SECTION 1. DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION [1-1](#development-description)

1.A Narrative [1-2](#narrative)

1.A.1 Objectives and Details [1-3](#objectives-and-details)

1.A.1.a Detailed Description of Consolidated Corridors Route
[1-3](#detailed-description-of-consolidated-corridors-route)

1.B Topographic Map and Location of Development
[1-25](#topographic-map-and-location-of-development)

1.B.1 Location of Development Boundaries
[1-25](#location-of-development-boundaries)

1.B.2 Quadrangle Names [1-26](#quadrangle-names)

1.C Construction Plan [1-26](#construction-plan)

1.C.1 ROW Width [1-26](#row-width)

1.C.2 Structure Selection Process [1-30](#structure-selection-process)

1.C.2.a Results and Conclusion [1-35](#results-and-conclusion)

1.C.3 Transmission Line Structures [1-35](#transmission-line-structures)

1.C.4 Construction Facilities, Access and Scheduling
[1-44](#construction-facilities-access-and-scheduling)

1.C.4.a Construction Equipment [1-44](#construction-equipment)

1.C.4.b Construction Staging Areas [1-44](#construction-staging-areas)

1.C.4.c Access To and Within the Project Route
[1-46](#access-to-and-within-the-project-route)

1.C.4.d Construction Schedule and Sequence
[1-46](#construction-schedule-and-sequence)

1.C.4.e Modification of Orrington Substation
[1-50](#modification-of-orrington-substation)

1.C.4.f Transmission Line Operation and Maintenance
[1-53](#transmission-line-operation-and-maintenance)

1.D Drawings [1-54](#drawings)

1.D.1 Development Description, Site Work, Existing Facilities, and
Topography
[1-54](#development-description-site-work-existing-facilities-and-topography)

1.E Proposed Alignment of the NRI [1-54](#proposed-alignment-of-the-nri)

1.E.1 Analysis of Reroutes [1-55](#analysis-of-reroutes)

1.E.1.a Description of Pickerel Pond Reroute
[1-55](#description-of-pickerel-pond-reroute)

1.E.1.b Description of Myra Camp Reroute
[1-58](#description-of-myra-camp-reroute)

1.E.2 Outstanding River Segments [1-59](#outstanding-river-segments)

TABLES

[1-1. Counties and Municipalities Traversed by the Consolidated
Corridors Route 1-6](#__RefHeading___Toc102608687)

[1-2. ROW Configurations Summary 1-7](#__RefHeading___Toc102608688)

FIGURES

FIGURE 1-1. PROJECT LOCATION MAP [1-4](#__RefHeading___Toc102738079)

FIGURE 1-2. WOOD H-FRAME TANGENT [1-36](#__RefHeading___Toc102738080)

FIGURE 1-3. LIGHT ANGLE STRUCTURE [1-37](#__RefHeading___Toc102738081)

FIGURE 1-4. LIGHT MEDIUM ANGLE STRUCTURE
[1-38](#__RefHeading___Toc102738082)

FIGURE 1-5. HEAVY MEDIUM ANGLE STRUCTURE
[1-39](#__RefHeading___Toc102738083)

FIGURE 1-6. GUYED DEAD-END STRUCTURE
[1-40](#__RefHeading___Toc102738084)

FIGURE 1-7. SELF-SUPPORTING STEEL ANGLE STRUCTURE
[1-42](#__RefHeading___Toc102738085)

FIGURE 1-8. SELF-SUPPORTING STEEL DEAD-END STRUCTURE
[1-43](#__RefHeading___Toc102738086)

FIGURE 1-9. COUNTERPOISE & GROUNDING
[1-51](#__RefHeading___Toc102738087)

FIGURE 1-10. EXISTING ORRINGTON SUBSTATION
[1-52](#__RefHeading___Toc102738088)

**APPENDICES**

APPENDIX 1-1: PRE-APPLICATION MEETING MINUTES

APPENDIX 1-2: ROUTE SEGMENTS, TEMPORARY ACCESS ROADS AND CONSTRUCTION
STAGING AREAS

APPENDIX 1-3: ROW CONFIGURATIONS

APPENDIX 1-4: PRE- AND POST-DEVELOPMENT SITE PLANS

APPENDIX 1-5: WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED BY BHE PERTAINING TO THE NRI

APPENDIX 1-6: REVIEW OF UNDERGROUND OPTIONS FOR CROSSING THE NARRAGUAGUS
AND MACHIAS RIVERS

#  DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION

Bangor Hydro-Electric Company (BHE), an investor-owned utility
headquartered in Bangor, Maine, is proposing to design, construct, and
operate a new 85-mile-long, 345,000 volt (345 kilovolt \[kV\]) electric
transmission line (the project). The new line will run from an existing
substation in Orrington, Maine to the Canadian border just north of
Baileyville, Maine and is called the Northeast Reliability Interconnect
(NRI). The proposed transmission line, associated substation, and
appurtenant equipment modifications will interconnect the New England
bulk electrical transmission system at Orrington, Maine to the Maritime
Canadian System electrically, i.e., the NRI will interconnect with a
complimentary 345 kV transmission line to be constructed, owned, and
operated by New Brunswick Power Transmission Corporation (NB Power), a
Crown corporation of Canada's Province of New Brunswick (the Canadian
Project). The Canadian Project will span approximately 68 miles from the
U.S. border near Baileyville, Maine to the substation facility in Point
Lepreau, New Brunswick. In May of 2003, Canada's National Energy Board
approved NB Power's application to construct the Canadian Project, but
construction on the Canadian Project awaits final U.S. approvals of the
NRI.

The purpose of the NRI is to improve the reliability and stability of
both the Maritime[^1] Canadian and New England bulk electric
transmission systems, increase the import/export transmission capacity
between Maine and New Brunswick, and reduce costly line losses. It will
also provide northern and eastern Maine consumers with improved access
to electricity generated in southern Maine.

The information being provided in this application is in support of
BHE's request for approval under the Site Location of Development Law
(Site Law) and the Natural Resources Protection Act (NRPA). During
pre-application meetings held at the Maine Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP) office in Bangor on August 23, 2003 and December 14,
2004, it was determined that BHE should file a single permit application
using the Site Law format, integrated with the necessary information for
a NRPA permit application. Meeting minutes are provided in Appendix 1-1.
BHE is also providing a comprehensive Alternatives Analysis report as a
separate document as part of this filing. The Alternatives Analysis
analyzes and evaluates both engineering alternatives to construction of
the NRI as well as five route alternatives for the NRI. It is the
culmination of more than a year-long process in which BHE convened a
formal stakeholder process that consisted of a series of meetings, site
visits, and technical presentations, and also met informally with
individuals, groups, businesses, and leaders from around the State. This
comprehensive and inclusive process enabled BHE to identify and evaluate
the impacts associated with its route alternatives and to select a route
that achieves the project purpose while minimizing environmental and
landowner impacts. In addition to describing the methodology and results
of evaluating the engineering and route alternatives, the Alternatives
Analysis contains extensive information regarding the history and
background of the project and the project purpose, and it is therefore
recommended that the Alternatives Analysis be reviewed in conjunction
with this application.

In addition to approvals under the Site Law and NRPA, BHE will obtain a
water quality certification under the Clean Water Act, a certificate of
Public Convenience and Necessity from the Maine Public Utilities
Commission (MPUC), a Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps), a modification to the existing Presidential Permit
(PP) from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and applicable local
permits.

## Narrative

BHE has sited this project to minimize environmental and landowner
impacts. In light of the significant environmental and other benefits
that result from consolidation of utility corridors, the regulatory
preference for co-location where feasible, and the clear direction from
the Maine DEP and Board of Environmental Protection during prior
permitting efforts, BHE sought to co-locate the NRI with existing
utility corridors to the maximum extent practicable. As a result, the
majority (84 percent) of the NRI is co-located with existing utility
rights-of-way (ROW). Approximately 14 percent of the route is co-located
with an existing 345-kV transmission line owned and operated by Maine
Electric Power Company (MEPCO), and the remaining 70 percent of the
co-located portion of the route is co-located with an existing natural
gas transmission line ROW and an existing logging road known as the Stud
Mill Road. Because it is consolidated with existing utility corridors
for the majority of its length, this route is referred to as the
Consolidated Corridors Route or CCR. As set forth more fully in the
accompanying Alternatives Analysis, the CCR was selected after
evaluation of the environmental, landowner and other impacts and factors
associated with five route alternatives. A project location map is
provided as Figure 1-1.

### Objectives and Details

Although Maine and Canada share over 600 miles of border, only one major
transmission line links the two regions. That line, known as the MEPCO
line, was constructed in 1970 through a partnership with Central Maine
Power Company (CMP), Maine Public Service Company (MPSCO) and BHE.[^2]
That line is now over 30 years old and is the only link between the New
England bulk transmission system and Maritime Canada. The NRI will
provide a redundant electrical path, which is critical to reliable
electric service and sound utility practice, and will otherwise improve
the reliability and stability of both the Maritime Canadian and New
England bulk electric transmission systems. It will allow for increased
import/export transmission capacity between Maine and New Brunswick with
the market benefits that result from that additional capacity, and will
also reduce costly line losses within the existing systems. In addition,
the NRI will provide northern and eastern Maine consumers with improved
access to electricity generated in southern Maine. The accompanying
Alternatives Analysis includes a more detailed discussion of the
technical need and support for the project.

#### Detailed Description of Consolidated Corridors Route

The NRI will traverse approximately 85 miles of predominantly flat to
moderately hilly terrain which is, for the most part, managed by forest
products companies for commercial timber harvesting.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc102738079 .anchor}FIGURE 1-1. PROJECT LOCATION MAP

The project ROW will generally be 100 feet wide where it is adjacent to
the MEPCO line, 155 feet wide where it is adjacent to the gas pipeline
ROW and/or Stud Mill Road, and 170 feet wide for those portions of the
route that are not adjacent to existing utility or road rights-of-way.
In its entirety, the NRI will occupy approximately 1,518 acres.

ROW widths were determined by BHE engineering staff based on the
requirements and industry standards for a wood H-frame structure. The
wood H-frame structure has a horizontal configuration of phases that
have a 26-foot separation between phases and as such the distance
between the outside phases to the centerline of the structure is 26
feet. ROW widths are determined by utility companies based upon a
combination of reliability, safety, maintenance, and operating history.
The common ROW width for virgin ROW for a 345 kV H-frame line is 170
feet for electric utility companies in Maine. This width is based on the
spacing of the conductors (26 feet) and the necessary clearances of the
outside conductor to the edge of the ROW (trees) to ensure a safe and
reliable line (85 feet). This width was used as the basis for designing
the line and establishing appropriate ROW dimensions. When the NRI is
immediately adjacent to an existing cleared corridor, the required ROW
is reduced on the side where the ROWs are juxtaposed. Thus, when the ROW
parallels an existing powerline, such as MEPCO, the ROW width is based
on the requirement of MEPCO to maintain a minimum 100-foot separation
between the centerlines of the two powerlines. Accordingly, the distance
to the edge of the opposite side of the ROW was the requisite 85 feet to
the edge, as described above. When the existing Maritimes & Northeast
Pipeline, LLC (Maritimes) natural gas transmission line is paralleled,
BHE's engineering staff have prescribed a separation of 155 feet from
the pipeline or adjacent Stud Mill Road, based on the normal half-width
of 85 feet plus an additional 70 feet for road clearance from conductor
blow-out. A more complete discussion of ROW widths is included in
Section 1.C.1.

The project will cross 3 counties and 17 municipalities or townships as
listed in Table 1‑1. Large waterbodies to be crossed along the route
include the Great Works Stream, Main Stream, Narraguagus River, Machias
River, and the St. Croix River.

