline; construction at the existing compressor stations and at the site of the new compressor station 

(which includes two MLVs, two pig launchers, and two pig receivers) would be conducted by fabrication 

crews working separately from the pipeline construction spread. At the existing compressor stations, all 

construction activities would be conducted within the existing fence lines. 

.1 Compressor Stations 

At the site of the proposed Milford Compressor Station at KRMP 326.9, the first step of 

construction would involve the removal of vegetation from the site and leveling of the terrain. After 

grading at the site of the new proposed compressor station, concrete foundations would be poured for 

buildings and pipe support piers. After completion of this work, Kern River would winterize the site. 

2-35
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale - Reference OnlyKern River proposes to use specific side slope construction methods when the proposed pipeline would be 

upgradient and downgradient of other pipelines and transmission lines

APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Cross-section of Typical Side Slope Construction 

Method

Figure 2.3.2-8

2-36
Date: March 2010

Not to Scale APEX EXPANSION PROJECT

Typical Side Slope Construction Method Right-of-Way

Figure 2.3.2-9

2-37
In the spring of 2011, Kern River would return to the proposed Milford Compressor Station site 

to install new filter/separator units; a new compressor building; a new turbine/compressor package inside 

the compressor building; high-pressure gas coolers; a natural gas-fired auxiliary power generation unit for 

backup power generation; pipelines associated with the new compressor; a blowdown/vent stack; two 

MLVs (one on the existing mainline pipeline and one on the existing loop pipeline); two pig launchers 

and two pig receivers (one on the existing mainline pipeline and one on the existing loop pipeline); power 

and control buildings; a warehouse building and the required electrical service; other utilities; and control 

equipment. Kern River would also construct a potable water tank and a septic system to serve the 

restrooms in the control building. Potable water would be brought to the compressor station by truck. 

The new compressor station site would be fenced for security and protection. 

At the existing compressor stations, some grading may be required at the sites planned for 

installation of the new compressors. At the existing stations, concrete foundations would be poured to 

support extensions of the existing compressor buildings, the new or replacement compressors, and the 

associated piping and appurtenant equipment. 

Constructing the concrete foundations at each of the sites would entail setting forms, installing 

rebar, pouring the concrete, and allowing the concrete to cure in accordance with applicable standards. 

Concrete pours would be randomly sampled to verify compliance with minimum strength requirements. 

Major construction activities at the existing compressor stations would involve extending the 

compressor buildings, installing the new or replacement turbine/compressor units inside of the buildings, 

installing piping associated with the new compressors and existing pipelines, installing new high-pressure 

gas coolers, relocating the existing blowdown/vent stacks or adding new blowdown/vent stacks, and 

installing the required utilities and control equipment. In addition, the existing compressors at the Coyote 

Creek, Elberta, and Dry Lake Compressor Stations would be restaged to accommodate the reduced flow 

through the existing compressors that would occur with use of both the existing compressors and the new 

compressors. 

For each existing compressor station, prefabricated segments of pipe, valves, fittings, and flanges 

would be shop- or site-welded and assembled at the compressor station site. The compressor units and 

other large equipment would be brought to the sites by truck, mounted on their respective foundations by 

cranes, and the compressor buildings or the building extensions erected around them. Noise abatement 

measures (including use of sound-dampening equipment installed in the walls of the building) and 

emission control technology would be installed as needed to meet applicable federal, state, and local 

standards. Section 4.11 provides additional information on noise abatement and emission control 

technology. 

Before being placed in service, all components of the high-pressure natural gas system would be 

hydrostatically tested and all controls and safety equipment and systems would be calibrated and tested. 

Municipal or private water well sources would be used for all hydrostatic testing associated with the 

compressor stations. Hydrostatic testing would be conducted in accordance with the requirements of 

USDOT pipeline safety regulations (49 CFR 192), Kern River’s testing specifications, and applicable 

permit requirements as described in section 4.3. Because hydrostatic test water from the existing 

compressor stations would be exposed to both new and existing pipe, it would be tested and disposed of at 

a local wastewater treatment facility, or if necessary, wastewater would be treated and disposed of on site. 

