Federal Agencies & Congr

F1.1 Issues related to safety at comsection 4.12.5 and 4.12.8 of the FSEISaddressed these issues. Alternative sitStation were analyzed in section 3.2.4independently concluded that the propStation site is preferable. F1.2 See the response to F1.1. Alsothe potential impact circle for the Brooincident in Colorado to which you are gas tank. The tank contained petroleufire was from burning condensate, not gathering natural gas from the ground some processing of the raw gas. The fpurpose and handles different petroleu

Brookfield Compressor Station, which Part 192 of the DOT regulations requiestablish and maintain liaison with appofficials to learn the resources and respmay respond to a natural gas pipeline assistance. The operator must also est

program to enable customers, the publ

engaged in excavation activities to recreport it to appropriate public officialsconsultation with local authorities appemergencies. Also, see responses to cthrough S6-22.

F1.3 See the response to F1.1. 
Federal Agencies & Congr
Federal Agencies & Congr

F2.3 Information regarding the use minimize impacts associated with watsection 4.3.2.1. We believe the DSEIS The contours of waterbodies would be construction condition as practicable. water quality certificate required Milleprior to construction and it would be pNYSDEC would determine whether a 

appropriate for the other components o

F2.2 Issues related to waterbody crF2.1 Crossing the Appalachian Natsection 4.8.3 of the 2001 FEIS. It was the NE-07 Project because the Appalaoutside the NYSEG and Warwick Isle replacement area, and no new informacrossing. The scope of the supplemenSEIS. All of the information that is in Pipeline Project and that was addressehas been incorporated into the NE-07 the material related to the crossing of tTrail. 
Federal Agencies & Congr

F2.4 We believe the FSEIS adequsection 4.3.2.2. Further, we have incothat was completed in the 2001 FEIS fF2.5 See response to comment F2.4F2.6 Although a GIS-enabled viewwe do not believe it is necessary. Croriver corridor was addressed in our 20overlap an existing right-of-way. If flcorridor would be crossed using dry crminimizing sedimentation.F2.7 We have recommended that MDelaware Scenic and Recreational Rivcrossing schedule for Delaware River that schedule as may be needed. Typienvironmental inspector would establireceiving scheduling updates.
Federal Agencies & Congr

F2.8 Section 4.3.2.2 was updated wF2.9 Thank you for your comment.F2.10 In response to comments regaoptions for federally-listed species, we for bald eagles from a “no effect” detenot likely to adversely effect” determiour position. This modification is refl4.6.1.1 of the FSEIS.
Federal Agencies & Congr

F2.11 See response to comment F2.4F2.12 The potential for indirect adve

with stream crossings is addressed in ssection 3.4 of the BA, under the Mille

F2.13 As per your comment, the FSE

to more clearly state the anticipated efconstruction. If blasting is required in when bald eagles are present, we have develop a bald eagle activity area consthe NYSDEC and FWS, that identifies blasting would occur within bald eagle when blasting would occur, and file thwritten approval by the Director of OEFWS has not recommended timing resbesides the Mongaup River area.
Federal Agencies & Con

F2.14 The Supplemental Phase I Bo

Orange and Rockland Counties, New on July 31, 2006. Millennium provideincludes wetland WKDR-001.

F2.15 The BA has been modified to 

the dwarf wedge mussel in the Upper 
Federal Agencies & Con

F2.16 Algonquin filed an executive 

survey results, and the full report is an

F2.17 Thank you for your comment.F2.18 Section 4.6.1.2, Other Special 

to include the documentation of the pr

pearlshell, and the bridle shiner in the potential impacts.F2.19 We believe the FSEIS adequa

Landowners have not allowed access tdelineation cannot be performed on thapplicants’ receive authorization for thThe applicants’ may have to use the emhave when they obtain a certificate of for the FERC to gain access in some indelineated prior to construction.

F2.20 Issues related to wildlife and w

4.4 and 4.7. We believe the FSEIS adThe EPA, Region 2, has commented thwetlands and that appropriate mitigati
Federal Agencies & Congr

F2.21 All wetlands would be delineaF2.23 The New York Regional Interproject alignment may be proposed alo

route. The NYRI would extend southwOneida County, New York, to HamptoYork. It may parallel portions of the PDelaware, Sullivan, and Orange Counco-exist if appropriate separation distaoperation. Maintaining a safe separatiMillennium Pipeline and the NYSEG the proposed NYSEG Route Variationof consultation with NYSEG on this iswould maintain NYSEG’s buffer distafrom the nearest grounded structure, srod, or wooden pole in its ROW. A saffected parties and the New York Pubwould establish the safe separation dis

powerline. 

Article VII of the New York Public Seresponsibility to grant or deny approvatransmission or power generation facilSiting of the NYRI powerline corridor environmental impact and safe operatiPSC. If the project is approved, the PSa “Certificate of Environmental Comp

F2.22 We believe that these addition

necessary as they are already part of ththe EIS via implementation of the app

procedures during construction, restor

We have determined these to be consiUse of these environmental constructiimpacts to wetlands. However, the COrequirements pursuant to its permitting 

F2.24 See response to comment F2.4
Federal Agencies & Congr

F2.25 The most parts of the wetland 

included in the DSEIS. Our Procedureat least 3 years or until wetland revegeyears, wetland restoration is not succerevegetation plan would be developed is successful. Wetlands may be succeThe COE may have some additional re

permitting authority.F2.26 The Commission does not req

under its jurisdiction. Applicants receall temporary workspaces, to restore wwetland hydrology and contour to as cas practicable; and to maintain the permay be operated in a reliable and safe 

pipeline standards published in parts 1

some more sensitive areas, such as wethe success of revegetation for at lest tsuccessful, it would need to develop a Construction and restoration of affectemonitor compliance with the requirembe issued for this project. 
Federal Agencies & Congr
Federal Agencies & Congr
Federal Agencies & Congr
Federal Agencies & Congr
Federal Agencies & Con
Federal Agencies & Con

F3.1 Thank you for your comment.F3.2 Thank you for your comment. 

reviewed by the COE as part of its per

F3.3 Thank you for your comment.
Federal Agencies & Congr
Federal Agencies & Congr

F4.1 Thank you for your comment.F4.2 Thank you for your comment.
Federal Agencies & Congr
Federal Agencies & Congr
Federal Agencies & Congr

F5.1 Thank you for your comment.F5.2 See the response to F2.19.F5.3 See the response to F2.20.
Federal Agencies & Congr

F5.4 See the response to F2.21.F5.5 See the response to F2.22.F5.6 See the response to F2.2. F5.7 See the response to F2.3.
Federal Agencies & Congr

F5.8 See the response to F2.25.F5.9 See the response to F2.26. F5.10 Thank you for your comments. 
Federal Agencies & Con