+---------------+----------------------+------------------------------+
| []{#_         |                      |                              |
| _RefHeading__ |                      |                              |
| _Toc102608687 |                      |                              |
| .anchor}Table |                      |                              |
| 1-1. Counties |                      |                              |
| and           |                      |                              |
| M             |                      |                              |
| unicipalities |                      |                              |
| Traversed by  |                      |                              |
| the           |                      |                              |
| Consolidated  |                      |                              |
| Corridors     |                      |                              |
| Route         |                      |                              |
+---------------+----------------------+------------------------------+
| **County**    | **Municipality^1^**  | **Type of Municipality**     |
+---------------+----------------------+------------------------------+
| Penobscot     | Orrington            | Town                         |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | Brewer               | City                         |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | Holden               | Town                         |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | Eddington            | Town                         |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | Bradley              | Town                         |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | Milford              | Town                         |
+---------------+----------------------+------------------------------+
| Hancock       | T 32 MD              | Unorganized Township (TWP)   |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | Great Pond           | Town                         |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | T 34 MD              | Unorganized TWP              |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | T 35 MD              | Unorganized TWP              |
+---------------+----------------------+------------------------------+
| Washington    | T 36 MD BPP          | Unorganized TWP              |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | T 37 MD BPP          | Unorganized TWP              |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | T 27 ED              | Unorganized TWP              |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | No. 21 TWP           | Plantation                   |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | Princeton            | Town                         |
|               |                      |                              |
|               | Baileyville          | Town                         |
+---------------+----------------------+------------------------------+
| ^             |                      |                              |
| 1^Unorganized |                      |                              |
| townships and |                      |                              |
| plantations   |                      |                              |
| technically   |                      |                              |
| are not       |                      |                              |
| m             |                      |                              |
| unicipalities |                      |                              |
| under Maine   |                      |                              |
| law. They     |                      |                              |
| have been     |                      |                              |
| referred to   |                      |                              |
| as such in    |                      |                              |
| this          |                      |                              |
| application,  |                      |                              |
| however, for  |                      |                              |
| convenience.  |                      |                              |
+---------------+----------------------+------------------------------+

As stated earlier, the proposed route for the new transmission line is
referred to as the Consolidated Corridors Route (CCR) due to its
co-location with established existing utility ROWs. The project has been
subdivided for discussion purposes into 16 separate route segments
(Appendix 1-2). These segments were created so the project could be
presented as clearly as possible. Each segment represents a specific ROW
configuration as illustrated in Appendix 1-3. Each of the 16 segments is
described below based on prominent existing resources, physical setting,
significant constructability concerns, and certain other descriptive
features of the route segment (Table 1-2).

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  []{#__RefHeading___Toc102608688                          
  .anchor}Table 1-2. ROW                                   
  Configurations Summary                                   
  --------------------------------- ----------- ---------- -----------------------------------------
  **Segment**                       **Length\   **Plan And **Description**
                                    (Miles)**   Profile    
                                                Sheet      
                                                No.^1^**   

  A-B                               0.33        1          From Orrington Substation to where
                                                           pipeline crosses MEPCO.

  B-C                               0.52        1          To where pipeline diverges away from
                                                           MEPCO.

  C-D                               0.86        1-2        To where MEPCO diverges to the northeast.

  D-E                               5.48        2-8        To where pipeline converges with proposed
                                                           route south of Route 9.

  E-F                               4.99        8-11       To where proposed route diverges from
                                                           MEPCO

  F-G                               13.54       11-23      To pipeline crossing at Stud Mill Road.
                                                           The Pickerel Pond Reroute.

  G-H                               1.40        23-25      To divergence at Myra Camps Reroute.

  H-I                               1.01        25-26      To convergence of Stud Mill Road after
                                                           reroute around Myra Camps.

  I-J                               28.06       26-51      To Machias River.

  J-K                               2.35        51-53      To divergence from Stud Mill Road.

  K-L                               5.91        53-58      To convergence of Stud Mill Road.

  L-M                               2.81        58-61      To Clifford Stream.

  M-N                               12.26       61-72      To South Princeton Road.

  N-O                               2.89        72-75      To Baileyville Compressor Station Road.

  O-P                               1.04        75-76      To where transmission line diverges from
                                                           co-location.

  P-Q                               0.80        76-77      Virgin ROW to edge of St. Croix River.

                                                           

  **TOTAL**                         **84.25**              

  ^1^Detailed drawings of the                              
  proposed project are included                            
  within plan and profile sheets                           
  (scale: 1 inch = 200 feet) that                          
  have been submitted as part of                           
  this permit application.                                 
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**Segment A-B**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 0.33 miles. It
> commences at the existing Orrington Substation (the southern terminus
> for the project) located north of Fields Pond Road in Orrington and
> ends just south of where the Maritimes pipeline joins the MEPCO ROW
> north of Fields Pond Road. This segment of the line is co-located with
> the existing MEPCO line. The ROW width varies from 85 to 125 feet to
> maintain the required spacing of the substation take-off and the MEPCO
> line (Appendix 1-3).
>
> Land use in this segment is generally restricted to existing ROWs
> bordered by forested areas. Portions of the segment are wetland
> consisting primarily of forested wetland communities. There are no
> residences within this segment, but residential property is located
> nearby along the several streets and roads. Wetlands in this segment
> are scattered along the proposed ROW.

**Segment B-C**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 0.52 miles. It
> commences approximately 200 feet south of where the Maritimes pipeline
> joins the MEPCO ROW north of Fields Pond Road and ends where the
> existing Maritimes pipeline ROW turns westerly and departs from the
> MEPCO line south of the Tributary to Felts Brook. This segment is
> co-located with the MEPCO line and the Maritimes pipeline for its
> entire length. The ROW width for this segment is 125 feet (Appendix
> 1-3). This width is required to maintain a sufficient separation
> distance between the conductors of the proposed line and the Maritimes
> safety exclusion zone established around the pipeline to the west and
> an appropriate clearance of 85 feet from centerline of the proposed
> line to the edge of the ROW to the east.
>
> Land use in this segment is similar to segment A-B. No residences are
> located within this segment, but are located along the several streets
> and roads adjacent to this segment. Wetlands in this segment are
> scattered along the proposed ROW and are primarily forested wetland
> communities.
>
> No rare, threatened, or endangered species are known to occur in this
> segment. Bald eagles are resident in the Penobscot River valley, but
> are not known to nest or congregate near this segment of the project.
>
> Clearing of trees in forests will impact existing vegetation in this
> project segment. No residential property will be crossed by this
> project segment. No impacts are anticipated to fish resources or flora
> and fauna. Less species diversity exists in this segment because of
> its semi-suburbanized character. Visual impacts will be minimal in
> this project segment because this area is not adjacent to nearby
> roads. Viewer expectations in this segment are generally lower than in
> other areas along the project route because of the present existence
> of transmission lines and other assorted man-made structures.

**Segment C-D**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 0.86 miles. It
> commences where the Maritimes pipeline ROW turns westerly and departs
> from the MEPCO line south of the Tributary to Felts Brook and ends
> approximately 400 feet north of Wiswell Road. This portion of the
> proposed ROW is co-located with the MEPCO line. The ROW width for this
> segment is 125 feet as a result of engineering and siting constraints
> (Appendix 1-3).
>
> Land use in this segment is generally similar to segments A-B and B-C.
> Residential property in this segment is generally restricted to
> residences located near Wiswell Road. The forested areas located along
> this segment are mixed coniferous and deciduous communities primarily
> consisting of second growth forests. Wetlands in this segment are
> primarily scrub-shrub and are mostly associated with Felts Brook. An
> alder swamp bordering Felts Brook will be crossed along this segment
> both south and north of Wiswell Road.
>
> No rare, threatened, or endangered species are known to occur in this
> segment. Bald eagles are residents in the Penobscot River valley, but
> are not known to nest or congregate near this segment of the project.
>
> Clearing of trees in forests will impact existing vegetation in
> approximately 25 percent of this project segment. No residential
> property will be crossed by this project segment, but the transmission
> line will be close to residences located near Wiswell Road. Visual
> impacts will be concentrated near Wiswell Road. Viewer expectations in
> this segment are generally lower than other areas along the project
> route because of the present existence of transmission lines and other
> assorted man-made structures.

**Segment D-E**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 5.48 miles and begins
> approximately 400 feet north of Wiswell Road and ends approximately
> 4,000 feet north of Clewleyville Road in Eddington. From where this
> segment commences, it travels adjacent to the MEPCO line, passes
> northeastward to the Holden -- Brewer Town line, thence northward
> along that line, and then northwestward crossing over Lambert and
> Clewleyville Roads. Unlike Segment B-C, this segment of the line is
> only co-located with the MEPCO line. As such the ROW width for this
> segment is 100 feet (Appendix 1-3) to maintain 100 foot separation
> between the MEPCO and NRI centerlines and an appropriate clearance of
> 85 feet from centerline of the proposed line to the edge of the ROW to
> the east.
>
> Land use in this segment is generally more diverse than in other
> segments. Approximately half of the segment is forested; of the
> non-forested portions, old fields, unused agricultural land, and other
> unproductive open land, reflecting a regional decline in agriculture,
> are located along this segment. Other portions of the segment are
> wetland (e.g., the wetland community associated with Felts Brook south
> and north of Route 1A), or road beds and grades. Residential property
> is located nearby along the several streets and roads. The forested
> areas located along this segment are mixed coniferous and deciduous
> communities. Most are young second-growth forests or forests that have
> grown up on old fields. Much of the non-forested area is in fact old
> field undergoing early stages of succession to forest. Wetlands in
> this segment are clustered along Eaton Brook and Felts Brook. At Eaton
> Brook, a relatively wide band of alders along the stream passes under
> the existing MEPCO line. These alders extend to and are bordered by
> fields. The proposed line will pass over this area.
>
> This segment passes over Felts Brook and Eaton Brook, both tributaries
> of the Penobscot River. Also crossed are small tributaries of both
> streams.
>
> No rare, threatened, or endangered species are known to occur in this
> segment. Bald eagles are residents in the Penobscot River valley, but
> are not known to nest or congregate near this segment of the project.
>
> Clearing of trees in forests and old fields will impact existing
> vegetation in approximately half of this project segment. No
> residences will be crossed by the project route, but the transmission
> line will be close to residences south of Eastern Avenue and near the
> Lambert and Cleweyville Roads. No impacts are anticipated to fish
> resources or flora and fauna. Less species diversity exists in this
> segment because of its semi-urbanized character. Visual impacts will
> be concentrated near U.S. Route 1A, Eastern Avenue, Lambert Road, and
> Cleweyville Road. Viewer expectations in this segment are generally
> lower than in other areas along the project route because of the
> present existence of transmission lines and other assorted man-made
> structures.

