Groups, Individuals & T

G15.1 The route referenced by Mrcertificated by the Commission in 2selection was studied and evaluated addressed in Appendix O of the 200G15.2 During easement negotiatioissues related to project impacts to tsystems, farm dump, and apple treeG15.3 The Line A-5 and Route 17 rejected during the original alternatPipeline Project (see sections 3.3 an
Groups, Individuals & T

G16.5 Although there may be an oproposed Oakfield Compressor Stat

(fallow agricultural field) is neither not listed as endangered or threatenBased on correspondence between Ethere are no known bald eagle nests site. Pheasants and wild turkeys are 

G16.4 Empire’s wetland delineatiwetlands are present in the northwethe Oakfield Compressor Station sitdetermine whether jurisdictional weG16.3 The USGS map and aerial pwaterbody is a channelized natural We defer to the COE to determine wjurisdictional stream. G16.2 We did not edit the site desprovided is consistent with our desc

agricultural land. The occurrence odescribed in detail in section 4.2.2.2

G16.1 Comment noted. 
Groups, Individuals & T

G16.6 Comment noted. G16.7 Empire filed a detailed site showed considerable use of the exis
Groups, Individuals & T

G17.2 The process used to evaluatdescribed in section 3.0. In consideCommission will review both the enenvironmental record, including altissuance of a Certificate is in the puThis process will include weighing associated with the project, such as requirements in the northeast and mcompetitively priced natural gas, agassociated with the proposed projecmitigation and alternatives discusseFSEIS adequately addressed projecG17.1 Comment noted. 
Groups, Individuals & T

G17.5 Comment noted. G17.4 Thank you for your commeG17.3 Your assumption is incorreof the NE097 Project components c
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T

G18.1 Comment noted. A numbeSection 5 of the FSEIS to address cincluding use of third-party inspectenvironmental conditions attached ttakes some time to complete and mseveral weeks. Restoration of the crevegetation, would also be monitotake more than one growing seasonG18.2 Issues related to potential imMillennium project area are addressG18.3 Issues related to safety of psections 4.12.2 and 4.12.3. G18.4 Comment noted.
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T

G19.4 Comment noted. G19.5 Comment noted. G19.3 Comment noted. G19.2 You may address additionaproperty with Empire during you fi

generally do not object to such chanthey do not affect sensitive resource

G19.1 This comment was sent to tpermitting process. The FERC has 

However, issues related to landownour jurisdiction. Empire and the otheasements would be obtained throuaffected landowners, if possible. Ewith property owners for all land re

pipeline. The easement negotiation

construction impacts and terms for right-of-way. The actual terms and 

easement are outside of the scope o
Groups, Individuals & T

G19.6 Comment noted. If you arinform Empire about this during yomay install the pipeline in such a wunder the road. Pipeline installation 
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T

G20.1 Comment noted. Millenniucompany, and as such, has no previMillennium’s pipeline, which woulconstructed, operated, and maintainregulations and the FERC certificat
Groups, Individuals & T

G20.2 We believe the FSEIS adeqalternatives. There are no known acapability of providing the equivalemarket area within the same time frTherefore, there is no reasonable alG20.3 Gas supplies are found in mand any of these may be considered availability of imported liquefied napossibilities beyond North America

customers to obtain the supplies of interstate pipelines. There are no dthat exclusively provide gas to any 

G20.4 We disagree with your suggplace of the pipeline would result in 

contamination. It is not uncommon abandoned in place. Where the pip

pipe would be emptied of all gas an

remove all foreign matter. The opesealed before abandonment. Abandcause less environmental disturbancconstruction ROW of at least 50 feeexcavation and pipeline removal. Trestored and revegetation may take complete. There would be additionwaterbodies, and other sensitive resrecover. Therefore, we have not inMillennium remove all abandoned p

G20.5 Comment noted.
Groups, Individuals & T

G20.6 Millennium and the NE-07 lists that included affected landownNOI was sent to all of the landowne

Further, the applicants are required all affected landowners, towns, comfederal governments and agencies ithree business days of the Commissapplication. We sent the CD of the was on one of these mail lists. 

G20.7 Comment noted.G20.8 Comment noted. The FERproject is in the public convenience 
Groups, Individuals & T

G20.9 Our assessment of visual reDSEIS did include the proposed ins50 foot by 50 foot sites, all within tmay address screening with MillennG20.10 We disagree. We believe design would be safe and secure. G20.11 The cultural resource asseincluded in a February 1998 report on August 28, 1997 Millennium repRichard Parrotte about an old filled construction ROW. The state histowith the report’s conclusion that no within proposed construction worksproperty were determined to be outG20.12 The existing text under “Rof the FSEIS supports the reference
Groups, Individuals & T