Test water for the proposed Milford Compressor Station would contact only new pipe and no chemicals 

would be added; therefore the that test water would be discharged on site in accordance with applicable 

state and local regulations and in accordance with the Kern River Procedures. Section 4.3 of the EIS 

provides additional information on hydrostatic testing procedures at the compressor stations. 

2-38
After completion of testing, the final construction activities would consist of painting structures 

using colors that do not contrast with the surrounding environment, grading and surfacing the driveway at 

the proposed Milford Compressor Station, gravelling the working yard in the vicinity of the new 

compressors at the existing stations, and gravelling the working yard of the new Milford Compressor 

Station. Debris and wastes generated from the construction would be disposed of in accordance with 

applicable regulations. 

2.3.3

2.3.3

.2 Mainline Valves 

As described in section 2.1.2, there are two MLVs in place at both Kern River MLV station 96 

and MLV station 124. One of the two existing MLVs at each station would be connected to the proposed 

Wasatch Loop at MPs 0.0 and 28.0. In addition, the pipeline construction crew would install two new 

MLVs along the proposed route at MPs 7.1 and 24.6. At the proposed Milford Compressor Station, one 

new MLV would be installed on each of the two existing Kern River pipelines (the mainline and the 

existing loop line). Installation of the new MLVs would be conducted in compliance with the same 

standards and requirements described above for the compressor stations and pipeline. 

At each of the MLV sites along the pipeline route, clearing and grading would be accomplished 

as part of pipeline construction. Concrete footings and concrete pads would be constructed as described 

for the compressor stations (section 2.3.3.1). The pipeline construction crew would connect the MLVs to 

the proposed pipeline using the welding and testing procedures described for pipeline construction 

(section 2.3.1.4). After the valves are installed, the sites would be graveled, as necessary, and fenced. 

At the proposed Milford Compressor Station, the compressor station construction crew would 

install the two MLVs on the concrete foundations described in section 2.3.3.1, connect them to the 

existing pipelines, and hydrostatically test the valves as described in section 2.3.1.6. 

.3 Pig Launchers and Pig Receivers 

As described in section 2.1.2, a pig launcher barrel would be relocated from the existing MLV 

station 124 (MP 28.0) to MLV station 96 (MP 0.0). These facilities would be tied into the existing Kern 

River pipeline and the proposed Wasatch Loop pipeline by the pipeline construction crew. The special 

facility construction crew at the Milford Compressor Station would install two pig launchers and two pig 

receivers at that site. One pig launcher and one pig receiver would be attached to the existing mainline, 

and one pig launcher and one pig receiver would be attached to the existing loop line. These facilities 

would be installed on the concrete foundations and tested as described in section 2.3.3.1. 

The pig launchers and pig receivers would be connected to the pipelines using the welding and 

testing procedures described for pipeline construction (section 2.3.1.4), and installation of the new pig 

launchers would be conducted in compliance with the same standards and requirements described above 

for the pipeline and compressor stations. 

2.4 CONSTRUCTION WORKFORCE AND SCHEDULE 

Kern River plans to begin construction in November 2010 and initiate service by 

November 2011. The majority of construction of the proposed loop would occur from April through 

November 2011 using one construction spread. The spread would have an estimated peak workforce of 

541 and an average workforce of 262. As the pipeline spread moves along, construction at any single 

point along the proposed pipeline, from initial surveying and clearing to backfilling and finish grading, 

would last approximately for 6 to 10 weeks. However, the duration of construction may be longer at the 

proposed MLV sites and at hydrostatic test tie-in locations. 

2-39
The proposed modifications at the Coyote Creek, Elberta, and Fillmore Compressor Stations may 

occur at any time during the proposed pipeline construction period. Modification of the Dry Lake 

Compressor Station would be completed in the fall of 2010 and the winter of 2011. Construction of the 

Milford Compressor Station and the additions to and modifications of the existing compressor stations 

would take from 3 to 8 months to complete. At the Milford Compressor Station site, Kern River would 

accomplish the site preparation work in late 2010, winterize the site, and return in the spring of 2011 to 

complete construction. 

