Record of Decision for Issuance of Presidential Permit; Bangor Hydro-Electric Company

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