59258 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[OE Docket No. PP–362] 

Record of Decision for Issuing a 

Presidential Permit to Champlain 

Hudson Power Express, Inc., for the 

Champlain Hudson Power Express 

Transmission Line Project 

AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery 

and Energy Reliability, U.S. Department 

of Energy. 

ACTION: Record of decision. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) announces its decision to issue a 

Presidential permit to Champlain 

Hudson Power Express, Inc. (CHPEI), to 

construct, operate, maintain, and 

connect an electric transmission line 

across the U.S./Canada border in 

northeastern New York State. The 

potential environmental impacts 

associated with the transmission line 

are analyzed in the Environmental 

Impact Statement for the Champlain 

Hudson Power Express Transmission 

Line Project (DOE/EIS–0447). The 

transmission line would cross the U.S./ 

Canada border near the town of 

Champlain, New York, and extend 

southward approximately 336 miles to 

the Consolidated Edison Company of 

New York, Inc., (ConEd) Rainey 

substation in Queens, New York. 

ADDRESSES: The Final Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) and this Record 

of Decision (ROD) are available on the 

DOE National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) Web site at http://

nepa.energy.gov/ and on the Champlain 

Hudson Power Express (CHPE) EIS Web 

site at http://www.chpexpresseis.org. 

Copies of the Final EIS and ROD are 

also available for review at the following 

locations: 

• Queens Library—Steinway, 21–45 31 

Street (Ditmars Boulevard), Long 

Island City, NY 11105. 

• Yonkers Public Library—Riverfront 

Library, 1 Larkin Center, Yonkers, NY 

10701. 

• Rose Memorial Library, 79 East Main 

Street, Stony Point, NY 10980. 

• Kingston Public Library, 55 Franklin 

Street, Kingston, NY 12401. 

• Schenectady County Public Library, 

99 Clinton Street, Schenectady, NY 

12305. 

• Crandall Public Library, 251 Glen 

Street, Glens Falls, NY 12801. 

• Plattsburgh Public Library, 19 Oak 

Street, Plattsburgh, NY 12901. 

Copies of the Final EIS and this ROD 

may be requested by contacting Mr. 

Brian Mills, Office of Electricity 

Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE–20), 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585; phone 202–586– 

8267; email Brian.Mills@hq.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information on the CHPE Project 

EIS, contact Mr. Brian Mills as indicated 

in the ADDRESSES section above. For 

general information on the DOE NEPA 

process, contact Carol Borgstrom, 

Director, Office of NEPA Policy and 

Compliance (GC–54), U.S. Department 

of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585; email 

askNEPA@hq.doe.gov; or facsimile to 

202–586–7031. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Executive Order (EO) 10485 

(September 9, 1953), as amended by EO 

12038 (February 7, 1978), requires that 

a Presidential permit be issued by DOE 

before electricity transmission facilities 

may be constructed, operated, 

maintained, or connected at the U.S. 

border. DOE may issue or amend a 

permit if it determines that the permit 

is in the public interest and after 

obtaining favorable recommendations 

from the U.S. Departments of State and 

Defense. In determining whether 

issuance of a permit for a proposed 

action is in the public interest, DOE 

considers the potential environmental 

impacts of the proposed project, the 

project’s impact on electricity reliability 

by ascertaining whether the proposed 

project would adversely affect the 

operation of the U.S. electric power 

supply system under normal and 

contingency conditions, and any other 

factors that DOE considers relevant to 

the public interest. 

On January 25, 2010, CHPEI, a private 

company, applied to DOE for a 

Presidential permit to construct, 

operate, maintain, and connect a 1,000- 

megawatt (MW), high-voltage direct 

current (HVDC) merchant electric power 

transmission system across the U.S./

Canada border. The proposed CHPE 

Project would cross the international 

border from Canada into the U.S. under 

water in the Town of Champlain, New 

York, and extend approximately 336 

miles (541 kilometers [km]) south 

through New York State to Queens, New 

York. The aquatic portions of the 

transmission line would primarily be 

buried in sediments of Lake Champlain 

and the Hudson, Harlem, and East 

rivers; concrete mats would be used 

where the line could not be buried due 

to presence of exposed bedrock or 

crossing of other utility infrastructure. 

