[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 17 (Thursday, January 25, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2244-2247]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1070]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[FE Docket No. PP-89]
Record of Decision for Issuance of Presidential Permit; Bangor
Hydro-Electric Company
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Record of decision: Presidential Permit PP-89, Bangor Hydro-
Electric Company; construction of an international electrical
interconnection.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Bangor Hydro applied to the DOE for a Presidential permit to
construct a new electric transmission facility at the U.S. border with
Canada. That action was determined to be ``a major federal action,
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment'' within
the meaning of NEPA. An EIS was issued on August 18, 1995, that
considered the environmental impacts associated with granting or
denying the Presidential permit. This
[[Page 2245]]
ROD determined that allowing construction of the new electric
facilities along alternative transmission line corridors and the
options for alternative energy supplies discussed in the EIS did not
prove preferable to granting the Presidential permit for construction
along the proposed route.
DATES: January 25, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of Presidential Permit PP-89 or DOE/EIS-
0166 may be submitted to: Mr. Anthony J. Como, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Fossil Energy (FE-52), 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585-0350.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Como (Program Office) 202-586-
5935 or Carol M. Borgstrom (NEPA process) 202-586-4600 or 1-800-472-
2756.
Record of Decision
On December 16, 1988, the Bangor Hydro-Electric Company (BHE) filed
an application with the Department of Energy (DOE) for a Presidential
permit pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended by Executive Order
12038, to construct, connect, operate, and maintain a new international
transmission line interconnection with New Brunswick, Canada. The
proposed new interconnection, referred to as Bangor Hydro-Electric
Company's Second 345-kV Transmission Tie Line to New Brunswick, would
cross the U.S. International border near Baileyville, Maine, and extend
to an existing substation at Orrington, Maine. In the application, the
BHE described the U.S. portion of the proposed line as 83.8 miles in
length.
The new transmission line is needed to complement and share
electrical load with the existing 345-kV interconnection owned and
operated by the Maine Electric Power Company. The line is needed to
reduce transmission losses on the existing tie line, increase the
opportunities for economic power transactions between New England and
New Brunswick, help meet projected load growth in the New England
region, and increase the capacity benefits of the transmission ties
with New Brunswick. This would result in a general increase in electric
system reliability for the New England region. Overall, the annual net
savings could range from about $21.6 million (24 MW conserved, 50 MW
average increased economy, and 25 MW additional reserves sharing) to
more than $87 million (24 MW conserved, 150 MW average increased
economy, and 300 MW additional reserves sharing).
In reviewing this application the DOE determined that granting the
Presidential permit for the proposed interconnection would constitute
``a major federal action, significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment'' within the meaning of NEPA. Consequently, the DOE
has prepared an EIS to assess the environmental impacts associated with
granting or denying the permit.
In October 1993, the DOE published and distributed about 336 copies
of a draft EIS to interested individuals and agencies. Following this
distribution, public hearings to obtain comments on the draft EIS were
held in Bradley and Woodland, Maine, January 10 - 11, 1994. One speaker
presented comments at the public hearings, and DOE received 33 written
comments from individuals during the 72-day public comment period.
Substantive comments and responses associated with the draft EIS are
presented in the final EIS. No comments were received on the final EIS.
Basis For Decision
In compliance with the provisions of NEPA, the DOE prepared an EIS
to address the environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action and its alternatives. The EIS discusses in detail construction
activities (including clearing and control of vegetation), loss or
alteration of wildlife habitat, displacement and disturbance of
wildlife, disturbance of aquatic resources, releases of gaseous
pollutants and dust, and disruption of agricultural and forestry
activities. The EIS also discusses in detail, the potential
environmental impacts resulting from operation and maintenance of the
transmission facilities (including the collision of birds with
structures), visual impacts of additional lines within the transmission
line corridor, and possible health and safety effects in close
proximity to the electromagnetic fields associated with the proposed
line. To minimize impacts to the extent practicable, BHE has committed
to a variety of mitigation actions to protect the environment. These
procedures are presented in the EIS. The information presented in the
EIS indicates that the issuance of the Presidential permit would result
in minor incremental impacts to the environment. Accordingly, based on
the analysis in the EIS, the DOE finds that any environmental impacts
resulting from construction activities would be minimal and of short
duration.