The average and peak construction workforce numbers for each compressor station are listed in 

table 2.4-1. 

TABLE 2.4-1 

Construction Workforce and Schedule for Compressor Station 

Construction and Modifications for the Proposed Apex Expansion Project 

Number of Workers 

Compressor Station 

Kern River Mainline 

Milepost Average Peak 

Estimated Time to 

Complete 

(months) 

Coyote Creek (existing) 60.1 40 70 7 

Elberta (existing) 191.6 40 70 7 

Fillmore (existing) 276.7 20 30 3 

Milford (new) 329.6 50 90 8 

Dry Lake (existing) 500.1 40 70 7 

2.5 ENVIRONMENTAL INSPECTION, COMPLIANCE MONITORING, AND POSTAPPROVAL VARIANCES 

The FERC may impose conditions on any Certificate granted for the proposed Apex Expansion 

Project. These conditions could include requirements and mitigation measures identified in this EIS to 

minimize environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project (see section 5.2). We will 

recommend to the Commission that these requirements and mitigation measures (indicated with bold type 

in the text) be included as conditions to any Certificate issued for the proposed Project. Further, Kern 

River would be required to implement the construction procedures and mitigation measures it has 

proposed in its filings with the FERC unless specifically modified by other Certificate conditions. 

Other regulatory agencies also may issue conditions as part of their permits or approvals. While 

there would be differences between the conditions of the FERC and other agencies, the environmental 

inspection program for the Apex Expansion Project would address all conditions placed on the proposed 

Project by regulatory agencies. 

During Project construction, Kern River would be represented by a Chief Inspector who would be 

supported by one Environmental Inspector and Craft Inspectors dedicated entirely to the Wasatch Loop. 

A full-time inspector would be assigned to each compressor station until initial ground work and 

temporary erosion control measures are installed as needed to ensure that there are no adverse impacts 

from excessive soil erosion and sedimentation from the site. There would be a full-time Environmental 

Inspector during winter construction of the pipeline. In areas where winter work is completed and the 

spread has been demobilized, the right-of-way would not be continuously inspected. However, access 

2-40
roads would be monitored biweekly, and when the snow cover melts, the construction sites and access 

roads would be inspected to determine whether maintenance or remedial erosion control efforts are 

needed. 

The Environmental Inspector would be responsible for monitoring and ensuring compliance with 

all environmental mitigation measures required by the FERC Certificate; the BLM Right-of-Way Grant 

and Temporary Use Permit; conditions or requirements of other federal, state, or local permits or 

authorizations; and Kern River’s plans. The Environmental Inspector would have the authority to stop 

activities that violate the environmental conditions of these authorizations, state and federal 

environmental permit conditions, or landowner requirements, and to order appropriate corrective actions 

if needed. The Environmental Inspector would also be responsible for maintaining status reports and 

training records. 

In addition to the Environmental Inspector, inspectors from the FERC, the BLM, and the USFS 

would conduct periodic field inspections during construction and restoration. The FERC, the BLM, and 

the USFS inspectors would report on the effectiveness of Kern River’s environmental inspection program 

and assess environmental compliance with both the FERC Certificate and with the terms and conditions 

of the BLM right-of-way grant. 