The terrestrial portions of the line 

would be buried within existing 

roadway and railroad rights-of-way. The 

project would include installation and 

operation of approximately 16 cooling 

stations along the terrestrial portions of 

the route and an HVDC converter station 

in Astoria, Queens, New York. The 

proposed line would be constructed and 

owned by CHPEI. 

Consultation 

Pursuant to Section 7 of the 

Endangered Species Act, DOE has 

consulted with the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

(NMFS) regarding the potential impacts 

on federally listed threatened or 

endangered species in the area of the 

proposed CHPE Project, and DOE has 

prepared a Biological Assessment (BA). 

The USFWS on September 10, 2014, 

submitted a letter to DOE concurring 

with the findings of the Final EIS and 

the BA that the proposed CHPE Project: 

‘‘may affect, but is not likely adversely 

affect the endangered Indiana bat 

(Myotis sodalis), Karner blue butterfly 

(Lycaeides melissa samuelis), or the 

proposed endangered northern longeared bat (Myotis septentrionalis)’’ and 

would result in no effect to other listed 

species. Based on these comments, DOE 

is conditioning its Presidential permit to 

require the Applicant to comply with all 

practicable means to avoid or minimize 

environmental harm from the 

alternative selected as required by the 

USFWS. The NMFS concurred on 

September 18, 2014, with DOE’s 

findings that ‘‘the CHPE project is not 

likely to adversely affect any ESA-listed 

species under our jurisdiction during 

construction or over the lifetime of its 

operation. Therefore, no further 

consultation pursuant to section 7 of the 

ESA is required.’’ 

DOE has also consulted with the 

NMFS regarding impacts pursuant to 

the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act and 

has prepared an Essential Fish Habitat 

(EFH) Assessment. NMFS provided its 

conservation recommendations (to 

suspend in-water work during 

spawning, early life stages, and 

migration seasons of aquatic species; 

monitor re-establishment of conditions 

and contours after transmission line 

installation; and establish a 

compensatory mitigation plan for 

adverse impacts to aquatic habitats) on 

August 19, 2014. DOE has no objection 

to these recommendations. 

Consultation with the New York State 

Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) 

under Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act has also 

occurred and a historic properties 

programmatic agreement (PA) between 

DOE and the New York SHPO has been 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Notices 59259 

executed. The PA requires CHPE to 

prepare a Cultural Resources 

Management Plan, which will meet the 

survey, data collection and mitigation 

measures necessary as identified by the 

New York SHPO. 

NEPA Review 

On June 18, 2010, DOE issued a 

Notice of Intent (NOI) (75 FR 34720) to 

prepare an EIS for the CHPE Project and 

conducted public scoping. On April 30, 

2012, DOE issued an Amended NOI to 

modify the scope of the EIS to reflect 

Applicant-proposed revisions to the 

proposed CHPE Project and conducted 

additional public scoping (77 FR 

25472). 

On November 1, 2013, the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

published a Notice of Availability 

(NOA) of the Draft EIS (78 FR 65643), 

that began a 45-day public review 

period, which DOE later extended by 30 

days (78 FR 76140). DOE held four 

public hearings on the Draft EIS and 

received more than 100 comments on 

the Draft EIS. Concerns raised in these 

comments included potential impacts 

on navigation safety (e.g., whether 

anchors would snag the transmission 

line or material placed over the line), 

aquatic and terrestrial protected and 

sensitive species, historic resources 

(including gravesites, particularly near 

Stony Point, New York, where the 

transmission line would be installed 

under historic sites via horizontal 

directional drilling) and transportation 

and traffic. Throughout the EIS process, 

DOE worked with the cooperating 

agencies to ensure that impacts will be 

appropriately addressed. DOE 

considered all comments received on 

the Draft EIS in the preparation of the 

Final EIS. DOE issued the Final EIS in 

August 2014 (79 FR 48140). 