Description of Alternatives and Their Environmental Impacts
On August 18, 1995, DOE issued a final EIS titled, ``Environmental
Impact Statement for Construction and Operation of the Proposed Bangor
Hydro-Electric Company's Second 345-kV Transmission Tie Line to New
Brunswick,'' DOE/EIS-0166. Section 2 of this document contains analyses
of the following alternatives considered by DOE in reaching its
decision to grant Presidential Permit PP-89:
1. Grant the Presidential permit as requested.
2. Grant the Presidential permit but require the use of alternative
transmission corridors and designs (three alternative transmission line
corridors were considered).
3. Take no action deny the Presidential permit request. Under
this alternative, it is assumed that the applicant would have two
additional alternatives:
(a) Do not implement alternative supply or demand measures
(maintain the status quo).
(b) Implement energy supply alternatives, such as: hydroelectric,
natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind, fuel conversion, cogeneration,
conservation and load management, and utility purchases and exchanges.
The DOE evaluated two alternative transmission line routes: the
Proposed Route and the Existing-line Route. The Proposed Route was
found to be environmentally preferable to the Existing-line Route. Two
other alternatives, the Straight-line Route and the Route 9 Route, were
considered but eliminated as viable alternatives.
Proposed Route: The proposed route is also referred to as the Stud
Mill Road route because much of the line would be located near Stud
Mill Road, an existing timber haul road jointly owned and maintained by
Georgia-Pacific Corporation and Champion International Incorporated.
The first 71.6 miles of the proposed line (starting at the crossing of
the St. Croix River) would be in a new 170-ft-wide right-of-way. For
the remaining 12.2 miles of the route, the new line would share right-
of-way space with the Maine Electric Power Company's existing 345-kV
interconnection and other lines.
For the proposed route, the estimated amount of existing vegetation
directly impacted is 1,623 acres. The unavoidable adverse impacts would
include: (1) Conversion of 1,450 acres of forest to areas with small
trees, shrubs, and grassland for the duration of the operation of the
transmission line, thereby preventing one or two
[[Page 2246]]
commercial cycles of timber cutting within the corridor; (2) about
1,185 acres of existing upland forest habitat would be cleared; (3)
most of about 268 acres of forested wetlands within the proposed right-
of-way would be modified to scrub/shrub wetlands; and (4) visual
interruption at river crossings.
Existing-Line Route: The Existing-Line Route is 106 miles in length
and would generally parallel the existing 345-kV line right-of-way,
crossing the international border at Orient, Maine, extending parallel
to the existing route to Chester, Maine, and then to the Orrington
substation. Because of the presence of several sensitive environmental
areas (e.g., extensive wetlands), this route would require several
diversions from the existing right-of-way. The six staging areas
required for this route include Bradley, Enfield, T2/R8 N.W.P.,
Mattawamkeag, Glenwood, and Orient.
Unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the Existing-Line Route
would include: (1) About 1,845 acres of forest would be cleared; (2) an
estimated 2,081 acres of existing vegetation would be directly
impacted; (3) a total of 150 houses would be located within 600 ft of
the centerline of the route, about 1.5 times greater than those of the
proposed route; (4) construction areas would be closer to a larger
population; (5) the likelihood of bald eagles colliding with the
transmission lines would be greater because there would be two
crossings of the Penobscot River, as compared with only one crossing of
the St. Croix River by the proposed route.
Straight-Line Route: The Straight-Line Route would be 115 miles,
crossing the international border just north of Kellyland, Maine, and
the Grand Falls Flowage in Fowler Township, Maine. The route would
travel northwest to the Topsfield, Maine, area and then west to Lee,
Maine. The line would then proceed northwest to Chester, where it would
parallel the existing 345-kV line to the Orrington substation.
The Straight-Line Route was eliminated from consideration as a
viable alternative because the route would (1) cross extensive areas of
wetlands, including Dead Man Stream; (2) pass through more populated
areas along Routes 2 and 6; (3) cross Route 6 in several places and be
more visually intrusive than the other routes; (4) pass through
relatively undisturbed areas of forest that contain few roads; (5) pass
near or through a series of white cedar swamps in Lee, Springfield, and
Carroll that contain rare plants; (6) pass the southern edge of the
large flowage area at Baskahegan Stream called Middle Deadwater; (7)
cross the Grand Falls Flowage on the St. Croix River in an area of
active bald eagle nesting; and (8) likely be the cause of a number of
landowner constraints along the length of the corridor.