G20.13 This incident was addressePublic Safety, the 2001 FEIS for thall of the information included in thinto this proceeding and, therefore, document. G20.14 Millennium has stated thacopy of the alignment sheet showinon September 30, 2004, and that theRight of Way and Valve Site Easemwith her father on March 11, 2006. G20.15 Millennium’s component both in terms of its own merits and Millennium Pipeline Project. We baddressed both perspectives. G20.16 Although there is no generProject, there are many avoidance, measures that would minimize impresources to the greatest degree praresource agencies have had an activcommenting on the project. G20.17 Comment noted. 
Groups, Individuals & T

G20.18 Comment noted. Issues rebeyond the scope of the FSEIS. G20.19 The Empire Connector Proportion of the original Millennium P

Corning, New York area. The Algoand the Iroquois MarketAccess Proj

pipeline looping and additional com

compressor stations, to transport gaPhase I Project eastern terminus in as stated in section 1, Millennium pamendment application to vacate in convenience and necessity it receivto the Phase II facilities and conditi

proposes to construct and operate o

Phase I facilities (these facilities wothe crossings of Lake Erie and the H

pipeline would not be designed to tr
Groups, Individuals & T

G21.5 Comment noted. G21.3 Pipeline construction procedescribed in section 2.3.2.5, includiimpacts to residents. Pipelines are under roadways and driveways. G21.3 See the response to G2.3.G21.2 Comment noted.G21.1 Issues related to safety of psections 4.12.2 and 4.12.3. Millennwould be obtained through good failandowners, if possible. The easemmitigation for construction impacts maintenance of the right-of-way. Thincluded in the easement are outsid
Groups, Individuals & T

G22.1 Comment noted. G24.2 to G24.4 Issues related to saddressed in section 4.12.5 and 4.12FSEIS adequately addressed these iBrookfield Compressor Station werThe Connecticut Siting Council indproposed Brookfield Compressor S
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T

G22.7 Comment noted. G22.6 See comments G22.2 to G2G22.5 Comment noted. 
Groups, Individuals & T

G23.1 See the responses to G22.2 G23.3 Comment noted. G23.2 Comment noted. 
Groups, Individuals & T

G23.4 Comment noted. 
Groups, Individuals & T

G24.5 See the response to G12.1. G24.3 and G24.4 Comments notedeasements with property owners for and operation of the pipeline. The include mitigation for construction and maintenance of the right-of-waimpacts to trees and septic systems. included in the easement are outsidG24.2 The Commission will addredeciding whether issuance of a Certconvenience and necessity for the pG24.1 Comment noted. 
Groups, Individuals & T

G25.5 Comment noted. G25.4 Section 2.3.2.2 describes rerights-of-way. Pipeline markers woExisting fences and gates disturbed replaced, but new fences and gates landowner requests that they be inspermanent ROW.G25.3 Comment noted. G25.2 Comment noted. G25.1 The Route 17 Alternative wthe original alternatives analysis for (see section 3.3 of the 2001 FEIS). 
Groups, Individuals & T

G26.1 Comment noted. G26.2 See the response to commeG26.3 Issues related to erosion anare addressed in section 4.2. We beaddressed those concerns. 
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T

G27.6 In august 2005, Millennium NYSDEC to amend its section 401 

application is pending. 

G27.5 The applicants must obtain construction of their respective projG27.4 Recommendation 15 (sectioMillennium to provide an update to locations of water wells and springs workspaces of the Phase I Project. pre- and post-construction water qu

and springs used for drinking water construction work area where appro4.3.1.1).

G27.3 The procedure for coating pof the FSEIS. Most of the pipe coathe pipe along the construction ROW applied to cover welds and any placoff during pipeline construction pripipeline construction procedure and G27.2 Millennium states it would resolution procedure with the Hartwproperty.G27.1 The third party environmendeveloped by the applicant and the agencies, as appropriate) to monitor environmental conditions of permitprojects. The applicants filed their 

with their applications and they werDSEIS. They may also be found viat http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/e

stated that it would be willing to rev
Groups, Individuals & T

G27.7 Issues related to wildlife ar2001 FEIS and section 4.4.1.2 of thadequately addressed those concernwindows would be used, as appropras may be recommended to reduce threatened or endangered species. G27.8 The FSEIS identified projeccommunities in section 4.5.1. Mitigareas have not been recommended bTherefore, there would be no opporcomment. G27.9 Section 4.6.1 of the FSEIS endangered and threatened species. G27.10 Section 4.7.1 assesses the proposed construction and operatio

implement to minimize impacts to a
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & T

G28.1 Comment noted.
Groups, Individuals & T

G29.1 See the responses to G22.G29.2 Comment noted.G29.3 Comment noted.
Groups, Individuals & T

G29.4 Alternative locations were FSEIS. G29.5 Comment noted.G29.6 Comment noted.G29.7 Comment noted.
Groups, Individuals & T
Groups, Individuals & 

G30.1 to G30.3 See the respons
Groups, Individuals & 

G31.2 Air quality is addressed G31.1 Comment noted.G31.3 Project impacts on grounin sections 4.3.1.5 and 4.3.1.6. 
Groups, Individuals & 