The U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (USEPA) Region 2, the New 

York District of the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE), the New York Field 

Office (Region 5) of the USFWS, the 

U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), the New York 

State Department of Public Service 

(NYSDPS), and the New York State 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation (NYSDEC) were identified 

and participated as cooperating agencies 

in the preparation of the EIS. The U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers will use the 

EIS in its decisionmaking for the 

permits required pursuant to Section 10 

of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 

and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 

The Corps will issue its own ROD. 

Alternatives Considered 

In the EIS, DOE analyzed the No 

Action Alternative and the Proposed 

Action of granting the Presidential 

permit for the construction, operation, 

maintenance, and connection of the 

proposed CHPE Project facilities. Under 

the No Action Alternative, DOE would 

not issue a Presidential permit for the 

proposed CHPE Project and the 

transmission line would not be built. 

Under the Proposed Action of granting 

the Presidential permit (the DOE 

Preferred Alternative), the transmission 

line would be constructed from the 

U.S./Canada border to the ConEd 

substation in Queens, New York. 

Analysis of Environmental Impacts 

The EIS analyzes potential 

environmental impacts associated with 

the alternatives for each of the following 

resource areas: Land use, transportation 

and traffic, water resources and quality, 

aquatic and terrestrial habitats and 

species, aquatic and terrestrial protected 

and sensitive species, wetlands, geology 

and soils, cultural resources, visual 

resources, infrastructure, recreation, 

public health and safety, hazardous 

materials and wastes, air quality, noise, 

socioeconomics, environmental justice, 

and cumulative impacts. 

Analysis of the potential 

environmental impacts of the Proposed 

Action on each resource area (Section 5 

of the EIS) assumes the implementation 

of all CHPEI-proposed measures to 

avoid or minimize adverse impacts 

(Appendix G of the EIS). 

In a floodplain statement of findings 

(Appendix S of the EIS), DOE prepared 

a floodplain assessment and has 

determined that the proposed CHPE 

Project would avoid floodplains to the 

maximum extent practicable, that 

appropriate measures to minimize 

potential harm to or within the 

floodplains would be taken, and that the 

project would comply with applicable 

floodplain protection standards. 

Implementation of the No Action 

Alternative would not result in changes 

to existing conditions in these resource 

areas and is, therefore, the 

environmentally preferable alternative. 

Comments Received on the Final EIS 

On September 12, 2014, the USACE 

submitted a comment letter on the Final 

EIS that states that the Applicant has 

supplemented its Clean Water Act 

Section 404 permit application, which 

demonstrates a change in the proposed 

CHPE Project’s wetland impacts as 

follows: 

• The proposed CHPE Project’s 

permanent impact on forested wetlands 

would be reduced to 0.6 acres from 2.0 

acres, and 

• The proposed CHPE Project’s 

permanent impact on emergent or scrubshrub wetlands would increase from 8.3 

acres to 9.7 acres. 

These revised impact calculations do 

not result in any change in the wetland 

impact findings in the Final EIS. 

On September 15, 2014, comments 

were received from Gale Pisha, a private 

citizen, through the CHPE EIS Web site 

asking that the Presidential permit not 

be issued and providing comments with 

respect to how the EIS addressed 

impacts in Canada, possible effects on 

electricity supplies and prices in New 

York State, the use of park land, and 

possible safety concerns from 

cumulative impacts due to the 

construction of the proposed CHPE line 

and an identified, foreseeable natural 

gas pipeline project. Discussion and 

analysis of these issues are adequately 

addressed in the Final EIS in Sections 

1.7.4 (impacts in Canada), 1.2 

(electricity supplies), 1.4 (electricity 

pricing in New York State), 5.2.1 (use of 

park land), and 2.4.9 and 2.4.10 

(cumulative impacts). 