**Segment E-F**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 4.99 miles. It
> commences south of Route 9 in Eddington and ends where the route turns
> east just north of Blackman Stream in Bradley (the beginning of the
> Pickerel Pond Reroute). This portion of the proposed ROW is co-located
> with the MEPCO line and the Maritimes pipeline ROWs. The ROW width and
> configuration for this segment is similar to segment B-C, and has a
> ROW width of 125 feet (Appendix 1-3) to maintain a sufficient
> separation distance between the conductors of the proposed line and
> the Maritimes safety exclusion zone established around the pipeline to
> the west and an appropriate clearance of 85 feet from centerline of
> the proposed line to the edge of the ROW to the east.
>
> From the south, this segment crosses Route 9, Hill Street, Meadow
> Brook, Government Road, and passes over Blackman Stream. On the south
> side of Route 9, the project passes through the yard of a small
> industrial operation, the only such operation on any of the route
> segments described. Much of this segment crosses over land used for
> commercial forestry practices. A portion of the segment near
> Government Road is owned by a consortium of forest products companies,
> who lease it to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). It is
> managed as the Penobscot Experimental Forest. This forest has many
> plots of trees of different species, seed provenance, etc., to test
> growth rates and productivity under a variety of forest management
> practices. Much of the work in this forest is performed by students of
> the University of Maine at Orono. The project passes over this forest
> a distance of approximately 2,400 feet; no experimental plots are
> within the proposed ROW.
>
> Forests in this segment are second-growth forests of mixed age and
> composition. Red spruce (*Picea rubens*), white spruce (*P. glauca*),
> balsam fir (*Abies balsamea*), and hemlock (*Tsuga canadensis*) are
> the most prominent conifers; the large forested wetland south of
> Meadow Brook is a nearly monospecific stand of black spruce (*P.
> mariana*). Red maple (*Acer rubrum*) is the most common deciduous
> species; small amounts of yellow birch (*Betula alleghaniensis*),
> paper birch (*B. papyrifera*), and American beech (*Fagus
> grandifolia*) are mixed as well.
>
> There are several wetlands in this segment. Forested wetlands are
> located near Meadow Brook and the Bradley -- Eddington town line. The
> first is one of the larger swamps along this segment. It is a cold
> coniferous swamp dominated by black spruce, with a small mixture of
> tamarack and with an understory of ericaceous shrubs. The second is
> forested with mixed coniferous and deciduous species. A scrub-shrub
> swamp is located along Government Road. This swamp extends beneath the
> existing powerline where the plant community is comprised mostly of
> cattails (*Typha latifolia*). Although clearing will be limited to
> removal of the tallest trees in this swamp, it is likely that the
> cattail will also vegetate the new ROW. Placement of structures in
> this wetland will likely be done during winter to minimize impacts to
> this wetland.
>
> This segment crosses over Meadow Brook and Blackman Stream; both are
> tributaries to the Penobscot River. Meadow Brook is a typical upper
> perennial stream in a shallow valley; it has a sand and gravel
> substrate and is lined with thick growth of low shrubs. Blackman
> Stream is the outlet of Chemo Pond. Because of Blackman Stream's large
> watershed, the stream is fairly large in size. Water levels are
> controlled by a dam at Leonard's Mills, approximately one-quarter-mile
> upstream of the proposed crossing.
>
> The diversity of land uses, land forms and forest types in this
> segment contribute to wildlife values; while the proximity to
> developed areas and roads provides some limitations to wildlife usage.
> Typical species suited to slightly urbanized areas are common
> throughout, while species needing large unbroken forest tracts or
> which regularly conflict with man are displaced from this slightly
> suburbanized area. Thus, white-tailed deer (*Odocoileus virginianus*)
> populations are reported to be moderate to high, while bobcat (*Felis
> rufus*), black bear (*Ursus americanus*), etc., are uncommon within
> the area.
>
> No rare, threatened, or endangered species are known to occur in this
> segment. Bald eagles are residents in the Penobscot River valley, but
> are not known to nest or congregate near this segment of the project.
>
> Nearly one-third of this route segment traverses cleared land, old
> fields and powerline routes. Nearly one-half mile of this route
> segment passes through the Penobscot Experimental Forest, but no
> experimental forest plots will be impacted. Agricultural areas crossed
> by the ROW will be allowed to continue as agricultural lands in
> production if so desired. As stated earlier, Meadow Brook and Blackman
> Stream will be crossed by this route segment. No structures are sited
> within regulated stream buffers.
>
> Visual impacts within this segment are concentrated near road
> crossings, especially near open lands, and near adjacent residences.
> Impacts will be somewhat reduced by siting structures parallel to
> existing transmission line structures throughout this segment to the
> greatest extent possible.

**Segment F-G**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 13.55 miles and begins
> just north of Blackman Stream in Bradley (herein after the Pickerel
> Pond Reroute). From this point the line traverses easterly and crosses
> Boynton Brook and Great Works Stream in Bradley. After crossing Great
> Works Stream, the line turns sharply to the north traversing through
> land owned and managed primarily for commercial forestry practices,
> crosses over Baker Brook Road and Baker Brook, then turns northeast
> and crosses over the Kingsbury and Parent Roads, the Penobscot/Hancock
> County line, Titcomb Brook, Birch Stream, the Horseback, Sunkhaze
> Stream, and ends where the line resumes its co-location with existing
> utility corridors along the Stud Mill Road in T 32 MD just east of the
> Horseback. The ROW in this portion of the route is virgin and will
> require a ROW width of 170 feet (Appendix 1-3) to maintain an
> appropriate clearance of 85 feet from the centerline of the proposed
> line to the edges of the ROW. This segment of the route is not
> co-located with other utilities, but was incorporated into the project
> to minimize overall project impacts. This segment departs from
> co-location to avoid impacts to the Sunkhaze National Wildlife Refuge,
> the Pickerel Pond Reroute, and other landowners. Section 1.E.1
> provides additional discussions describing the need to deviate from
> co-location with existing ROWs.
>
> Land throughout this segment is primarily owned by timber companies
> which manage it for commercial forestry. Nearly all upland portions of
> this segment indicate signs of clearcutting. The mature second growth
> forest which was clearcut in areas is primarily coniferous, but
> includes northern white cedar (*Thuja occidentalis*). Other common
> tree species found along this segment of the route include white pines
> (*Pinus strobus*), red pines (*P. resinosa*), and red and black
> spruce. On the Horseback, in the eastern portion of this segment, the
> soil is sandy and well-drained, and the forest consisted of a mixture
> of white pines, red pines, trembling aspen (*Populus tremuloides*),
> and balsam poplar (*P. balsamifera*). Areas remaining uncut are
> generally composed of white cedar, hemlock, red spruce, and balsam
> fir. Towards the western end of the segment, on the highest terrain,
> some deciduous species, notably red maple, are also mixed in.
>
> Wetlands in this segment include scrub-shrub, forested, and aquatic
> communities (e.g., aquatic communities associated with Great Works
> Stream). Many wetlands in this segment are associated with the many
> tributaries draining to the waterbodies crossed by this segment. There
> are very extensive wetlands along both sides of the Horseback,
> including very large heaths along Birch Stream.
>
> This segment crosses over several streams. The first waterbody crossed
> along this segment is Boynton Brook, a small low-gradient perennial
> stream. The route then crosses over two tributaries to Boynton Brook
> and then crosses one of the larger streams; Great Works Stream, a
> tributary to the Penobscot River. This stream drains the large swamps
> associated with Chemo Bog. It has certain riverine features such as a
> small floodplain zone. The next named waterbody crossed is Baker
> Brook. Baker Brook is a small perennial stream that drains northward
> towards Sunkhaze Stream. After crossing Baker Brook, the project
> crosses over Little Birch Stream, two tributaries to Little Birch
> Stream, and then over Titcomb Brook. After crossing Titcomb Brook,
> this segment crosses over three tributaries to Birch Stream, and then
> over Birch Stream. The next waterbody crossed by this segment is
> Sunkhaze Stream. Sunkhaze Stream is a major stream of the region east
> of the Great Pond drainage. It has a drainage area of approximately 77
> square miles and is a tributary to the Penobscot River. Flowing north
> along the east side of the Horseback adjacent to the Stud Mill Road,
> the stream is wide and flows through a large open (emergent) wetland.

**Segment G-H**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 1.40 miles and begins
> just east of the Horseback in T 32 MD on the north side of the Stud
> Mill Road, crosses over Wiley Brook and the Tributary to Indian Brook,
> and ends approximately 2,356 feet west of Crocker Turn Road in T 32 MD
> (Myra) (the beginning of the Myra Camp Reroute). This segment of the
> line is co-located with the Stud Mill Road which is bounded to the
> south by the Maritimes pipeline ROW. The ROW in this portion of the
> route will require an average ROW width of 155 feet (Appendix 1-3) to
> maintain an appropriate clearance of 85 feet from the centerline of
> the proposed line to the edge of the ROW and an average of 70 feet to
> the edge of Stud Mill Road.
>
> All the land in this segment is owned and managed by Kennebec West
> Forest, LLC (Kennebec West). Until recently, this land was owned and
> managed by International Paper. Similar to segment F-G, the land is
> managed for timber and commercial forestry. Forest resources in this
> segment include areas of deciduous forest on elevated areas throughout
> the segment and coniferous forests dominated with spruce and fir.
>
> Wiley Brook drains a complex of wetlands north of the project. The two
> branches are both low gradient streams ideal for beaver dams. Wiley
> Brook is approximately 5-10 feet wide at the proposed crossing and is
> associated with a palustrine forested wetland.

**Segment H-I**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 1.01 miles. It begins
> 2,356 feet west of Crocker Turn Road in T 32 MD (Myra) (hereinafter
> the Myra Camp Reroute). The reroute deviates from the original
> alignment of the CCR along the Stud Mill Road west of Crocker Turn
> Road, passes around a culturally sensitive area, crosses over Crocker
> Turn Road, and then passes behind several privately owned camps for a
> distance of approximately 3,081 feet before the reroute rejoins the
> original alignment of the CCR along the Stud Mill Road. The reroute is
> located on Kennebec West land, which is managed similarly to other
> route segments as commercial forest land. Evidence of logging activity
> and existing forest timber haul roads were identified along the
> reroute during field investigations conducted in 2004. Section 1.E.1
> provides additional discussions describing this segment of the
> project.
>
> This segment of the line deviates from existing corridors to eliminate
> impacts to the culturally sensitive area and reduce visual impacts of
> the project to the camp owners located south of the reroute. The ROW
> in this segment of the route is virgin and will require a ROW width of
> 170 feet (Appendix 1-3) to maintain an appropriate clearance of 85
> feet from the centerline of the proposed line to the edges of the ROW.

**Segment I-J**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 28.06 miles. It
> commences at the end of the Myra Camp Reroute at the point where the
> reroute rejoins Stud Mill Road and ends at the Machias River in T 37
> MD BPP. The ROW in this portion of the route will require an average
> ROW width of 155 feet (Appendix 1-3) ) to maintain an appropriate
> clearance of 85 feet from the centerline of the proposed line to the
> edge of the ROW and an average of 70 feet to the edge of Stud Mill
> Road . From the end of the Myra Camp Reroute this segment parallels
> the Stud Mill Road, crosses over Dead Stream, Hinkley Brook, Main
> Stream, several tributaries to Alligator Stream, crosses south of Duds
> Pond, and then crosses over the main branch of Alligator Stream. From
> this point, this segment continues its co-location with Stud Mill
> Road, crosses south of Eagle Mountain, crosses several tributaries to
> the West Branch of the Narraguagus River, and then crosses the
> Narraguagus River near the border of T 34 MD and T 35 MD. From this
> point the route then crosses over Allen Brook south of the Oxbow in T
> 35 MD and several tributaries to Thompson Brook south of Woodchipping
> Ridge in T 35 MD. From this point the route then crosses several
> tributaries to Lower Sabao Lake and then crosses south of Burnt Land
> Lake. After crossing south of Burnt Land Lake, the segment turns due
> east crosses the Hancock/Washington County line and continues along
> the Stud Mill Road south of Fifth Machias Lake. After crossing several
> tributaries to Fifth Machias Lake and Fletcher Brook, this segment
> ends just after the crossing of the Machias River. The Maritimes
> pipeline ROW remains on the south side of Stud Mill Road for this
> segment, but at the terminus of this segment it crosses over to the
> north side of Stud Mill Road.
>
> Similar to Segments F-G and H-I, all the land in this segment is owned
> by a forest products company and is managed for commercial forestry.
> Forests in this segment vary from mixed forests near the beginning of
> the segment to stands of northern white cedars east of Hinkley Brook,
> to extensive deciduous forests between Hinkley Brook and Dead Stream.
> West of Dead Stream, coniferous forest, with balsam fir, red spruce,
> and hemlock prevails. From Main Stream to the south shoulder of Eagle
> Mountain, this segment passes mostly over upland. Sloping terrain on
> the south side of Eagle Mountain supports a second-growth northern
> hardwood forest. Near the Hancock/Washington County line the forests
> are primarily dominated by second-growth mixed forests. Continuing
> easterly, this segment crosses south of Fletcher Peak and continues
> along Stud Mill Road primarily within upland forests which have been
> clearcut or harvested. Much of the terrain in this eastern portion of
> the segment is rough and bouldery.
>
> This segment crosses primarily forested wetlands with crossings of
> inland freshwater meadows (e.g., at Hinkley Brook and Dead Stream)
> associated with the various waterbodies crossed. A relatively large
> forested wetland on the west side of Main Stream will be crossed by
> this segment. This wetland is contiguous with a narrow band of
> scrub-shrub wetland that grades into forested wetland along Main
> Stream. Alligator Stream is also associated with a narrow band of
> scrub-shrub wetland along its banks. Another riparian wetland crossed
> is at the Narraguagus River which grades into forested wetlands. Their
> extent here is narrowly circumscribed by rising terrain. Plant
> associations in these wetlands include common species such as
> meadow-sweet (*Spiraea latifolia*), withered (*Viburnum cassinoides*),
> and many grasses and forbs as well.