Route 9 Route: The Route 9 Route would be 83 miles in length and
would cross the international border in Woodland, Maine. It would
generally parallel the major east-west highway between Bangor and
Calais. This route was eliminated as a viable alternative because: (1)
Several major crossings of Route 9 would be required, possibly in
sections designated as scenic highway; (2) river crossings of the
south-flowing St. Croix, Machias, Narraguagus, and Union rivers would
be more difficult and extensive because these locations are the widest
(as compared with other alternative routes); (3) the Maine Department
of Transportation is planning significant reconstruction of Route 9,
possibly involving substantial rerouting of the road, thus, making it
more difficult to locate the transmission line; (4) several lakes and
large wetlands would probably have to be traversed or would likely
force significant route changes, especially at Whalesback (Union
River), Mopang Lake, Crawford Lake, and Meddybemps Lake; (5) the
corridor is more hilly and rugged (particularly west of the Machias
River) than the other alternative routes, making (for example)
construction more difficult and increasing the potential for erosion;
and (6) more individual property owners (as compared with the other
alternative routes) would be involved, thereby complicating the routing
of the corridor.
Take No Action: Under the No Action Alternative, the DOE would not
issue a Presidential permit for the proposed interconnection, and the
transmission line would not be constructed. BHE would have to develop
other sources of energy to meet increases in demand for electricity.
The ``no action'' alternative would not provide the needed generating
capacity and would result in greater degradation of air quality as a
result of the continued use of fossil fuels for generation of
electricity.
Energy Supply Alternatives: If the DOE were to deny the
Presidential permit, BHE could take other actions to meet future demand
for electricity, such as identifying supply alternatives and/or
implementing demand-side options. However, among the alternatives
available to BHE, none were considered viable alternatives to the
proposed action.
One alternative would be construction of a new central-station,
non-oil-fired generating plant. Candidate plant types would be
hydroelectric, natural gas, nuclear, and coal-fired. BHE is currently
attempting to license several hydroelectric projects within its service
territory. Additional hydroelectric development beyond that currently
proposed would not be viable because of the limited number of sites
remaining for such development. The availability of natural gas for
generating facilities is quite limited in Maine. Natural gas is being
imported from Canada, but not in sufficient quantities to generate
power at a utility scale.
The time required to license and build a new nuclear plant is 10-15
years and the average lead time for a new coal-fired plant is 8 years.
Therefore, such alternative facilities could not be placed in service
until the year 2003 or later. In addition, these alternatives would
have similar environmental impacts as the proposed action because
construction of additional domestic transmission lines would be
required in order to deliver energy to the region.
The use of nonconventional generating facilities such as fuel
substitution, solar-, wind-, and biomass-powered facilities of the size
required to meet the energy supply level of the proposed
interconnection are not considered reasonable alternatives. Commercial-
scale developments of the size comparable to the proposed project are
not feasible for the near future.
The increased use of cogeneration and small power production (CSPP)
was not considered to be a viable alternative to the proposed action
because reliability of supply, operational problems, and financial
stability make reliance on these sources undesirable over the long-
term. CSPP's are generally nondispatchable (i.e., BHE does not have the
contractual option to shut down those resources when it is economical
to do so). Furthermore, BHE does not have complete control over when,
where, or if these alternative supply sources are developed.
In some cases, BHE's transmission system would need upgrading to
handle the interconnection with the CSPPs.
In evaluating the suitability of energy conservation and load
management (shifting of energy consumption from on-peak to off-peak
hours), BHE estimates an 11% peak reduction by the year 2000. While
load management will continue to reduce energy demand, expected growth
rates for electricity consumption are projected to be high enough to
require additional generating capacity in the New England region within
the next 5 to 10 years.
Several members of the New England Power Pool (NEPOOL) already
purchase power from other sources; however, to be considered a viable
alternative, a
[[Page 2247]]
potential source must be able to provide NEPOOL with energy and/or
capacity benefits which are comparable to those provided by the
proposed tie-line. Such purchases would not be possible from existing
sources. In addition, the New York Power Pool (NYPP), a contiguous
utility system that is a potential source of purchased power for NEPOOL
members, is a competitor of NEPOOL for the energy available in Canada
and the coal-fired energy in the midwestern United States. Therefore,
purchase of power from NYPP was not considered a viable alternative to
the proposed project.