G32.1 Comment noted. Route rejected during the original alternPipeline Project (see section 3.3 G32.2 Comment noted. We hasurface waters in section 4.3. Mduring construction and would nsignificant rain events are predichigh for the design of the crossinG32.3 Comment noted. The orapplication was filed in DecembeOrder for that project on Septembproject (the Phase I Project) was G32.4 Comment noted. 
Groups, Individuals & 

G32.5 Comment noted. G32.6 Comment noted. The Fproject. 
Groups, Individuals & 

G32.7 Landowner concerns havworkspaces have been modified all landowners will be satisfied wmoving the project from their prothese other locations, other landothe presently affected landownerconstruction and operation.G32.8 All of the environmental addressed in appropriate sections have additional requirements relasection 401 permit. G32.9 Comment noted. Pipelin4.12. Emergency response plans coordinated with local first respoin developing appropriate protocestablish and maintain liaison wipublic officials to learn the resou

organization that may respond to and to coordinate mutual assistanestablish a continuing education 

public, government officials, and 

activities to recognize a gas pipeappropriate public officials. 
Groups, I 

ndividuals & 

G33.1 The NYSEG Tioga-Brooextensively and determined to be 3.2.1.3 of the FSEIS). The Line considered and rejected during ththe Millennium Pipeline Project 2001 FEIS).
Groups, Individuals & 

G34.1 We disagree. See the reS7.9, and S7.10. G34.2 Issues related to safety ain section 4.12.5 and 4.12.8. We addressed these issues.
Groups, Individuals & 

G34.3 See the response to G37its Findings of Fact, and Opinion proposed Brookfield CS. It state

to the Vale Road Site, the propos

preferred location for the compre

construction of the compressor shave less environmental impact ain close proximity. The CSC alsthe project at this location, and thFSEIS. 

G34.4 Air and noise issues at thaddressed in section 4.11.4. We these issues.G34.5 You have assumed a lot MarketAccess Project. The ComMarketAccess Project is in the puwill do for other projects that are 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 

G34.6 through G34.11 We disaadditional risk assessment be percompressor station at this locatio2002, in Docket No. CP02-31-00compressor station were part of tand nearby residences, including identified and possible impacts to locations were evaluated as part that project was approved, there the area that had not been identifThis FSEIS, which includes IroqNo. CP02-31-002, has again add

adequately. The pipeline and abIroquois would be designed, conin accordance with the DOT Min49 CFR 192. The regulations are 

protection for the public and to p

and failures. The Research and S(RSPA) of the DOT's Office of Pnational regulatory program to ennatural gas and other hazardous msafety regulations and other apprensure safety in the design, constmaintenance, and emergency res(including compressor stations). environment are protected from tthese regulations. 
Groups, Individuals & 

G34.6 through G34.11 (continueconducted an independent analysBrookfield Compressor Station atoo, has conducted a safety analyfiled its Findings of Fact, and Opabout the proposed Brookfield Cwould not impinge on the Whiscand therefore, its safety would nostated that it believes the proposein comparison to the Vale Road Meadow Road is the preferred loconsidering environmental impacresidences near the station. The 

proposed site for Algonquin's Br

appropriate. We have addressed the issue of tsystem at the compressor station downstream mainline block valvS6.19. The station would complregulations. We believe that issues related to addressed and no further analysi
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 

G34.12 As stated in section 4.11modeling was performed and toosurrounding the Brookfield Comeffort analyzed both worst-case o

conditions for a grid surrounding meters. This included the Whiscosurrounding areas. Emissions frocause, or contribute to, any local 
Groups, Individuals & 

G34.13 Unsilenced blowdown nemergency situations are addressS6.11 and S6.12. 
Groups, Individuals & 

G34.14 Part 192 of the DOT reoperator must establish and mainpolice, and public officials to lea

of each organization that may resemergency, and to coordinate mualso establish a continuing educathe public, government officials, activities to recognize a gas pipeappropriate public officials. Iroqwith local authorities appropriate emergencies. Iroquois states thaemergency first responder designdetermine the type of emergency Due to safety and security issuesbe reported to the Town or its de

G34.15 Comment noted. G34.16 Comment noted. The rbeen addressed in various parts oresponses to comment S5 (relatecomment S6 (related to Iroquois
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, I 

ndividuals & 
Groups, I 

ndividuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 
Groups, Individuals & 

GF1.1 Although the proposed Bis currently zoned residential, it hpresently for industrial purposes. provides more details. GF1.2 See the response to G31GF1.4 Comment noted.GF1.8 See the responses to GFGF1.5 Comment noted.GF1.6 See the response to G34GF1.7 Affected landowners weJanuary 10, 2006 when the FERC project and requested comments 

impact statement. Opportunities scope of the environmental impaissuance of the DSEIS, and the popportunity to comment on the Denvironmental staff held a public Connecticut, which provided the comment on the project.

GF1.3 Issues related to potentisurface waters at the Brookfield sections 4.3.1.6 and 4.3.2.5. We addressed these issues. This form letter was sent by: Margaret Bosco-Minier Todd Leckinger