The Port of New York/New Jersey Tug 

and Barge Committee submitted a letter 

dated September 8, 2014, stating that 

they continued to oppose the issuance 

of a Presidential permit due to the 

potential for anchor snags and 

interference with compass readings. 

Section 5.1.2 of the Final EIS addressed 

these issues and determined that such 

impacts from the project to anchor snags 

and interference to compass readings 

would not be considered significant. 

The NYSDPS submitted a comment 

letter on the Final EIS on September 15, 

2014, stating that the EIS analysis and 

mitigation measures are consistent with 

the terms and conditions of the 

Certificate of Environmental 

Compatibility and Public Need issued 

by the New York State Public Service 

Commission (NYSPSC). 

The American Waterways Operators 

(AWO) submitted a letter dated 

September 15, 2014, stating that they 

oppose the issuance of a Presidential 

permit due to the potential for anchor 

snags unless the cable is buried to at 

least 15 feet in depth in 

Congressionally-authorized channels. 

Anchor snags and burial depths are 

addressed in Sections 5.1.2 and 5.3.2 of 

the Final EIS and it was determined that 

impacts from such would not be 

considered significant. 

The USCG commented on September 

15, 2014, that additional consultation 

and measures are required to reduce the 

potential impacts on mariners and the 

environment from risks associated with 

constructing and operating the 

transmission line, including the 

potential for anchor snags. Based on 

these comments, DOE is conditioning its 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

59260 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Notices 

Presidential permit to require the 

Applicant to undertake a revised 

Navigation Risk Assessment in 

consultation with the USCG, and to 

involve the USCG in the preparation of 

the Environmental Management & 

Construction Plan with respect to the 

final location and design of the 

transmission cables and the 

communication procedures and 

notifications for the construction and 

operation of the transmission line. 

New York State Assemblyman James 

Skoufis provided a comment letter on 

September 15 that identified an 

inconsistency with maps of the project 

route, expressed a concern over when 

and where the Applicant might use 

eminent domain to acquire property, 

and questioned whether the EIS 

adequately addressed the potential 

impacts of construction of the proposed 

CHPE Project on overland areas within 

Rockland County. DOE notes that the 

route maps used in the EIS are the same 

as provided to the NYSPSC by the 

Applicant and incorporated into the 

Certificate issued by the NYSPSC, that 

any land acquisitions would be 

conducted in accordance with New 

York State law and as provided in the 

NYSPSC Certificate, and that land 

acquisition and construction impacts in 

Rockland County are addressed in EIS 

Sections 5.3.1, 5.3.3, 5.3.9, and 5.3.17, 

respectively. 

All comments received on the Final 

EIS are available in the CHPE EIS Web 

site Document Library. 

Decision 

DOE has decided to issue Presidential 

Permit PP–362 to authorize CHPEI to 

construct, operate, maintain, and 

connect a 1,000–MW HVDC 

transmission line across the U.S./

Canada border. The permit will include 

conditions requiring CHPEI to 

implement the Applicant-proposed 

avoidance and minimization measures 

identified in the EIS, as well as those 

conditions described above concerning 

the USFWS and USCG. 

Basis for Decision 

DOE’s decision to grant this 

Presidential permit is based on 

consideration of the potential 

environmental impacts, impacts on the 

reliability of the U.S. electric power 

supply system under normal and 

contingency conditions, and the 

favorable recommendations of the U.S. 

Departments of State and Defense 

(which were provided, respectively, in 

February and June of 2014). 

DOE determined that the proposed 

international electric transmission line 

would not have an adverse impact on 

the reliability of the U.S. electric power 

supply system. In reaching this 

determination, DOE considered the 

operation of the electrical grid with a 

specified maximum amount of electric 

power transmitted over the proposed 

line. DOE reviewed the reliability 

studies conducted by CHPEI and by 

New York Independent System Operator 

(NYISO). These studies are available on 

the CHPE EIS Web site at http://

www.chpexpresseis.org. DOE also 

considered NYISO’s interconnection 

standards and its restrictions on any 

requested transmission service to and 

from the proposed interconnection. 