2.6 POST-APPROVAL VARIANCE PROCESS 

The pipeline alignment and work areas identified in this EIS should be sufficient for construction 

and operation (including maintenance) of the Apex Expansion Project and ancillary facilities. However, 

minor route realignments and other workspace refinements often continue past the project planning phase 

and into the construction phase. As a result, the project location and areas of disturbance described in this 

EIS may require refinement after project approval (assuming the project is approved). These changes 

frequently involve minor route realignments, shifting or adding new temporary extra workspaces or 

staging areas, or adding additional access roads. We have developed a procedure for assessing impacts on 

those areas that have not been evaluated in this EIS and for approving or denying their use. In general, 

biological and cultural resource surveys were conducted using a survey corridor larger than that necessary 

to construct the pipeline. For example, Kern River utilized a 400- to 600-foot-wide survey corridor for 

wetland, wildlife, and cultural resource surveys, and identified wells and springs within 150 feet of the 

proposed pipeline workspaces. If Kern River shifts any additional temporary workspace or requires 

unanticipated workspace subsequent to any project approval, these areas would typically be within the 

previously surveyed area. Such requests would be reviewed using a post-approval variance process. 

The request for route realignments or additional workspace locations along with a copy of the 

survey results would be documented and forwarded to the FERC (and other federal land managing 

agencies, as applicable) in the form of a “variance request”. The FERC and/or the applicable federal land 

managing agency would take the lead on reviewing the request, depending on the ownership status of the 

subject land. Typically, no further resource agency consultation would be required if the requested 

change is within previously surveyed areas. The procedures used for assessing impacts on work areas 

outside the survey corridor and for approving their use are similar to those described above, except that 

additional surveys, analyses, and resource agency consultations would be performed to ensure that 

impacts on biological, cultural, and other sensitive resources would be avoided or minimized to the 

maximum extent practicable. 

After Kern River completes any additional surveys, analyses, and/or resource agency 

consultations, the new work area and supporting documentation (including landowner approval) would be 

forwarded to the FERC and other federal land managing agencies, as applicable, in the form of a variance 

request, which would be evaluated in the manner described above. At the conclusion of the Project, as2-41
built drawings would be provided to the FERC, the BLM, and the USFS, as appropriate, to document the 

final location of the constructed facilities. The BLM and other federal land managing agencies, as 

appropriate, would use the information in the as-built survey to determine if an amendment to the rightof-way grant on federal land would be necessary. 

2.7 OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE 

The Project pipeline and aboveground facilities would be operated and maintained in accordance 

with USDOT regulations in 49 CFR 192, the Commission’s guidance at 18 CFR 380.15, and Kern 

River’s Plan and Procedures. 

2.7.1 Operation 

2.7.1

2.7.1

.1 Pipeline Surveys and Inspections 

As required by 49 CFR 192.615, Kern River would establish an operation and maintenance plan 

and an emergency plan that includes procedures to minimize the hazards in a natural gas pipeline 

emergency. Kern River’s existing operations and maintenance program includes corrosion control, leak 

inspection surveys, regularly scheduled aerial and ground patrols of the pipeline right-of-way, and 

maintenance of the right-of-way. The existing Kern River operation, maintenance, and emergency plans 

would be expanded to incorporate the Apex Expansion Project; key elements of those plans are described 

below. 

As a part of the existing operations and maintenance plans, Kern River conducts regular patrols of 

the pipeline right-of-way. The patrol program includes periodic aerial and vehicle patrols of the pipeline 

facilities to survey surface conditions on and adjacent to the pipeline right-of-way for evidence of leaks, 

unauthorized excavation activities, erosion and wash-out areas, areas of sparse vegetation, damage to 

permanent erosion control devices, exposed pipe, missing markers and signs, new residential 

developments, and other conditions that might affect the safety or operation of the pipeline. The cathodic 

protection system is also inspected periodically to ensure that it is functioning properly. In addition, pigs 

are regularly sent through the pipeline to check for corrosion and irregularities in the pipe in accordance 

with USDOT requirements. Kern River keeps detailed records of all inspections and supplements the 

corrosion protection system as necessary to meet the requirements of 49 CFR 192. 

Kern River also maintains a liaison with the appropriate fire, police, and public officials. This 

program identifies the available resources and responsibilities of each organization that may respond to a 

natural gas pipeline emergency and assists in developing coordination responsibilities 

In addition, Kern River uses a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system, which 

continuously monitors gas pressure, temperature, and volume at specific locations along the pipeline. 