The Midwest is another potential source of purchased power because
of its surplus of non-oil-fired capacity. Factors that precluded
consideration of this source as a viable alternative to the proposed
action are as follows:
Load and capacity projections indicate that the present
capacity surpluses would not last long enough to sustain a firm energy
sale to NEPOOL through the 1990s.
Any available surpluses are likely to be purchased by
utilities in regions with existing direct transmission connections.
Any power purchased must flow through the central New York
State and Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland (PJM) systems. The
transmission systems in these areas are already heavily used and could
not readily withstand the additional load imposed by transmitting
midwestern energy to New England.
The construction of additional transmission lines through
New York or the states of the PJM systems could encounter various
regulatory, legal, and environmental obstacles that could prevent or
delay implementation and raise the final cost of the energy.
Installing the transmission line underground and alternative
structure designs were also considered. The environmental impacts and
construction costs of installing the transmission line underground
would be greater than those for the proposed project, and the
reliability would be lower than that of an overhead system. The wood H-
frame structure was chosen largely because of economic considerations,
and because the impacts caused by most structure types would be
similar. The primary impacts associated with an underground system that
precluded it from consideration as a viable alternative included (1)
extensive excavation, grading, and backfilling; (2) potential for oil
contamination of soils; (3) disruption of land use patterns along the
entire length of the route; (4) limitation on land uses allowed over or
near the route; (5) instream disturbance of all waterways crossed by
the route; (6) potential for oil spills or leaks into surface water and
wetlands; (7) potential for oil contamination of groundwater; (8)
decreased habitat diversity along the route because the area would have
to be maintained as grasses; (9) increased potential for damage to
surface and subsurface archaeological sites; and (10) increased worker
safety concerns because of the increased construction and maintenance
activities that would be required.
Environmentally Preferred Alternative
Upon completion of a thorough review of all proposed alternatives,
DOE has concluded that construction of the Stud Mill Road route is the
environmentally preferred alternative and that adequate safeguards of
the environment can be accomplished using mitigation measures
identified in the EIS as well as the standard practices of utility
companies constructing and maintaining ROW. With approximately 83 miles
of transmission line to be sited within Maine, the Stud Mill Road route
is the shortest when compared to the 106 mile Existing Line and 115
mile Straight-Line routes. The preferred route would require the fewest
transmission structures with the greatest spacing. The preferred route
would require the least amount of forest clearing, stream crossings and
new service road construction due to use of existing service roads and
timber haul roads that traverse the route. Construction of the
transmission line along the preferred route will have the least impact
to wildlife species due to the reduced amount of vegetation clearing.
Where the proposed alternative will parallel existing 345-kV
transmission facilities, interactions between the phases (conductors)
of the existing and proposed line will decrease magnetic field exposure
to residents located near the two-line corridor. Application of the No
Action alternative would likely have a negative impact on air quality
in the region as a result of continued or increased fossil fuel use in
the New England region. The technology for use of nonconventional
generation sources in place of the proposed facilities is not
considered to have advanced sufficiently to provide the energy
resources required today. Construction of a new, non-oil-fired
generating plant, would require an extensive design and construction
phase and would clearly have significant negative environmental impacts
especially in terms of air emissions.
Decision
DOE will issue Presidential Permit PP-89 to BHE for the
construction, connection, operation, and maintenance of a 345-kV
transmission line across the international border between the United
States, at Baileyville, Maine, and Canada for interconnection with
facilities of the New Brunswick Power Commission in New Brunswick,
Canada. In the United States, the transmission line will follow the
Stud Mill Road route, as described in Presidential Permit PP-89. As a
condition of granting the Presidential permit, BHE will be required to
implement all mitigative measures to which BHE has committed, as
presented in the EIS. This conditional requirement shall be deemed
adequate mitigation protection to satisfy the requirements for a
Mitigation Action Plan (10 CFR 1021.331).
Copies of this Record of Decision will be made available upon
request, for public inspection and copying at the Department of Energy,
Room 3F-090, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585, between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
Issued in Washington, D.C. on January 18, 1996.
Anthony J. Como,
Director, Office of Coal & Electricity, Office of Fuels Programs,
Office of Fossil Energy.
[FR Doc. 96-1070 Filed 1-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