**Segment J-K**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 2.35 miles. It
> commences on the east side of the Machias River and ends where the
> Maritimes pipeline leaves the Stud Mill Road corridor in an easterly
> direction south of Second Lake Ridge in T 37 MD BPP. This portion of
> the route is co-located with both the Stud Mill Road and the Maritimes
> pipeline. The Maritimes pipeline is located on the north side of Stud
> Mill Road and the NRI is located on the north side of the Maritimes
> pipeline ROW. The ROW in this segment of the route will require an
> average width of 155 feet (Appendix 1-3) to maintain an appropriate
> clearance of 85 feet from the centerline of the proposed line to the
> edge of the ROW and an average of 70 feet to the edge of the Maritimes
> easement.
>
> From the Machias River, this segment will pass through an area
> previously used for gravel borrow and will travel in an easterly
> direction adjacent to the Maritimes pipeline ROW and will cross over a
> tributary to First Machias Lake in T 37 MD BPP. The segment then turns
> northeast, crosses over Dead Stream, passes through an area recently
> cleared, and ends where the proposed transmission line and the
> Maritimes pipeline leave the Stud Mill Road corridor and turn to the
> east. Much of this route segment is located on moderately well-drained
> upland slopes associated with the southern side of Second Lake Ridge,
> but wetlands are scattered along this route segment associated with
> drainages along the edge of the Stud Mill Road.

**Segment K-L**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 5.91 miles. It
> commences where the proposed transmission line and the Maritimes
> pipeline leave the Stud Mill Road corridor and turn to the east south
> of Second Lake Ridge in T 37 MD BPP. This route segment ends east of
> Big Wallamatogue Stream in T 27 ED BPP where the Maritimes pipeline
> and the proposed transmission line rejoin with the Stud Mill Road.
> This route segment lies south of Little Musquash Lake and north of
> Fourth Lake. Similar to other route segments, this land is owned by
> forest products companies and is managed for commercial forestry
> practices. This portion of the route is co-located with the Maritimes
> pipeline and will require an average ROW width of 155 feet (Appendix
> 1-3) to maintain an appropriate clearance of 85 feet from the
> centerline of the proposed line to the edge of the ROW and an average
> of 70 feet to the edge of the Maritimes easement.
>
> Conifers dominate the forests throughout this route segment. The
> dominant conifer is hemlock, although there is an admixture of red
> spruce, balsam fir, and white cedar. Much of the forest in this
> segment has been selectively harvested and there are some areas that
> have been clearcut.
>
> Forested wetlands dominate this route segment. A small forested
> wetland is associated with Lanpher Brook in the western portion of
> this segment and is dominated with mixed conifers. Other forested and
> scrub-shrub wetlands located near the esker south of Little Musquash
> Lake will also be crossed.

**Segment L-M**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 2.81 miles. It
> commences east of Big Wallamatogue Stream in T 27 ED BPP where the
> Maritimes pipeline and the proposed transmission line rejoin with the
> Stud Mill Road corridor and ends in T 27 ED BPP in Washington County
> at the crossing of Clifford Stream. This route segment crosses Little
> Wallamatogue Stream and a tributary to Clifford Lake and is co-located
> with the Maritimes pipeline and the Stud Mill Road corridor. This
> segment is located to the south of Big Lake and to the north of
> Clifford Lake. Similar to other route segments, the land crossed by
> this segment is owned by forest products companies and is managed for
> commercial forestry practices. This portion of the route will require
> an average ROW width of 155 feet (Appendix 1-3) to maintain an
> appropriate clearance of 85 feet from the centerline of the proposed
> line to the edge of the ROW and an average of 70 feet to the edge of
> the Maritimes easement.
>
> The uneven terrain of this segment -- several northeast-southwest low
> trending ridges -- results in a mixture of uplands and wetlands.
> Upland ridges are forested with mixed forest. Hemlock and balsam fir
> are dominant conifers over much of the area. The forested wetlands
> encountered along this segment are also mixed forest; the forested
> wetlands are wooded variously with black and red spruce or with
> northern white cedar. Wetlands occur in the lower areas between
> uplands; these are nearly all forested wetlands although a scrub-shrub
> wetland is associated with the wetland at Clifford Stream.
>
> Clifford Stream, the outlet of Clifford Lake, is regulated by the dam
> on Clifford Lake upstream of the proposed crossing location. Its water
> levels fluctuate according to the operation of the dam. In the project
> area the stream is generally high-gradient, with a narrow zone of
> riparian vegetation; downstream it is a low-gradient deadwater stream.
> Clifford Lake is a large deep lake which is located approximately
> 1,000 feet south of the project area.

**Segment M-N**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 12.26 miles and is
> co-located with the Stud Mill Road and the Maritimes pipeline ROW. It
> commences at Clifford Stream, crosses over Stud Mill Road and into No.
> 21 Township, Washington County. From this point, this route segment
> heads southeast for a short distance and turns east/northeast and
> crosses over Huntley Brook and the northern edge of Seavey Ridge and
> then crosses over Joe Brook. At this location, the route segment turns
> northeast crossing over Allen Stream and to the south of Pocomoonshine
> Mountain in Princeton. After crossing south of Pocomoonshine Mountain
> this segment crosses over Leweys Brook, turns easterly, and continues
> along the Stud Mill Road (or locally called the Pocomoonshine Cut-Off
> Road) and ends at South Princeton Road just west of U.S. Route 1 in
> Princeton. This portion of the route will require an average ROW width
> of 155 feet (Appendix 1-3) to maintain an appropriate clearance of 85
> feet from the centerline of the proposed line to the edge of the ROW
> and an average of 70 feet to the edge of the Stud Mill Road.
>
> The forests in this segment, owned by a forest products company, are
> generally coniferous, with red spruce and hemlock the predominant
> species. Much of this forest has been selectively harvested and is now
> regenerating very heavily to conifers, creating dense thickets of
> vegetation. Deciduous forests found along this segment consists of
> sugar maple (*Acer saccharum*), white ash (*Fraxinus americana*), and
> yellow birch.

**Segment N-O**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 2.89 miles and is
> co-located with the Maritimes pipeline ROW. It commences at South
> Princeton Road, traverses generally easterly and crosses over U.S.
> Route 1. After crossing U.S. Route 1 this route segment follows the
> Maritimes pipeline ROW on the north side and crosses to the south of
> Sawtelle Heath in Baileyville. From this point, this route segment
> turns north/northeast traversing through recently harvested areas and
> crosses over Grand Falls Road. After crossing Grand Falls Road, the
> route segment continues easterly and ends at the west side of the
> Maritimes compressor station located west of Sprague Meadow Brook.
> Similar to Segment K-L, this portion of the route will require a ROW
> width of 155 feet (Appendix 1-3) to maintain an appropriate clearance
> of 85 feet from the centerline of the proposed line to the edge of the
> ROW and an average of 70 feet to the edge of the Maritimes easement.
> []{.mark}

[]{.mark}

> Similar to many other route segments, nearly all the land in this
> segment is managed for commercial forestry practices and has recently
> been harvested. Grand Falls Road is situated on an esker, much of
> which has been previously quarried for gravel. The project will cross
> this area perpendicularly. Wetlands in the area primarily consist of
> forested wetlands south of Sawtelle Heath and the project was routed
> to avoid impacts to this area as much as possible.
>
> A small unnamed stream occurs at the base of an esker section
> immediately east of Grand Falls Road. There are no surface waters in
> the proposed ROW in the forested wetland south of Sawtelle Heath.
>
> Two areas of coniferous cover, north of the project ROW have been
> mapped as deer wintering habitat. The area west of Sawtelle Heath is
> larger in extent than the other area and has greater cover and food
> resources. This area is not impacted by the project. The project does
> traverse through the edge of the other deer wintering area that is
> located east of Grand Falls Road (this area extends northward from the
> proposed ROW). Impacts are not anticipated to the deer population in
> either area.
>
> Wetland plant communities at Sawtelle Heath are the most distinctive
> along this project route segment. Sawtelle Heath is a coalesced dome
> peatland dominated by ericaceous shrubs and sphagnum. Northern white
> cedars predominate in the forested wetlands, with red spruce and black
> spruce present as well. Several rare species were noted in this area
> and are discussed in Section 9.0. As previously mentioned, the
> alignment of the project in this area was routed to avoid the heath to
> the greatest extent as possible.
>
> Because of the generally good access afforded by logging roads and
> public roads, and the proximity of this segment to populated areas
> (Woodland, Princeton), recreational hunting and trapping is greater in
> this route segment than many other areas of the proposed project. As
> in other areas, increased access along the project ROW may increase
> hunting opportunities.

**Segment O-P**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 1.04 miles. It
> commences just west of the Maritimes compressor station, travels
> easterly on the north side of an existing gravel road opposite of the
> compressor station and pipeline, crosses over Sprague Meadow Brook,
> and ends where the Maritimes pipeline turns northeast for its crossing
> of the St. Croix River. Similar to segments K-L and N-O, this portion
> of the route will require a ROW width of 155 feet (Appendix 1-3) to
> maintain an appropriate clearance of 85 feet from the centerline of
> the proposed line to the edge of the ROW and an average of 70 feet to
> the edge of the Baileyville Compressor Station Road. []{.mark}

[]{.mark}

> Similar to the majority of the other route segments, this segment is
> managed for commercial forestry. Much of the forest in this area has
> been recently harvested; the project therefore passes through young
> second-growth areas in the majority of this route segment. Wetlands in
> the area include fringing wetlands along Sprague Meadow Brook.
>
> The forests throughout the route segment are primarily coniferous.
> Upland forests are a mixture of hemlock, spruce, and white pine.
> Because most of the forest in this area is in a young stage of
> regeneration, mature forest communities are generally lacking.
>
> Sprague Meadow Brook is the only named stream crossed by this segment.
> At the point of crossing it is low-gradient stream with a deep channel
> and sandy bottom. Various areas along it have been impounded by beaver
> at various times, leading to the formation of narrow scrub-shrub
> wetlands along its length. Young second growth forests in this segment
> are attractive to typical wildlife species; deer, hares, bears, and
> other upland species are most common.