This system is installed along the Kern River mainline and existing loop lines and would be incorporated 

into the proposed Project. The SCADA system is continuously monitored from Kern River’s gas control 

center in Salt Lake City, Utah. The system provides continuous information to the control center 

operators and has threshold and alarm values set such that warnings are provided to the operators if 

critical parameters are exceeded. 

.2 Right-of-Way Maintenance 

In addition to the survey, inspection, and repair activities described above, operation of the 

pipeline would include maintenance of the right-of-way. The right-of-way would be allowed to 

revegetate after restoration; however, large brush and trees may be periodically removed near the 

2-42
pipeline. Trees or deep-rooted shrubs could damage the pipeline’s protective coating, obscure periodic 

surveillance, or interfere with potential repairs; in accordance with Kern River’s Plan, such vegetation 

would typically not be permitted to grow within the permanent right-of-way. The frequency of the 

vegetation maintenance would depend upon the vegetation growth rate. Routine vegetation maintenance 

clearing would not be done more frequently than every 3 years. However, to facilitate periodic corrosion 

and leak surveys, a corridor not exceeding 10 feet in width centered on the pipeline would be maintained 

annually in an herbaceous state. In no case would routine vegetation maintenance clearing occur between 

April 15 and August 1 of any year. Vegetation maintenance would not normally be required in 

agricultural or grazing areas. Vegetation management is discussed further in section 4.5. 

Pipeline facilities would be clearly marked at line-of-sight intervals and at crossings of roads, 

railroads, and other key points. The markers would clearly indicate the presence of the pipeline and 

provide a telephone number and address where a company representative may be reached in the event of 

an emergency or prior to any excavation in the area of the pipeline by a third party. Kern River 

participates in the One-Call system in Utah. 

2.7.1.3 Compressor Stations 

The current operation and maintenance procedures of the four existing compressor stations would 

be expanded to include the equipment installed as a part of the proposed Project. Operation and 

maintenance of the Milford Compressor Station would be similar to that of the existing Kern River 

compressor stations. 

At each of the compressor stations associated with the proposed Project, operations personnel 

would perform routine checks of the facilities, including calibration of equipment and instrumentation, 

inspection of critical components, and scheduled and routine maintenance of equipment. Safety 

equipment, such as pressure relief devices, fire detection and suppression systems, and gas detection 

systems, would be periodically tested for proper operation. Corrective actions would be taken for any 

identified problems. 

The existing compressor stations are equipped with combustible gas and fire detection alarm 

systems and an emergency shutdown system, as described below. The Milford Compressor Station 

would have the same alarm and emergency shutdown systems and capabilities. The gas detection system 

is designed to sound an alarm and begins venting upon detection of 20 percent of the lower explosive 

limit of natural gas in air. Automatic emergency shutdown of the compressors, evacuation or venting of 

gas from the station piping, and isolation of the station from the main pipeline would occur following a 

fire detection alarm or the detection of a 40 percent of the lower explosive limit inside the station. The 

compressor stations are also equipped with relief valves or pressure protection devices to protect the 

station piping from overpressure if station or unit control systems fail. 

The Kern River telemetry system is designed to notify personnel locally and at the gas control 

headquarters in Salt Lake City of the activation of safety systems and alarms. If alerted to a potential 

emergency, these personnel would instruct maintenance personnel to investigate and take proper 

corrective actions. 

2.8 FUTURE PLANS AND ABANDONMENT 

Kern River currently has no plans for future expansion of the facilities proposed. If additional 

demand for natural gas supplies requires future expansion, Kern River would apply for the appropriate 

authorizations from the FERC and the relevant federal, state, or local agencies. If such applications are 

filed, the potential environmental impacts of the new proposal would be examined at that time. 

2-43
2-44

Abandonment of the pipeline facilities would be subject to the approval of the FERC under 

Section 7(b) of the NGA and would comply with USDOT regulations and specific agreements or 

stipulations made for the pipeline right-of-way. An environmental review of any proposed abandonment 

would be conducted when the application for abandonment is filed with the FERC.