DOE did not select the No Action 

Alternative because the Proposed 

Action has been determined to be 

consistent with the public interest. 

Mitigation 

All practicable means to avoid or 

minimize environmental harm from the 

alternative selected have been, or will 

be, adopted. CHPEI-proposed measures 

to avoid and minimize adverse impacts 

are described in the EIS, the EFH 

Assessment, and the BA, and were 

further refined through consultations 

with the USFWS, USCG, USACE, and 

NMFS. All of these measures were 

incorporated into the Final EIS. CHPEI 

will be responsible for implementing 

these avoidance and minimization 

measures. Additional measures will be 

required as a result of ongoing 

consultations (e.g., regarding Clean 

Water Act Section 404, the Cultural 

Resources Management Plan) between 

CHPEI and state and federal agencies as 

part of approval and permitting 

processes. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

24, 2014. 

Patricia A. Hoffman, 

Assistant Secretary, Office of Electricity 

Delivery and Energy Reliability. 

[FR Doc. 2014–23421 Filed 9–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Combined Notice of Filings #2 

Take notice that the Commission 

received the following electric rate 

filings: 

Docket Numbers: ER14–1616–002; 

EL14–41–001. 

Applicants: NorthWestern 

Corporation. 

Description: Joint Offer of Settlement 

of NorthWestern Corporation, et al. 

Filed Date: 9/23/14. 

Accession Number: 20140923–5024. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/14/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER14–2466–001. 

Applicants: RE Camelot LLC. 

Description: Tariff Amendment per 

35.17(b): Amendment to Baseline 

Filing—RE Camelot LLC to be effective 

9/7/2014. 

Filed Date: 9/24/14. 

Accession Number: 20140924–5111. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER14–2548–001. 

Applicants: Ocean State Power. 

Description: Tariff Amendment per 

35.17(b): Amendment to Notice of 

Succession to be effective 9/22/2014. 

Filed Date: 9/22/14. 

Accession Number: 20140922–5093. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/14/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER14–2933–000. 

Applicants: Arizona Public Service 

Company. 

Description: § 205(d) rate filing per 

35.13(a)(2)(iii): Service Agreement No. 

335—Mead Substation Interconnection 

Agreement to be effective 11/24/2014. 

Filed Date: 9/24/14. 

Accession Number: 20140924–5082. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER14–2934–000. 

Applicants: PJM Interconnection, 

L.L.C. 

Description: § 205(d) rate filing per 

35.13(a)(2)(iii): PJM Service Agreement 

No. 3503 (Queue No. X4–031) to be 

effective 8/25/2014. 

Filed Date: 9/24/14. 

Accession Number: 20140924–5090. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER14–2935–000. 

Applicants: Arizona Public Service 

Company. 

Description: Tariff Withdrawal per 

35.15: Cancellation of Service 

Agreement No. 331 to be effective 11/

24/2014. 

Filed Date: 9/24/14. 

Accession Number: 20140924–5106. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER14–2936–000. 

Applicants: Sunbury Generation LP. 

Description: Tariff Withdrawal per 

35.15: Sunbury Reactive Supply Tariff 

Cancellation to be effective 9/24/2014. 

Filed Date: 9/24/14. 

Accession Number: 20140924–5107. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/15/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER14–2937–000. 

Applicants: American Transmission 

Systems, Incorporated, PJM 

Interconnection, L.L.C. 

Description: § 205(d) rate filing per 

35.13(a)(2)(iii): ATSI submits Revised 

SA No. 2852 and Service Agreement 

Nos. 3931 and 3932 to be effective 11/ 

20/2014. 

Filed Date: 9/24/14. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES