[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 105 (Thursday, May 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27069-27072]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13486]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 27070]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP96-248-000 and CP96-249-000]
Portland Natural Gas Transmission System; Notice of Intent To
Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed PNGTS
Project, Request for Comments and Environmental Issues, and Notice of
Public Scoping Meeting (NOI)
May 23, 1996.
The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) that
will discuss the environmental impacts of the construction and
operation of the 246.2 miles of pipeline and metering facilities
proposed in the PNGTS Project.\1\ This EIS will be used by the
Commission in its decision-making process to determine whether to
approve the project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Portland Natural Gas Transmission System's applications were
filed with the Commission under Sections 3 and 7 of the Natural Gas
Act and Parts 153 and 157 of the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are asking a number of Federal and state agencies to indicate
whether they wish to cooperate with us in the preparation of the EIS.
These agencies are listed in appendix 1 and may choose to participate
once they have evaluated the proposal relative to their agencies'
responsibilities.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Appendices 2 through 5 referenced in this notice are not
being printed in the Federal Register. Copies are available from the
Commission's Public Reference and Files Maintenance Branch, 888
First Street, NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426 or call (202) 208-
1371. Copies of the appendices were sent to all those receiving this
notice in the mail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of the Proposed Project
Portland Natural Gas Transmission System (PNGTS) wants to build new
natural gas pipeline facilities in Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, and
Massachusetts, with a peak day capacity of 178,000 thousand cubic feet
per day (Mcf/d), of natural gas to transport up to 167,000 Mcf/d of
natural gas for four shippers. PNGTS requests Commission authorization,
in Docket CP96-249-000, to construct and operate the following
facilities:
241.9 miles of 20-inch-diameter pipeline (mainline)
extending from a connection with TransCanada PipeLines Limited (TCPL)
at the border of the United States and Canada near North Troy, Vermont
to the existing Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company transmission system in
Haverhill, Massachusetts. Of the 241.9-mile-long mainline, about 58.8
miles would be in Vermont, 65.9 miles would be in New Hampshire, 117.1
miles would be in Maine, and 0.1 mile would be in Massachusetts;
3.3 miles of 12-inch-diameter pipeline lateral connected
to the mainline in Westbrook, Maine and ending in Falmouth, Maine;
1.0 mile of 12-inch-diameter pipeline lateral connected to
the mainline in Newington, New Hampshire and ending near Portsmouth,
New Hampshire;
Four new meter stations, one each in Falmouth and Wells,
Maine; Newington, New Hampshire; and Haverhill, Massachusetts;
Acquisition and modification of an existing meter station
in Newington, New Hampshire adjacent to the proposed new meter station;
and
Associated pipeline facilities, such as 15 mainline block
valves and 4 pig launchers and/or receivers.
PNGTS has also requested authorization in Docket No. CP96-248-000
to construct, operate, and maintain border facilities to import gas
from Canada. The import point border facilities would include about 500
feet of 20-inch-diameter pipeline to connect with the facilities of
TCPL near North Troy, Vermont.
PNGTS proposes to have the facilities in service by November 1,
1998. PNGTS also plans to construct but has not yet filed an
application for additional pipeline laterals (future laterals) to serve
markets near Newport, St. Johnsbury, and Gilman, Vermont; Groveton and
Berlin, New Hampshire; and Jay, Maine. PNGTS indicates that it will
file a separate application for these facilities in the fall of 1996.
The general locations of the project facilities are shown in
appendix 2. The general locations of PNGTS future laterals and other
natural gas projects under Commission review occurring in the same
region and within the same timeframe (Granite State Gas Transmission,
Inc. [Granite State], Granite State LNG Project, Docket No. CP95-52-000
and Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C. [M&NP], Maritimes &
Northeast Pipeline [Maritimes Project], Docket No. CP96-178-000) as
shown in appendix 3. If you are interested in obtaining detailed maps
of a specific portion of the project, contact the EIS Project Manager
identified at the end of this notice.
Land Requirements for Construction
Construction of the proposed facilities would affect about 2,506
acres of land. Approximately 93 percent of the proposed pipeline and
pipeline laterals would parallel existing pipeline, powerline, or other
rights-of-way. The nominal construction rights-of-way for the 20-inch-
diameter pipeline and 12-inch-diameter pipeline laterals would be 75
feet wide. Extra temporary work spaces would be used at road, stream,
and large wetland crossings, as well as for pipeyards and contractor
yards and areas where temporary topsoil or rock storage is required.
Following construction, about 1,473 acres of the land affected by
the project would be retained for operation of the pipeline and
aboveground facilities. This total includes about 0.5 acre for each of
the four new and one existing meter stations and about 1.0 acre for
each of the four pig launchers and/or receivers. Permanent 50-foot-wide
rights-of-way would be maintained for the 20- and 12-inch-diameter
pipelines. The mainline block valves would be within the permanent
rights-of-way. Existing land uses on the remainder of the disturbed
area, as well as most land uses on the permanent rights-of-way, would
be allowed to continue following construction.
The EIS Process
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals.
We call this ``scoping.'' The main goal of the scoping process is to
focus the analysis in the EIS on the important environmental issues. By
this NOI, the Commission requests public comments on the scope of the
issues it will address in the EIS. All comments received are considered
during the preparation of the EIS. State and local government
representatives are encouraged to notify their constituents of this
proposed action and encourage them to comment on their areas concern.
The EIS will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the
construction and operation of the proposed project. We have already
identified a number of issues under each topic that we think deserve
attention based on a preliminary review of the proposed facilities and
the environmental information provided by the applicant. These issues
are listed below. This is a preliminary list of issues and may be
changed based on your comments and our analysis.
Geology and Soils
--Seismology, soil liquefaction, and areas susceptible to landslide.
--39.6 miles of near-surface bedrock that may require blasting.
--Effect on exploitable mineral resources.
[[Page 27071]]
--Effect on farmland.
--Erosion control and right-of-way revegetation procedures.
Water Resources
--Effect on groundwater and surface water supplies.
--832 crossings of perennial and intermittent waterbodies, including 9
crossings of waterbodies over 100 feet wide (Moos, Connecticut,
Peabody, Androscoggin, Presumpscot, Saco, Mousam, Squamscott, and
Piscataqua Rivers) and crossings of the Missisquoi, Israel, and Exeter
Rivers and Great Brook.
--Consistency with state Coastal Zone Management Programs.
Biological Resources
--Clearing of upland forest and the permanent conversion of forest to
open land.
--Effect on wetland habitat, including tidal salt marshes along the
Squamscott and Piscataqua Rivers, resulting from the crossing of 940
wetlands.
--Effect on warmwater, coldwater, anadromous, and estuarine fisheries,
habitat.
--Effect on wildlife habitat, including deer wintering areas and
waterfowl and wading bird habitat.
--Effect on Federal threatened and endangered species and state special
concern species.
--Effect on Kennebunk Plains, an unusual dry grassland community.
Cultural Resources
--Effect on historic and prehistoric sites.
--Native American and tribal concerns.
Land Use
--Effect on 103 residences within 50 feet of construction work areas.
--Effect on planned residential developments.
--Effect on public and recreation lands, including the Willoughby State
Forest, Victory State Forest, Victory Bog State Wildlife Management
Area, Roaring Brook Park, White Birches Campground, Bean Pond Fish and
Wildlife Area, White Mountain National Forest, and the Pease
Development Authority property.
--Effect on snowmobile, jeep, and hiking trails, several of which are
important to the Appalachian Mountain Club and Randolph Mountain Club,
including the Carter-Moriah Trail and Appalachian Trail.
--Effect on scenic waterbodies and byways, including the Connecticut,
Exeter, and Piscataqua Rivers; and Routes 3, 116, 16, 2, 107, and 238
in New Hampshire and Route 11 in Maine.
--Effects resulting from crossing over or near known hazardous waste
sites.
Socioeconomics
--Effect of construction workforce on surrounding areas.
--Effect on property values.
Air Quality and Noise
--Effect on local air quality and noise environment as a result of
construction.
Reliability and Safety
--Assessment of hazards associated with natural gas pipelines.
Cumulative Impact
--Assessment of the combined effect of the proposed project with other
projects occurring in the same general area and within the same time
frame, including the Granite State LNG Project and Maritimes Project.
We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the proposed project
or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to lessen
or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
Our independent analysis of the issues will be in the Draft EIS
which will be mailed to Federal, state, and local agencies, public
interest groups, interested individuals, affected landowners,
newspapers, libraries, and the Commission's official service list for
this proceeding. A 45-day comment period will be allotted for review of
the Draft EIS. We will consider all comments on the Draft EIS and
revise the document, as necessary, before issuing a Final EIS. The
Final EIS will include our response to each comment received and will
be used by the Commission in its decision-making process to determine
whether to approve the project.
Public Participation and Scoping Meetings
You can make a difference by sending a letter addressing your
specific comments or concerns about the project. You should focus on
the potential environmental effects of the proposal, alternatives to
the proposal (including alternative routes), and measures to avoid or
lessen environmental impact. The more specific your comments, the more
useful they will be. Please follow the instructions below to ensure
that your comments are received and properly recorded:
Address your letter to: Lois Cashell, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426;
Reference Docket No. CP96-249-000;
Send a copy of your letter to: Mr. Mark Jensen, EIS
Project Manager, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE, Room 72-65, Washington, DC 20426; and
Mail your comments so that they will be received in
Washington, DC on or before June 28, 1996.
In addition to sending written comments, you may attend public
scoping meetings. We will conduct four public scoping meetings
comprising six sessions at the following times and locations:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Time Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 17, 1996........... 7:00 p.m.............. Orleans, VT.
June 18, 1996........... 7:00 p.m.............. Gorham, NH.
June 19, 1996........... 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m Wells, ME.
June 20, 1996........... 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m Newton, NH.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The meetings in Newton and Wells will also cover the proposed
Maritimes Project in New Hampshire and Maine. We will send a separate
NOI for the Maritimes Project to landowners affected by that project.
PNGTS and/or M&NP will be invited to present a description of their
proposals at the appropriate meetings. The Newton and Wells meetings
will have two sessions in order to provide sufficient time to discuss
both projects at each session. While all are invited to attend either
session, we are requesting that state and local governments plan on
attending the 4:00 p.m. session.
The meeting in Orleans, Vermont will be held at the Lake Region
Union High School. The meeting in Gorham, New Hampshire will be held at
the Town and Country Motor Inn, Route 2. The two meetings in Wells,
Maine will be held at the Wells High School Gymnasium, Sanford Road.
The two meetings in Newton, New Hampshire will be held at the Memorial
Grammar School Gymnasium, 31 West Main Street.
The purpose of the scoping meetings is to obtain input from state
and local governments and from the public. Federal agencies have formal
channels for input into the Federal process (including separate
meetings which we have arranged) on an interagency basis. Federal
agencies are expected to transmit their comments directly to the
[[Page 27072]]
FERC and not use the scoping meetings for this purpose.
Interested groups and individuals are encouraged to attend the
meetings and present oral comments on the environmental issues which
they believe should be addressed in the Draft EIS. The more specific
your comments, the more useful they will be. Anyone who would like to
make an oral presentation at the meeting should contact the EIS Project
Manager identified at the end of this notice to have his or her name
placed on the list of speakers. Priority will be given to those persons
representing groups. A list will be available at the public meetings to
allow for non-preregistered speakers to sign up. A transcript will be
made of the meetings and comments will be used to help determine the
scope of the Draft EIS.
Becoming an Intervenor
In addition to involvement in the EIS scoping process, you may want
to become an official party to the proceeding or become an
``intervenor.'' Among other things, intervenors have the right to
receive copies of case-related Commission documents and filings by
other intervenors. Likewise, each intervenor must provide copies of its
filings to all other parties. If you want to become an intervenor you
must file a motion to intervene according to Rule 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214) (see
appendix 4).
The date for filing of timely motions to intervene in this
proceeding has passed. Therefore, parties now seeking to file late
interventions must show good cause, as required by section
385.214(b)(3), why this time limitation should be waived. Environmental
issues have been viewed as good cause for late intervention. You do not
need intervenor status to have your scoping comments considered.
Environmental Mailing List
This notice is being sent to individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed project. It is also being sent to all potential right-of-way
grantors to solicit comments regarding environmental considerations
related to the proposed project. As details of the project become
established, representatives to PNGTS may also separately contact
landowners, communities, and public agencies concerning project
matters, including acquisition of permits and rights-of-way.
If you do not want to send comments at this time but still want to
keep informed and receive copies of the Draft and Final EIS's, please
return the Information Request (appendix 5). If you do not return the
Information Request, you will be taken off the mailing list.
Additional information about the proposed project is available from
Mr. Mark Jensen, EIS Project Manager, at (202) 208-0828.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
Appendix 1--Cooperating Agencies
The following Federal and state agencies are asked to indicate
whether they want to be cooperating agencies for purposes of producing
an EIS:
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Department of the Army
Army Corps of Engineers
Department of Commerce
National Marine Fisheries Service
Department of Energy
Department of the Interior
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Fish and Wildlife Service
Geological Survey
National Park Service
Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
Environmental Protection Agency
Vermont Agency of Natural Resources
New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services
Maine Department of Environmental Protection
These, or any other Federal, state, or local agencies wanting to
participate as a cooperating agency should send a letter describing the
extent to which they want to be involved. Follow the instructions below
if your agency wishes to participate in the EIS process or comment on
the project:
Address your letter to: Lois Cashell, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426;
Reference Docket No. CP96-249-000;
Send a copy of your letter to: Mr. Mark Jensen, EIS
Project Manager, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE, Room 72-65, Washington, DC 20426; and Docket No. CP96-248-
000, et al.
Mail your comments so that they will be received in
Washington, DC on or before June 28, 1996.
Cooperating agencies are encouraged to participate in the scoping
process and provide us written comments. Agencies are also welcome to
suggest format and content changes that will make it easier for them to
adopt the EIS. However, we will decide what modifications will be
adopted in light of our production constraints.
[FR Doc. 96-13486 Filed 5-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 0717-01-M