**Segment P-Q**

> This segment of the line measures approximately 0.80 miles and is not
> co-located with any existing utility corridors. It commences where the
> Maritimes pipeline turns northeast for its crossing of the St. Croix
> River, crosses a Tributary to the St. Croix River, and then crosses
> the St. Croix River to make the interconnection with the Canadian
> Project. This portion of the route will require a ROW width of 170
> feet (Appendix 1-3) to maintain an appropriate clearance of 85 feet
> from the centerline of the proposed line to the edges of the ROW.
> []{.mark}
>
> []{.mark}
>
> South of the proposed crossing location, the river is impounded by a
> dam which produces hydroelectric power. The impoundment is known as
> Woodland Lake or Woodland Flowage. This segment terminates at the
> crossing of this impoundment. At normal water level, the width of the
> river is approximately 550 feet.
>
> The majority of this segment is managed for timber production
> (excluding the lands adjacent to the river). The terrestrial portion
> of this segment passes through mixed hardwood forest. Red oak, red
> maple, yellow birch, and other deciduous species dominate the eastern
> portion of the segment; there is an understory of young conifers --
> balsam fir, red spruce, and hemlock. Some larger hemlocks are located
> at the very shore of Woodland Flowage.
>
> Eastern Maine has hosted a breeding population of bald eagles for some
> time. The resident population is most numerous in coastal areas, but
> eagles will occur inland along major rivers and large lakes as well.
> Nest sites in the region are closely associated with large
> waterbodies. Active nest sites are afforded protection by the State of
> Maine by restricting the types of human activity within one-quarter
> mile of the nest site. Based on field work conducted for the project,
> there are no known nests at Woodland Flowage near the project nor does
> there appear to be any suitable trees for nesting near the proposed
> crossing.
>
> Nevertheless, colored ball markers will be placed on the shield wires
> and/or conductors to increase its visibility to all birds as well as
> aviators. Specific sizes and spacing of the markers will be in
> accordance with recommendations of state agency biologists and FAA
> requirements.

## Topographic Map and Location of Development

### Location of Development Boundaries

Figure 1-1 shows a location map of the proposed project. The proposed
transmission line is located to the extent practicable adjacent to
existing utility corridors between Orrington and Baileyville, Maine. Of
the 84.25 mile-long transmission line, approximately 70 miles (84
percent) are co-located along existing utility ROWs. The remaining 15.4
miles (18 percent) have been located with a primary emphasis of
minimizing impacts to private landowners, the federally managed Sunkhaze
National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge), a site of cultural significance, and
deviates from co-location with the Maritimes ROW near the terminus of
the line in Baileyville to interconnect with the NB Power line.
Construction of the transmission line will require approximately 1,548
acres of land. Modifications to the Orrington Substation will require
approximately 0.91 acres of land. In total, 1,548.91 acres of land are
required for this project, including easements and land purchased by
BHE.

### Quadrangle Names

The proposed project area falls within the following U. S. Geological
Survey (USGS) Quadrangle maps:

-   Hampden

-   Brewer Lake

-   Veazie

-   Old Town

-   Otter Chain Ponds

-   The Horseback

-   Great Pond

-   Alligator Lake

-   Quillpig Mountain

-   Gassabias Lake

-   Fletcher Peak

-   Monroe Lake

-   Clifford Lake

-   Crawford Lake

-   Princeton

-   Woodland

## Construction Plan

### ROW Width

BHE has determined the minimum ROW widths necessary to ensure the safe,
reliable and uninterrupted operation of transmission lines. The cleared
ROW must allow for safe access to the line for both emergency and
routine maintenance, and must be sufficiently wide to ensure that trees
or other objects on the edge of the ROW do not present a danger to the
conductors or structures supporting the conductors. Indeed, tree-related
outages (caused by a tree coming into contact with the conductor) are
the largest cause of transmission line power outages and were a major
initiating event of the August 14, 2003 blackout that affected large
portions of the Midwest and Northeast United States and Ontario, Canada
and caused an estimated 50 million people to lose power. U.S.-Canada
Power System Outage Task Force Final Report on the August 14, 2003
Blackout in the United Sates and Canada: Causes and Recommendations, pp.
57-64. As a result, there is renewed focus on the need to ensure that
utility ROWs, particularly ROWs for higher voltage transmission lines
and tie line interconnection facilities between control areas (such as
the NRI) are adequate in size and are properly maintained to protect
against outages caused by vegetation contact.

Based on more than 80 years of operating transmission lines in Maine,
and consistent with the industry practice in the Eastern United States,
BHE has determined that it is necessary to maintain a minimum of
approximately 60 feet between the outermost conductor and the edge of
the ROW. Where the ROW is located in a vegetated area and there are no
shared benefits of co-locating with other cleared areas such as an
existing utility corridor, this translates to a typical ROW width of 170
feet for a structure that has the conductors in a horizontal
configuration. This distance allows for safe access to the line in the
event of a power outage or other emergency, and minimizes the risk of
power outages resulting from danger trees or other objects or large
equipment operating on the edge of the ROW. A narrower ROW increases the
risk of contact with vegetation outside of the ROW and adjacent to the
transmission line. While an even wider ROW would provide greater
protection against such events, the 170-foot ROW is considered
sufficient to address the more typical conditions that are expected to
be encountered along the ROW in Maine and strikes the balance between
reliability, environmental impacts, and ROW costs.

The total ROW width is a function of the conductor or phase
configuration (specifically, whether the conductors are aligned
vertically, in a delta configuration, or horizontally) and the adjacent
land uses. This line consists of three phases with two conductors per
phase. Phase separation is a function of many variables including
conductor sag, galloping (airfoil that causes conductors to jump in a
wave), clearance to structure, and line voltage. In a horizontal
configuration (the typical configuration in Maine) the conductors are
horizontally configured, with each phase about 26 feet apart. In a
vertical configuration, the conductors are stacked vertically, with 28
feet between each phase. In a delta configuration, the conductors are
aligned in a triangular configuration with 27 feet separating the two
phases that form the base of the triangle, and the third phase located
approximately 24 feet above the base. As a result, if a delta
configuration is used, the overall virgin ROW width can generally be
reduced by 25 feet and if a vertical configuration is used, then the
overall ROW width can generally be reduced by 52 feet. There are
tradeoffs associated with these alternative configurations, however, and
BHE has selected the horizontal configuration on a wood H-frame
structure as the structure type that minimizes overall impacts. The
basis for that conclusion is discussed below in the section on structure
selection. The remainder of this section describes the total ROW width
based on a horizontal configuration of the conductors.

The total ROW width is also a function of the adjoining land uses. For
example, for virgin ROW (located in a vegetated area and not co-located
with other utility corridors) BHE requires the full 170 foot ROW. This
provides the 26 feet between each of the three phases and 59 feet from
each of the outermost phases to the edge of the ROW (alternatively, it
is more typically described as allowing 85 feet from the centerline to
the outer edge of the ROW). Where the ROW is adjacent to a utility
corridor, the ROW may be reduced on the side where the NRI ROW and the
existing utility corridor are juxtaposed.

The NRI is co-located with the MEPCO line, the Maritimes gas pipeline,
and Stud Mill Road. Each of these existing corridors allows for a
reduced ROW width for the NRI, partly for the reason of reducing ROW
width (one of the benefits of co-location). In those portions where the
NRI is co-located with the MEPCO line, the ROW is 100 feet. This is
based on MEPCO's requirement that BHE maintain a minimum distance of 100
feet between the centerlines of the two powerlines. This is the minimum
distance needed to ensure that construction and maintenance and
emergency access equipment can safely maneuver between the two lines.
Thus, the NRI ROW is 85 feet from the centerline to the edge of the ROW
away from the MEPCO line, and only 15 feet from the centerline to the
edge of the existing MEPCO ROW. When the Maritimes pipeline is located
on the edge of the MEPCO ROW it is necessary to increase the NRI ROW to
125 feet to ensure that the structure and the conductors do not overlap
onto the Maritimes ROW. In addition, there are limited locations where
the 125 foot separation is used to meet engineering and siting needs.

Where the NRI is located adjacent to Stud Mill Road and/or the Maritimes
pipeline, the total ROW width is on average, 155 feet. This allows for
85 feet from the center of the structure to the outer edge of the ROW,
and a reduced width of on average 70 feet from the centerline to the
edge of Stud Mill Road and/or the Maritimes pipeline.

There are significant challenges to locating the NRI adjacent to Stud
Mill Road and the Maritimes pipeline which prevent further reductions in
the ROW width because the Stud Mill Road is not straight. Transmission
lines are generally constructed in a linear fashion, which reduces the
need for costly angle structures required when the transmission line
changes direction. Second, as discussed in the Alternatives Analysis,
when high voltage transmission lines are co-located with an underground
pipeline, alternating current (AC) voltages may be transmitted to the
pipeline by conductive or inductive interference. As a result, BHE has
spent considerable time working with Maritimes and AC mitigation experts
to identify the potential impacts that might occur here and to design an
AC mitigation system that offsets those impacts. The impacts are a
function not only of the distance between the transmission line and the
pipeline, but also the geometry of the two systems. While the modeling
is complex, the impacts tend to increase as the length of the paralleled
section increases and when the two systems converge or diverge. Thus,
the final alignment along Stud Mill Road and the gas pipeline has to
take into account AC mitigation requirements.

Because Stud Mill Road is not straight, the ROW width will vary somewhat
along the road and there will some locations where the distance from the
centerline of the structure to the edge of Stud Mill Road will be
greater than or less than 70 feet. The average of 70 feet, however, will
allow a safe buffer between the powerline and the logging trucks that
use Stud Mill Road, and will also allow BHE to use guys for anchoring
some of the angle structures that are required along Stud Mill Road.
(The guys extend further toward the road but must be sufficiently set
back from the road so as not to pose a danger to trucks using the
roads.) It will also allow for implementation of an AC mitigation system
that does not require disturbance of any streams.

Specifically for tangent structures, a goal of 50 feet from the edge of
the Stud Mill Road to the centerline of the transmission line was used
when designing the location of structures. This allows the conductor to
be blown-out at the NESC code required 6 pounds per square foot (psf)
wind while still maintaining safe clearance to the edge of the road.
When added to the 85 feet to the edge of the ROW on the side away from
the road, the minimum ROW width could conceivably be 135 feet. This was
achieved in some sections. However, guyed angle structures had to be
moved farther away from the road to allow room for the guys. Also, the
crookedness in the road also contributed to the ROW edge distance to be
greater then the 50 feet in many locations. After plotting the whole
line, the average cleared ROW along Stud Mill Road was 155 feet which is
consistent with the ROW width used during the Alternatives Analysis for
the Consolidated Corridors Route Alternative along the Stud Mill Road
and/or Maritimes pipeline.

### Structure Selection Process

There are several structure types to consider in the construction of a
345 kV transmission line (see Appendix 5-2 of the Alternatives Analysis
-- Slide Show Presentation from the Technical Conference). The
structures vary by material, foundation, line configuration, and
construction system and generally break down into the following types
studied for this project:

-   Wood pole H-frame;

-   Guyed lattice delta structure;

-   Self-supporting delta lattice tower;

-   Single shaft self-supporting tubular steel pole in delta
    configuration; and

-   Various vertically configured structures.

Conductor or phase configuration is a key variable in structure design
and there are three primary types: horizontal, delta (triangular
orientation), and vertical. There are many impacts and trade-offs to
consider in the selection process including: environmental impact,
visual impact, cost, and factors related to construction. Several
structure options were considered and analyzed for this project.
Vertically configured structures were eliminated from detailed analysis
due to their unacceptable height requirements. This was based on the
required spacing between each of the conductors (28 feet) which would
effectively require vertically configured structures to be at least 32
feet taller than delta configured structures and 56 feet taller than
horizontally configured structures.

The following discussion reviews the options and criteria used to select
a preferred structure for the NRI. Consistent with the route selection
process, particular attention was given to the environmental impacts
during this process. These impacts included:

-   ROW width requirements;

-   Visual impacts;

-   Height, and fit in the natural environment;

-   Soil disturbance; and

-   Equipment access with associated site impacts.

The following summarizes the impacts of each option considered.

**Wood H-Frame --** This is a two or three pole structure with
cross-arms for strength and support of the conductors. The conductors
are suspended from the upper cross-arm in a horizontal configuration.
There are also two shield wires for lightening protection on top of each
pole. The poles are directly embedded in the soil with no other
foundation. Two poles are used for normal straight-line runs (tangent)
and 3 pole structures would be used for angle turns and dead-ends. The
angle and dead-end structures are also guyed for additional support.
Because the conductors are configured horizontally, H-frames are the
lowest structure type, and for this project would generally be 85-90
feet tall. Because of the favorable visual effects associated with this
structure and the reduced disturbances due to the fact that the
structures are direct embedded and do not require foundations, BHE
concluded that the wood H-frame structure minimizes overall impacts and
has selected it for use on the NRI.

**ROW Width** -- H-frame structures require a wider ROW than a delta
configuration because the conductors are horizontally configured 26 feet
apart. Designs for this project call for ROW widths of 170 feet for
virgin ROW and approximately 155 feet when adjacent to the Stud Mill
Road and/or pipeline, and between 100 to 125 feet when adjacent to the
MEPCO line or both the MEPCO line and the pipeline. Therefore
co-location is being used to minimize ROW width and clearing. The
trade-offs considered in designing the width include: distance to
standing trees that could present a risk to the line, distance to roads
for traffic safety, and distance to the pipeline to manage A/C
interference. The design widths were selected to minimize ROW width, but
also optimize these three factors. Finally, the additional ROW width
when compared to the delta structures may not be as undesirable as some
wildlife biologists have suggested in the past. Some wildlife biologists
are now suggesting that more early-successional habitat is needed in
Downeast Maine. Although not an ideal distribution of habitat, the ROW
for this line will provide a stable area of early successional
(scrub/shrub/grass) habitat for the long-term.

**Visual Impacts** -- H-frame is the most favorable structure for height
management. Total structure height (pole tops) would be 85-90 feet with
line height ranging from 26 to 65 feet above ground. Although extending
above most of the adjacent trees, the lower height will make the line
less visible when viewed from most key viewsheds. In addition, the color
and texture of the wood will provide a more natural blend into the
surrounding forested landscape when compared to steel structures. Wooden
H-frames are the most common structure type in Maine and are consistent
with viewer expectations; particularly in less developed areas such as
occur along the NRI. Wooden H-frames are also consistent with the MEPCO
route and therefore are particularly appropriate for that portion of the
NRI.

**Soil Disturbance --** H-frame provides an alternative with the least
impact on soil disturbance. Poles are set in the ground through boring
or excavation/back-fill, without any other foundation. Bored holes are
approximately 2 feet in diameter and excavation would impact an area of
approximately 15 square feet per pole. Where needed, guy wires are
installed either by anchoring to a buried dead-man (log or pre-cast
concrete block) or by drilling and anchoring into bedrock. In most cases
poured concrete is not required.

**Equipment Access** -- Basic equipment including boring machines,
back-hoes, bucket trucks, stringing equipment, and cranes would need to
access each structure site. No roads will be needed to facilitate this
access and no special concrete truck access would be required.

**Cost -** H-Frames are generally less costly, at least initially, than
the other structure types, but have a shorter life span than steel
structures.

***Lattice Structures***

> **Guyed Lattice Delta Structure --** This structure is a steel lattice
> construction with a delta configuration of the conductor wires. It is
> designed for long spans averaging 1,200 feet with a structure height
> of 120 feet. It is also guyed, with four guy wires extending out 65-75
> feet toward the edge of the ROW. The guy wires present a number of
> design challenges, and in the case of this project would result in a
> wider ROW. The guy wires cannot extend too close to the gas pipeline
> or the Stud Mill Road for safety and operational reasons (could not
> cross over, or place guys in the pipe or road ROWs). Therefore the
> centerline would have to be moved (compared to its current alignment)
> and the ROW widened to accommodate a safe placement of the guy wires.
> Essentially, the use of this structure would eliminate any potential
> narrower sections of ROW that may be available along MEPCO or
> Maritimes because the full 170 feet width is needed to accommodate the
> guy wires along the whole length. The visual impact of the guyed delta
> would not be favorable because the height would increase visibility
> from many key viewing areas, and steel would not be as compatible
> visually with the forested landscape. This structure also requires a
> concrete foundation with excavation of soil and truck access
> requirements to each structure site.
>
> In addition, the line cost using this structure is greater than the
> line cost using a wood H-frame line. Most large steel structures are
> designed to facilitate longer spans than wood structures. The design
> of the NRI, which follows the many turns of the Stud Mill Road and
> pipeline, does not lend itself to tall long-span structures. The
> potential efficiency that could be gained by fewer structures is lost
> because of the frequent turns and angles needed for this alignment and
> thus for this project there is no cost advantage to steel.
>
> **Self-Supporting Delta Lattice Tower --** This structure is also a
> steel lattice tower, but is supported by four legs anchored on
> substantial foundations - there are no guy wires. The structure is
> also designed for long spans of 1,200 feet, and again the route is not
> conducive to long straight lines and significantly increases the costs
> of the project.
>
> The foundations for the tower have two possible designs. The first
> option is drilled concrete piers that would be approximately 4 feet in
> diameter and 20 feet deep. The second option is large buried
> foundations called grillages. The excavation for these foundations
> would be approximately 9 feet square and 10 feet deep.
>
> This tower is also very tall with an average height for this project
> of 135 feet. However, without the guy wires, some ROW can be saved and
> the estimated virgin ROW width would be about 145 feet.
>
> The visual impacts are negative both from height and appearance. This
> structure is large and has a very intrusive industrial-type impact on
> the landscape.
>
> The other major environmental impact will be soil and site
> disturbance. The foundations will require major excavation and road
> access for concrete trucks. This tower is also a high cost option as
> the 'crookedness' of the route does not allow for long spans making
> this design cost prohibitive.

**Self-Supporting Tubular Steel Poles --** The last option analyzed is
the tubular steel pole structure. This is usually a single-pole design
using galvanized steel (which allows for low maintenance). The
foundations for these poles are large diameter poured-in-place concrete
caissons. The size of the caissons would range from 6 to 10 feet in
diameter and 20 to 40 feet deep. The conductors would be in a delta
configuration, and the total height would be 115-120 feet. The ROW width
for this structure would be about 145 feet.

Of the steel options, the tubular design is the most attractive
visually, but would be taller and still not as aesthetically favorable
as the wood structure. The site disturbance would also be very extensive
with this option as large excavation equipment and concrete trucks would
need to access each structure site. Tubular steel poles would be the
highest cost option of the structures evaluated and again, given the
route makes this design cost prohibitive.

#### Results and Conclusion

This structure analysis concluded that the wood H-frame minimizes
overall environmental impacts and is the best option financially.
Although marginally less favorable on ROW width, the H-frame is the most
favorable structure option for all other environmental impacts,
especially visual and site disturbance. It provides the lowest height
and best fit in the landscape, while also requiring the least soil
disturbance and no concrete construction. The visual impacts associated
with the greater height and 'industrial' appearance of steel lattice
structures, coupled with the impacts associated with installing concrete
foundations were determined to offset any benefits of reduction in ROW
width. Finally, if the view of some wildlife biologists concerning a
need to increase early-successional habitat is considered, a slightly
wider ROW would not be viewed as negative, and the H-frame structure
becomes the solid preferred option.

### Transmission Line Structures

The project will have a single circuit configuration. The new
transmission line will consist of two overhead shield wires and three
phases with two conductors per phase. As identified above, the
predominant structure that will support the transmission line will be
the direct embedded wood H-Frame tangent (Figure 1-2). Guyed angle
structures will be used when the line turns an angle up to 30 degrees
(Figures 1-3, 1-4, or 1-5). When the line exceeds a turn of 30 degrees,
a guyed 3-pole dead-end structure will be utilized (Figure 1-6). The
distance between structures will vary from 340 feet to 975 feet, with an
average span of 731 feet.

Pole lengths will be between 65 and 110 feet long, but the most common
lengths will be 95 feet or 100 feet in length and will be embedded
approximately 11 to 12 feet in the ground. Wood pole structures are
typically embedded in the ground by a standard formula of 10 percent of
the structure height plus 2 feet. Therefore, the average height
above-ground of the structures will be 83 to 88 feet depending on pole
length. Pole sizes will be Class 2, 1, H1, H2, H3, or H4 with an
approximate ground line diameter of 1.5 feet to 2.0 feet and pole tops
approximately 1-foot in diameter. A grounding system will be installed
at each structure site to ensure proper grounding.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc102738080 .anchor}FIGURE 1-2. WOOD H-FRAME TANGENT

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc102738081 .anchor}FIGURE 1-3. LIGHT ANGLE
STRUCTURE

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc102738082 .anchor}FIGURE 1-4. LIGHT MEDIUM ANGLE
STRUCTURE

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc102738083 .anchor}FIGURE 1-5. HEAVY MEDIUM ANgle
structure

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc102738084 .anchor}FIGURE 1-6. GUYED DEAD-END
structure

The majority of angle and dead-end structures will be direct embedded
3-pole guyed wood or steel structures. However, four locations
(structure #21 north of Route 1A, structure #86 near Blackman Stream,
structure #237 along Stud Mill Road, and structure #608 just before
crossing the St. Croix River into Canada) have been identified that will
require the use of self-supporting steel structures. Typical guyed wood
angle or dead-end structures could not be utilized in these areas
because these locations are constrained by the proximity of roads,
wetlands, or the Maritimes pipeline. The last structure before crossing
the St. Croix River must be a self-supporting steel structure due to the
extremely long span required to cross this river. The dead-end
structures (#21, #86, and #606) will be three tubular steel poles and
will be approximately 80 to 110 feet tall and the angle structure (#237)
will be three poles 100 feet tall. These structures will be supported by
concrete cylinder foundations estimated to be 9 feet in diameter and
approximately 27-feet deep. Figure 1-7 illustrates the self-supporting
steel angle structure and Figure 1-8 illustrates the self-supporting
steel dead-end structures.

All ground clearances, clearances to other electric wires, and
clearances to facilities will be according to the National Electric
Safety Code (NESC) and standard utility practices with an appropriate
safety margin. The transmission line will be constructed to have a
minimum of 26 feet of ground clearance when the conductors are at
maximum design sag. The shield wires and conductors will be as follows:

Shield Wires: Two 7 No. 8 Alumoweld

Conductors: 1192.5 kcmil, 45/7 ACSR code name Bunting

(2 per phase)

Diameter = 1.302 inches

Weight = 1.344 lbs per foot

Rated Breaking Strength = 32,000 lbs

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc102738085 .anchor}FIGURE 1-7. SELF-SUPPORTING
STEEL ANGLE STRUCTURE

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc102738086 .anchor}FIGURE 1-8. SELF-SUPPORTING
STEEL DEAD-END STRUCTURE

### Construction Facilities, Access and Scheduling

#### Construction Equipment

The construction of the transmission facilities, the installation of the
transmission line structures, and the ROW clearing will be performed by
independent contractors. Construction of the line will proceed in an
orderly fashion with one operation sequentially succeeding another. The
general sequence of work is surveying, development of access roads and
vegetation clearing, installation of erosion control measures, structure
assembly, structure erection, conductor installation and clean‑up.

#### Construction Staging Areas

Staging areas become focal points of activity during construction of a
transmission line. Staging areas serve as construction headquarters.
Material is received, stored, organized and shipped to the ROW from
these points.

Five staging areas have been identified for the project as follows:

1.  **Route 178 Staging Area --** This area is on the west side of State
    Route 178 in Bradley north of the entrance to the Penobscot
    Experimental Forest. The area is approximately five acres in size,
    presently cleared land, and is located approximately nine miles from
    the Orrington Substation. The proposed laydown area consists of a
    field with a borrow pit located toward the rear. In 1992 the
    Department of Transportation filled the pit with road construction
    debris consisting of clean fill only. After the MDOT project was
    completed, MDOT leveled the filled area and covered it with loam and
    seeded it.

2.  **Costigan Mill Staging Area --** This area is a large industrial
    site located in Penobscot County, Maine, Town of Milford, and
    community of Costigan. The area is approximately ten acres in size,
    and is the location of a former sawmill operation, which produced
    softwood lumber from the early 1970's until it was shut down
    in 2001. Demolition of most of the equipment and some of the
    buildings has been completed. There are no active operations at this
    time.

> The site is primarily flat to gently rolling terrain. The primary
> surface material is filled and graded gravel which facilitated roads,
> mobile equipment access, and a woodyard. There are also significant
> areas of paved surface. The staging area has good drainage management,
> including a new retention pond. It is accessed by paved and gravel
> roads, and has a functional railroad spur. The planned use for this
> staging area is for rail unloading and storage of utility materials
> (e.g., poles, wire, etc.).

3.  **Pickerel Pond Staging Area --** This area encompasses
    approximately six acres, and is located at an abandoned air strip
    owned by Kennebec West near Pickerel Pond and adjacent to the Stud
    Mill Road in T 32 MD. This area is approximately 13.5 line miles
    from the Route 178 Staging Area and provides an excellent location
    for the storage and handling of materials and providing a support
    area for the project.

4.  **Machias River Staging Area --** This area encompasses
    approximately six and a half acres owned by Kennebec West located
    south and north of the Stud Mill Road straddling T 36 MD and T
    37 MD. This staging is area near the Machias River and is
    approximately 32 line miles from the Pickerel Pond Staging Area.
    This area is currently cleared and has previously been used for
    gravel borrow and as a staging area for construction of the
    Maritimes natural gas pipeline.

5.  **Huntley Brook Staging Area --** This staging area is located in
    Plantation No. 21 on land owned by Haynes Timberlands Inc. near the
    crossing of Huntley Brook by the Stud Mill Road. It is approximately
    16 miles from the Machias River Staging Area. The site is
    approximately four and a half acres in size and has previously been
    cleared.

Each staging area is located adjacent to an established road with easy
vehicle access and is either a previously disturbed site because it
functioned as a staging area for commercial forestry practices or was
used by Maritimes during construction of its natural gas pipeline.
Minimal vegetation clearing and light grading will be required to
establish the staging areas. Appendix 1-2 identifies the locations of
the five staging areas along the route.

The staging areas have been specifically located in areas that have
previously been disturbed by clearing, gravel pit operations, staging
for timber operations or for constructing the Maritimes pipeline. These
locations were chosen which were judged to be relatively less sensitive
to environmental impact. Temporary erosion control measures are planned
for the staging areas, consisting of siltation fencing along the
downslope boundary of the staging areas if gradients are sufficient to
result in erosion and sedimentation to protected natural resources
(i.e., wetlands and waterbodies).

#### Access To and Within the Project Route

Throughout the project area, BHE will utilize existing public roads and
logging roads to access the ROW. These roads will provide an opportunity
to travel back and forth to the ROW for clearing and construction
activities. Use of existing roads and the ROW itself will allow the
project to be completed without constructing any new gravel access roads
for construction. Use of logging roads is required where other road
crossings (i.e., paved or gravel state and local roads) do not exist.
All access roads were selected to avoid impacts to the greatest extent
practicable. Improvements to these access roads (e.g., trimming
overhanging vegetation, grading, replacing culverts, and installing
temporary bridges) may be required due to the size and nature of the
equipment that will utilize the road. Appendix 1-2 identifies the
locations of the temporary construction access points along the project
ROW.

#### Construction Schedule and Sequence

i.  **[Construction Schedule]{.underline}** -- Pending approvals, the
    project is anticipated to start with ROW clearing in December 2005
    and is anticipated to take approximately one year to complete. It
    should be noted that while it is anticipated that work will take
    place throughout the construction period, BHE plans on conducting
    winter construction in unusually wet or saturated soils to minimize
    wetland impacts and avoid causing erosion and sedimentation into
    protected resources. Section 14, Erosion and Sedimentation Control,
    provides additional information pertaining to winter construction
    and erosion and sedimentation control for the project.

Descriptions of the major construction tasks and sequence are as
follows:

ii. **[Surveying]{.underline}** -- The first operation to be completed
    will be a survey of the selected route. The surveying will establish
    the centerline and edges of the ROW for the transmission line. For
    the most part, only the survey crew and small items of survey
    equipment will be involved. Establishing the centerline may involve
    limited cutting of trees for line‑of‑sight staking, profiling and
    distance measuring. The survey crew will utilize existing roads to
    obtain access to the selected route. Much of the work will proceed
    on foot.

iii. **[Access Roads and Vegetation Clearing]{.underline}** -- Temporary
     construction access points along the ROW are identified in Appendix
     1-2. As stated above, BHE expects to utilize existing public roads
     and logging roads to access the ROW and no new temporary access
     ways will be required to construct the transmission line
     facilities.

Construction of the proposed transmission line facilities will consist
of two main stages. The first stage is the clearing of vegetation
followed by the actual line construction stage. An on-site project
manager will dictate the day-to-day activities during both stages. The
project manager's responsibilities will include ensuring compliance with
all applicable environmental standards and conditions of state and
federal permits.

The project calls for clearing overstory vegetation an additional
100-125 feet from the existing cleared edge of the MEPCO ROW from the
existing Orrington Substation north to a point near Blackman Stream in
Bradley (Appendix 1-3) (Segments A-B, B-C, C-D, D-E, and E-F). At the
beginning of Segment F, the route turns easterly/northeasterly passing
through land owned and managed for commercial forest products for a
distance of approximately 13.54 miles to a point where the route would
join the Stud Mill Road east of Sunkhaze Stream in Myra (T 32 MD) and
requires a ROW width of 170 feet (Appendix 1-3) (Segment F-G). At the
end of Segment G, the route turns northeasterly and is generally
co-located with the Stud Mill Road and/or the Maritimes pipeline for the
remaining distance of the route and requires a ROW width ranging from
135-170 feet (Appendix 1-3) (Segments G-H through P-Q). In some places
the ROW width may exceed 170 feet as a result of the 'crookedness' of
the road.

Crews with whole-tree harvesting machines will first ground cut all
vegetation two inches diameter at breast height (dbh) and greater.
Mowing machines and/or hand clearing crews will then remove the
remaining vegetation within or anticipated to encroach into the NESC
clearance zone. All ground level vegetation will remain in place and the
stumps left after cutting of overstory trees will not be removed.

iv. **[Line Construction]{.underline}** -- After clearing the ROW, the
    first step in line construction is to erect the poles. Most direct
    embedded poles will be erected by drilling a hole with an auger,
    placing the pole in the hole and backfilling around the pole with
    excavated soil material or crushed stone. This backfill is tamped in
    (i.e., compacted) to provide a firm base. Some contractors may
    choose to erect poles using a backhoe to excavate approximately 1.5
    cubic yards of material, allowing each pole to be placed up to
    approximately 11-12 feet deep. The excavated area around the poles
    will then be backfilled. This backfill is also tamped down to
    provide a firm base.

During erection of some poles, it may be necessary to create a level
area for the equipment in order to allow for proper (straight)
installation of the pole. In most cases appropriate topography exists.
However, in locations where the terrain is not level, it is expected
that a level working area will need to be created by moving material
(e.g., rocks and soil) from the area immediately adjacent to the pole
location to create safe working conditions. These locations will be
limited to only those places where the topography is too sloped to allow
the equipment to operate safely. All necessary erosion and sedimentation
control measures will be installed and will remain in place until the
area is stabilized.

For poles located at angle points, guy wires will be installed from the
pole tops and then anchored to the ground with an anchor. Common types
of anchors include screw anchors, dead-man anchors or rock anchors.
Screw anchors are easy to install and popular but do not work well in
rocky soils and locations with shallow bedrock. It is anticipated that
screw anchors will not be used on this project. It is more likely that a
dead-man anchor (a wood or concrete log or plank that is buried 6-8 feet
deep into the soil and the guy is attached to the dead-man) will be
used. If the bedrock is shallow, a rock anchor may be used. This would
involve drilling a hole into the bedrock, inserting a rebar or other
anchor into the hole and grouting the hole closed. This is an expensive
anchor but is the most effective for bedrock conditions.

In all probability, it will be necessary to blast ledge and large rocks
at a number of locations during construction of this project. Blasting
will be limited to pole locations where bedrock is exposed or shallow,
and possibly to move or break large boulders to provide access to pole
locations. Section 20, Blasting, provides a complete discussion of
blasting that may be associated with construction of the project.

After the poles are erected (the vertical insulators which hold the
conductors are installed prior to placement of the pole) the next step
involves running a pull line along pulleys attached to each insulator.
The pull lines are then connected to the conductors which are pulled
from pole-to-pole until they are run the entire length of the line.
Pulling sites will be positioned at key locations along the line
(usually at a dead-end structure) where the wires will be pulled from.
This allows the conductor to be strung in sections. The last step
involves tying the conductors into each insulator.

Schematic drawings of the various pole configurations that will be used
on the project are found in Figures 1-2 through 1-8. Specific locations
of poles within the ROW are found on plan and profile sheets (scale: 1
inch = 200 feet) that appear as an attachment of this permit
application.

v.  **[Grounding]{.underline}** -- All structures will be grounded and
    all pole line hardware which penetrates the surface of wood poles
    will be bonded and connected to the structure grounding to ensure
    adequate protection for lightening surge flashovers. The structure
    grounding will consist of No. 2 solid Copperweld wire (or similar
    material) connected to the overhead shield wires at the top of each
    structure and to Copperweld ground rods, pole plates, or anchor
    rods. Where anchors are included, all anchor rods shall be connected
    to the underground system for the structure grounding. As part of
    construction of the transmission line it may be necessary to install
    counterpoise in addition to the ground rods. The counterpoise shall
    be No. 2 solid Copperweld (or similar material) and will consist of
    one or more radial wires as shown in Figure 1-9. The counterpoise
    will be buried at least 12 inches deep below normal grade except in
    cultivated areas where the counterpoise will be buried at least 18
    inches below grade. Where installed on rock, the counterpoise shall
    be extended across the entire rock surface so that the terminal
    point is located in earth. Where large boulders or other
    obstructions are encountered, the counterpoise shall be diverted
    around such obstructions.

vi. **[Clean Up]{.underline}** -- Upon completion of construction, all
    work areas will be cleaned up and restored. All bare soil areas will
    be seeded and mulched as specified in Section 14, Erosion and
    Sedimentation Control.

#### Modification of Orrington Substation

The Orrington Substation is an existing substation which is located on
Fields Pond Road in Orrington, Maine (Figure 1-10). Specifically, the
substation is situated in Parcel No. 5 as shown on Property Map No. 9
for the Town of Orrington located in Penobscot County, Maine.

The Orrington Substation will be modified to accept one new 345 kV
transmission line. The expansion will include necessary switches,
circuit breakers, overhead bus and structures similar to the existing
installation. The new switching configuration will require that the 345
kV H‑frame structure located immediately north of the substation be
relocated. The access road to the substation will also be modified to
accommodate the additional facilities required at the existing entrance
to the substation.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc102738087 .anchor}FIGURE 1-9. COUNTERPOISE &
GROUNDING

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc102738088 .anchor}FIGURE 1-10. EXISTING ORRINGTON
SUBSTATION

#### Transmission Line Operation and Maintenance

The line will be examined at least one time per year by aerial
inspections, and one detailed ground inspection will be completed every
five years. The ground patrol will be done at a rate of approximately
eight structures per 10-hour day including travel time, switching, and
tagging. During this patrol, about 10 percent of the structures will
receive a full climbing inspection. The structures climbed would be
picked on a random basis and/or if the visual inspection indicated a
need for close inspection. General maintenance on wood pole structures
consists of guy adjustments and bolt tightening. On steel structures
spot painting of damaged or rusting material is included.

Steel structures are considered to have a service life of 50 years. The
wood H‑frame structure is considered to have a 30-year service life. In
practical terms, it is not likely that the line would be torn down and
rebuilt completely after 30 years. It is likely that extra maintenance
would be performed over the later years of the anticipated life which
would include a program to test the soundness of the structures and
crossarms. Any defective or questionable poles or crossarms would be
replaced when found, thereby extending the service life.

As previously stated, no new access roads are necessary to construct the
transmission line. The only permanent access road required (other than
existing paved and gravel roads) for operation and maintenance of the
line is the existing access road leading to the Orrington Substation,
which will be modified to accommodate the new facilities.

Regarding vegetation management, two distinct zones of vegetative
management are identified as follows:

-   Areas of selective clearing, including buffers and wetlands; and

-   Areas within the ROW.

See Section 10, Buffers, for the vegetation maintenance plan.

## Drawings

### Development Description, Site Work, Existing Facilities, and Topography

Detailed drawings of the proposed project are included within plan and
profile sheets (scale: 1 inch = 200 feet) that have been submitted as an
attachment of this permit application. These drawings show the plan view
and profile view (topography) of the transmission line route with
proposed pole locations, including location, function and ground area of
the project, location where the site work will be conducted, and
landowner and political boundaries. Additional drawings included as
Appendix 1-4 include pre- and post-development areas and contours for
the proposed modifications to the Orrington Substation.

## Proposed Alignment of the NRI

BHE conducted a comprehensive and inclusive process to identify and
evaluate impacts associated with five route alternatives. As a result of
that process BHE determined that the NRI is the best technical solution
to achieve the project purpose and that the CCR is the best route
alternative for the NRI considering the following categories of
evaluation criteria:

-   Environmental suitability and relative level of impacts;

-   Landowner impacts;

-   Project purpose; and

-   Cost.

The Alternatives Analysis provides detailed descriptions of each of
these evaluation criteria. In addition, the Alternatives Analysis
thoroughly describes the process that BHE developed and implemented to
determine the preferred route for the NRI.

During detailed examination of the CCR by BHE, and based on input
received from various stakeholders (e.g., landowners), BHE has
determined that in two locations the alignment should deviate from the
originally defined CCR (referred to here as reroutes). The first is
located in the southern portion of the CCR from Blackman Stream south of
Bradley to a point in Hancock County just east of Sunkhaze Stream (the
Pickerel Pond Reroute, Segment F-G). The second is located in Myra in
the western portion of the CCR and is necessary to avoid an
archeologically sensitive area and several privately owned camps
adjacent to Stud Mill Road west of Dead Stream (the Myra Camp Reroute)
(Segment H-I, Plan and Profile Drawings). Each of these reroutes has
been incorporated into the CCR to minimize potential adverse
environmental impacts, minimize the number of landowners that could be
potentially affected by development of the CCR, reduce the visual
impacts associated with development of the project, and other route
siting criteria as described below.

### Analysis of Reroutes

This section describes the Pickerel Pond and the Myra Camp Reroutes. The
evaluation criteria as described in the Alternatives Analysis was
generally followed in evaluating theses reroutes to maintain consistency
in the route selection process developed by BHE.

#### Description of Pickerel Pond Reroute

The Pickerel Pond Reroute traverses a distance of approximately 13.55
miles from Blackman Stream in Bradley to a point where the reroute joins
the Stud Mill Road east of Sunkhaze Stream in Myra (T 32 MD) and would
require approximately 266 acres of ROW (ROW width of 170 feet) (Appendix
1-3). The majority of that distance is over land owned and managed by
forest products companies. Approximately 88 percent of the reroute is
under active commercial forest management and as such is traversed by an
extensive existing timber haul road system. Provided below is a
description of the primary reasons that BHE has incorporated the
Pickerel Pond Reroute into the proposed route.

**Reduction in Visual Impacts**

The Pickerel Pond Reroute was incorporated into the proposed route to
minimize visual impacts associated with the project. The original
alignment of the CCR Alternative passes just south of the federally
managed Sunkhaze National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge) on the south side of
County Road in Milford adjacent to the Maritimes pipeline ROW. During
stakeholder meetings and based on written comments received by BHE
(Appendix 1-5) regarding development of the project, the Refuge Manager
and other stakeholders indicated a strong preference for a final
alignment of the route that would not visually impact the Refuge. BHE
also received written comments from Friends of Sunkhaze Meadows (a
non-profit organization dedicated to the protection of the Refuge)
expressing that a route located adjacent to the Refuge is not preferred
and would result in visual impacts to the Refuge (Appendix 1-5). In
addition, incorporation of the Pickerel Pond Reroute into the proposed
route reduces the number of dwellings located adjacent to the route
resulting in less visual impacts of the project to abutting landowners
along the MEPCO line and County Road. The reroute also eliminates the
visual impacts associated with development of the project to the Breyer
Heights subdivision located off County Road in Milford. Breyer Heights
subdivision is bordered to the south by the Milford/Bradley town line
and the Maritimes pipeline ROW. The original alignment of the CCR
Alternative in this area was located on the south side of the Maritimes
pipeline ROW and abutting landowners would be visually exposed to a new
transmission line.

In addition to reducing visual impacts to the Refuge and abutting
landowners, the Pickerel Pond Reroute also eliminates visual impacts to
the Maine Youth Conservation Wildlife Management Area in T 32 MD located
in Hancock County off the Stud Mill Road (i.e., Pickerel Pond). The
Maine Youth Conservation Association arranged a lease from International
Paper (IP) to DIFW for the land surrounding Pickerel Pond and erected a
building to be used for youth education programs. The land is now owned
by the State and encompasses nearly 22 acres around Pickerel Pond. The
regulations on the pond currently restrict fishing to young people under
the age of sixteen. During negotiations with IP regarding siting the NRI
on their property, IP indicated a preference to the Pickerel Pond
Reroute over the original alignment of the CCR Alternative in this area
because the reroute avoids visual impacts to the Maine Youth Association
Wildlife Management Area.

**Reduction in Alternating Current Mitigation Impacts along the
Maritimes Pipeline**

As identified in the Alternatives Analysis, the installation of AC
mitigation measures along portions of the NRI paralleling the Maritimes
pipeline will be required. These impacts will be temporary in nature and
will be located on Maritime's previously disturbed ROW. The Alternatives
Analysis provides a general description of AC mitigation and provides
additional information regarding AC mitigation located along the
Maritimes pipeline.

The Pickerel Pond Reroute would minimize overall project impacts because
the installation of AC mitigation along the entire length of the reroute
would not be required because this segment of the route is not located
adjacent to the Maritimes pipeline and therefore does not require the
installation of AC mitigation measures.

**ROW Acquisition**

Having a very high percentage of the reroute under the ownership of a
few landowners and under active forest management presents two
advantages associated with the Pickerel Pond Reroute. First, greater
flexibility and greater opportunity exists for advantageous siting of
the route. Second, ROW acquisition along the route is simplified. In
addition, the active commercial forestry has resulted in the existence
of an extensive timber haul road network, which minimizes the need to
develop new access roads for the reroute.

The Pickerel Pond Reroute is essentially a segment of the Previously
Permitted Route that BHE proposed during the previous permitting efforts
associated with this project. As such, BHE has previously performed ROW
acquisition along the majority of the reroute and currently has most
rights necessary to construct along this segment of the NRI. The
Alternatives Analysis provides additional information pertaining to the
history and permitting background associated with the project.

#### Description of Myra Camp Reroute

The Myra Camp Reroute traverses a distance of approximately 1.01 miles.
The reroute deviates from the original alignment of the CCR Alternative
approximately 2,356 feet west of Crocker Turn Road, passes around an
culturally sensitive area, crosses over Crocker Turn Road, and then
passes behind several privately owned camps for a distance of
approximately 3,081 feet before the reroute rejoins the original
alignment of the CCR Alternative along the Stud Mill Road. The reroute
would require approximately 21.22 acres of ROW (ROW width of 170 feet)
(Appendix 1-3). The reroute has been sited on Kennebec West land, which
is managed similarly to the lands crossed by the Pickerel Pond Reroute
as commercial forest land. Evidence of logging activity and existing
forest timber haul roads were identified along the reroute during field
investigations conducted in 2004.

Provided below is a description of each of the primary reasons that BHE
has incorporated the Myra Camp Reroute into the proposed route.

**Avoidance of Culturally Sensitive Areas**

As previously stated, the Myra Camp Reroute was incorporated into the
project because the reroute avoids a culturally sensitive area that was
identified during field surveys performed in 2004. The culturally
sensitive area consists of a possible 19^th^ century dwelling foundation
and associated surface features located adjacent to the Stud Mill Road
in Myra (T 32 MD). Dr. Kathy Wheeler, an Historic Resources Specialist,
investigated the area and recommended to BHE and the Maine State
Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) that a no build zone adjacent to
the culturally sensitive areas should be incorporated into the route
alignment in this area to avoid potential impacts to these resource
areas from development of the project. As recommended, the no build zone
has been incorporated into the route alignment and will subsequently
avoid all impacts to the foundation and related surface features, as
well as avoid all the test holes excavated by the investigating
archeologists that contained any historic artifacts. Section 8, Historic
Sites, provides additional information regarding the culturally
sensitive area being avoided by the reroute, identifies the mitigation
measures (i.e., the exclusion zone) recommended by Dr. Wheeler, and
provides a copy of the Phase I Archaeological Survey prepared for the
project as well as a letter from the Maine Historic Preservation
Commission approving the reroute as an avoidance measure of this site.

**Removal of Camps**

The Myra Camp Reroute was also incorporated into the project to avoid
the adverse impact of removing the camps to construct the project
adjacent to the Stud Mill Road. The reroute effectively eliminates this
impact and was approved by IP who formally owned and currently manages
the land along the reroute.

### Outstanding River Segments

Two rivers crossed by the NRI are defined as Outstanding River Segments
(ORS) (12 M.R.S.A. § 403): the Narraguagus and the Machias Rivers.
Pursuant to 38 M.R.S.A. § 480-D(8), BHE has conducted an analysis and
prepared a Review of Options for Crossing the Narraguagus and Machias
Rivers Report (Appendix 1-6) that summarizes the various alternatives
and feasibility of crossing the Narraguagus and Machias Rivers by
undergrounding a short segment of the transmission line under these
river crossings. Based on the results of the analysis, BHE has
determined that an overhead transmission line minimizes overall
environmental impacts to the rivers and has demonstrated that no
reasonable and practicable alternative exists which would have less
adverse effect upon the natural and recreational features of the river
segments. BHE has mitigated visual impacts by strategically placing
structures further away from the resource and implementing reduced
clearing and maintenance practices to maximize vegetation height.
Furthermore, it is important to note that both rivers already experience
visual impacts from the road and pipeline crossings and as such an
overhead transmission line co-located with these impacts reduces impacts
when compared to crossings at other locations or in a broader context
other ORS on alternative routes evaluated by BHE (see the Alternatives
Analysis report).

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1-1

PRE-APPLICATION MEETING MINUTES

APPENDIX 1-2

ROUTE SEGMENTS, TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS

ROADS AND STAGING AREAS

APPENDIX 1-3

ROW CONFIGURATIONS

APPENDIX 1-4

PRE- AND POST-DEVELOPMENT SITE PLANS

APPENDIX 1-5

WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED

BY BHE PERTAINING TO THE NRI

APPENDIX 1-6

REVIEW OF UNDERGROUND OPTIONS FOR

CROSSING THE NARRAGUAGUS AND MACHIAS RIVERS

[^1]: The Maritimes area of Canada consists of New Brunswick, Nova
    Scotia, and Prince Edward Island.

[^2]: CMP owns the controlling interest of the MEPCO line, while MPSCO
    and BHE hold minority ownership interests.