[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 17 (Thursday, January 25, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2244-2247]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1070]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[FE Docket No. PP-89]


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

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Record of decision: Presidential Permit PP-89, Bangor Hydro-
Electric Company; construction of an international electrical 
interconnection.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Bangor Hydro applied to the DOE for a Presidential permit to 
construct a new electric transmission facility at the U.S. border with 
Canada. That action was determined to be ``a major federal action, 
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment'' within 
the meaning of NEPA. An EIS was issued on August 18, 1995, that 
considered the environmental impacts associated with granting or 
denying the Presidential permit. This 

[[Page 2245]]
ROD determined that allowing construction of the new electric 
facilities along alternative transmission line corridors and the 
options for alternative energy supplies discussed in the EIS did not 
prove preferable to granting the Presidential permit for construction 
along the proposed route.

DATES: January 25, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of Presidential Permit PP-89 or DOE/EIS-
0166 may be submitted to: Mr. Anthony J. Como, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Fossil Energy (FE-52), 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0350.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Como (Program Office) 202-586-
5935 or Carol M. Borgstrom (NEPA process) 202-586-4600 or 1-800-472-
2756.

Record of Decision

    On December 16, 1988, the Bangor Hydro-Electric Company (BHE) filed 
an application with the Department of Energy (DOE) for a Presidential 
permit pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended by Executive Order 
12038, to construct, connect, operate, and maintain a new international 
transmission line interconnection with New Brunswick, Canada. The 
proposed new interconnection, referred to as Bangor Hydro-Electric 
Company's Second 345-kV Transmission Tie Line to New Brunswick, would 
cross the U.S. International border near Baileyville, Maine, and extend 
to an existing substation at Orrington, Maine. In the application, the 
BHE described the U.S. portion of the proposed line as 83.8 miles in 
length.
    The new transmission line is needed to complement and share 
electrical load with the existing 345-kV interconnection owned and 
operated by the Maine Electric Power Company. The line is needed to 
reduce transmission losses on the existing tie line, increase the 
opportunities for economic power transactions between New England and 
New Brunswick, help meet projected load growth in the New England 
region, and increase the capacity benefits of the transmission ties 
with New Brunswick. This would result in a general increase in electric 
system reliability for the New England region. Overall, the annual net 
savings could range from about $21.6 million (24 MW conserved, 50 MW 
average increased economy, and 25 MW additional reserves sharing) to 
more than $87 million (24 MW conserved, 150 MW average increased 
economy, and 300 MW additional reserves sharing).
    In reviewing this application the DOE determined that granting the 
Presidential permit for the proposed interconnection would constitute 
``a major federal action, significantly affecting the quality of the 
human environment'' within the meaning of NEPA. Consequently, the DOE 
has prepared an EIS to assess the environmental impacts associated with 
granting or denying the permit.
    In October 1993, the DOE published and distributed about 336 copies 
of a draft EIS to interested individuals and agencies. Following this 
distribution, public hearings to obtain comments on the draft EIS were 
held in Bradley and Woodland, Maine, January 10 - 11, 1994. One speaker 
presented comments at the public hearings, and DOE received 33 written 
comments from individuals during the 72-day public comment period. 
Substantive comments and responses associated with the draft EIS are 
presented in the final EIS. No comments were received on the final EIS.

Basis For Decision

    In compliance with the provisions of NEPA, the DOE prepared an EIS 
to address the environmental impacts associated with the proposed 
action and its alternatives. The EIS discusses in detail construction 
activities (including clearing and control of vegetation), loss or 
alteration of wildlife habitat, displacement and disturbance of 
wildlife, disturbance of aquatic resources, releases of gaseous 
pollutants and dust, and disruption of agricultural and forestry 
activities. The EIS also discusses in detail, the potential 
environmental impacts resulting from operation and maintenance of the 
transmission facilities (including the collision of birds with 
structures), visual impacts of additional lines within the transmission 
line corridor, and possible health and safety effects in close 
proximity to the electromagnetic fields associated with the proposed 
line. To minimize impacts to the extent practicable, BHE has committed 
to a variety of mitigation actions to protect the environment. These 
procedures are presented in the EIS. The information presented in the 
EIS indicates that the issuance of the Presidential permit would result 
in minor incremental impacts to the environment. Accordingly, based on 
the analysis in the EIS, the DOE finds that any environmental impacts 
resulting from construction activities would be minimal and of short 
duration.

Description of Alternatives and Their Environmental Impacts

    On August 18, 1995, DOE issued a final EIS titled, ``Environmental 
Impact Statement for Construction and Operation of the Proposed Bangor 
Hydro-Electric Company's Second 345-kV Transmission Tie Line to New 
Brunswick,'' DOE/EIS-0166. Section 2 of this document contains analyses 
of the following alternatives considered by DOE in reaching its 
decision to grant Presidential Permit PP-89:
    1. Grant the Presidential permit as requested.
    2. Grant the Presidential permit but require the use of alternative 
transmission corridors and designs (three alternative transmission line 
corridors were considered).
    3. Take no action  deny the Presidential permit request. Under 
this alternative, it is assumed that the applicant would have two 
additional alternatives:
    (a) Do not implement alternative supply or demand measures 
(maintain the status quo).
    (b) Implement energy supply alternatives, such as: hydroelectric, 
natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind, fuel conversion, cogeneration, 
conservation and load management, and utility purchases and exchanges.
    The DOE evaluated two alternative transmission line routes: the 
Proposed Route and the Existing-line Route. The Proposed Route was 
found to be environmentally preferable to the Existing-line Route. Two 
other alternatives, the Straight-line Route and the Route 9 Route, were 
considered but eliminated as viable alternatives.
    Proposed Route: The proposed route is also referred to as the Stud 
Mill Road route because much of the line would be located near Stud 
Mill Road, an existing timber haul road jointly owned and maintained by 
Georgia-Pacific Corporation and Champion International Incorporated. 
The first 71.6 miles of the proposed line (starting at the crossing of 
the St. Croix River) would be in a new 170-ft-wide right-of-way. For 
the remaining 12.2 miles of the route, the new line would share right-
of-way space with the Maine Electric Power Company's existing 345-kV 
interconnection and other lines.
    For the proposed route, the estimated amount of existing vegetation 
directly impacted is 1,623 acres. The unavoidable adverse impacts would 
include: (1) Conversion of 1,450 acres of forest to areas with small 
trees, shrubs, and grassland for the duration of the operation of the 
transmission line, thereby preventing one or two 

[[Page 2246]]
commercial cycles of timber cutting within the corridor; (2) about 
1,185 acres of existing upland forest habitat would be cleared; (3) 
most of about 268 acres of forested wetlands within the proposed right-
of-way would be modified to scrub/shrub wetlands; and (4) visual 
interruption at river crossings.
    Existing-Line Route: The Existing-Line Route is 106 miles in length 
and would generally parallel the existing 345-kV line right-of-way, 
crossing the international border at Orient, Maine, extending parallel 
to the existing route to Chester, Maine, and then to the Orrington 
substation. Because of the presence of several sensitive environmental 
areas (e.g., extensive wetlands), this route would require several 
diversions from the existing right-of-way. The six staging areas 
required for this route include Bradley, Enfield, T2/R8 N.W.P., 
Mattawamkeag, Glenwood, and Orient.
    Unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the Existing-Line Route 
would include: (1) About 1,845 acres of forest would be cleared; (2) an 
estimated 2,081 acres of existing vegetation would be directly 
impacted; (3) a total of 150 houses would be located within 600 ft of 
the centerline of the route, about 1.5 times greater than those of the 
proposed route; (4) construction areas would be closer to a larger 
population; (5) the likelihood of bald eagles colliding with the 
transmission lines would be greater because there would be two 
crossings of the Penobscot River, as compared with only one crossing of 
the St. Croix River by the proposed route.
    Straight-Line Route: The Straight-Line Route would be 115 miles, 
crossing the international border just north of Kellyland, Maine, and 
the Grand Falls Flowage in Fowler Township, Maine. The route would 
travel northwest to the Topsfield, Maine, area and then west to Lee, 
Maine. The line would then proceed northwest to Chester, where it would 
parallel the existing 345-kV line to the Orrington substation.
    The Straight-Line Route was eliminated from consideration as a 
viable alternative because the route would (1) cross extensive areas of 
wetlands, including Dead Man Stream; (2) pass through more populated 
areas along Routes 2 and 6; (3) cross Route 6 in several places and be 
more visually intrusive than the other routes; (4) pass through 
relatively undisturbed areas of forest that contain few roads; (5) pass 
near or through a series of white cedar swamps in Lee, Springfield, and 
Carroll that contain rare plants; (6) pass the southern edge of the 
large flowage area at Baskahegan Stream called Middle Deadwater; (7) 
cross the Grand Falls Flowage on the St. Croix River in an area of 
active bald eagle nesting; and (8) likely be the cause of a number of 
landowner constraints along the length of the corridor.
    Route 9 Route: The Route 9 Route would be 83 miles in length and 
would cross the international border in Woodland, Maine. It would 
generally parallel the major east-west highway between Bangor and 
Calais. This route was eliminated as a viable alternative because: (1) 
Several major crossings of Route 9 would be required, possibly in 
sections designated as scenic highway; (2) river crossings of the 
south-flowing St. Croix, Machias, Narraguagus, and Union rivers would 
be more difficult and extensive because these locations are the widest 
(as compared with other alternative routes); (3) the Maine Department 
of Transportation is planning significant reconstruction of Route 9, 
possibly involving substantial rerouting of the road, thus, making it 
more difficult to locate the transmission line; (4) several lakes and 
large wetlands would probably have to be traversed or would likely 
force significant route changes, especially at Whalesback (Union 
River), Mopang Lake, Crawford Lake, and Meddybemps Lake; (5) the 
corridor is more hilly and rugged (particularly west of the Machias 
River) than the other alternative routes, making (for example) 
construction more difficult and increasing the potential for erosion; 
and (6) more individual property owners (as compared with the other 
alternative routes) would be involved, thereby complicating the routing 
of the corridor.
    Take No Action: Under the No Action Alternative, the DOE would not 
issue a Presidential permit for the proposed interconnection, and the 
transmission line would not be constructed. BHE would have to develop 
other sources of energy to meet increases in demand for electricity. 
The ``no action'' alternative would not provide the needed generating 
capacity and would result in greater degradation of air quality as a 
result of the continued use of fossil fuels for generation of 
electricity.
    Energy Supply Alternatives: If the DOE were to deny the 
Presidential permit, BHE could take other actions to meet future demand 
for electricity, such as identifying supply alternatives and/or 
implementing demand-side options. However, among the alternatives 
available to BHE, none were considered viable alternatives to the 
proposed action.
    One alternative would be construction of a new central-station, 
non-oil-fired generating plant. Candidate plant types would be 
hydroelectric, natural gas, nuclear, and coal-fired. BHE is currently 
attempting to license several hydroelectric projects within its service 
territory. Additional hydroelectric development beyond that currently 
proposed would not be viable because of the limited number of sites 
remaining for such development. The availability of natural gas for 
generating facilities is quite limited in Maine. Natural gas is being 
imported from Canada, but not in sufficient quantities to generate 
power at a utility scale.
    The time required to license and build a new nuclear plant is 10-15 
years and the average lead time for a new coal-fired plant is 8 years. 
Therefore, such alternative facilities could not be placed in service 
until the year 2003 or later. In addition, these alternatives would 
have similar environmental impacts as the proposed action because 
construction of additional domestic transmission lines would be 
required in order to deliver energy to the region.
    The use of nonconventional generating facilities such as fuel 
substitution, solar-, wind-, and biomass-powered facilities of the size 
required to meet the energy supply level of the proposed 
interconnection are not considered reasonable alternatives. Commercial-
scale developments of the size comparable to the proposed project are 
not feasible for the near future.
    The increased use of cogeneration and small power production (CSPP) 
was not considered to be a viable alternative to the proposed action 
because reliability of supply, operational problems, and financial 
stability make reliance on these sources undesirable over the long-
term. CSPP's are generally nondispatchable (i.e., BHE does not have the 
contractual option to shut down those resources when it is economical 
to do so). Furthermore, BHE does not have complete control over when, 
where, or if these alternative supply sources are developed.
    In some cases, BHE's transmission system would need upgrading to 
handle the interconnection with the CSPPs.
    In evaluating the suitability of energy conservation and load 
management (shifting of energy consumption from on-peak to off-peak 
hours), BHE estimates an 11% peak reduction by the year 2000. While 
load management will continue to reduce energy demand, expected growth 
rates for electricity consumption are projected to be high enough to 
require additional generating capacity in the New England region within 
the next 5 to 10 years.
    Several members of the New England Power Pool (NEPOOL) already 
purchase power from other sources; however, to be considered a viable 
alternative, a 

[[Page 2247]]
potential source must be able to provide NEPOOL with energy and/or 
capacity benefits which are comparable to those provided by the 
proposed tie-line. Such purchases would not be possible from existing 
sources. In addition, the New York Power Pool (NYPP), a contiguous 
utility system that is a potential source of purchased power for NEPOOL 
members, is a competitor of NEPOOL for the energy available in Canada 
and the coal-fired energy in the midwestern United States. Therefore, 
purchase of power from NYPP was not considered a viable alternative to 
the proposed project.
    The Midwest is another potential source of purchased power because 
of its surplus of non-oil-fired capacity. Factors that precluded 
consideration of this source as a viable alternative to the proposed 
action are as follows:
    <bullet> Load and capacity projections indicate that the present 
capacity surpluses would not last long enough to sustain a firm energy 
sale to NEPOOL through the 1990s.
    <bullet> Any available surpluses are likely to be purchased by 
utilities in regions with existing direct transmission connections.
    <bullet> Any power purchased must flow through the central New York 
State and Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland (PJM) systems. The 
transmission systems in these areas are already heavily used and could 
not readily withstand the additional load imposed by transmitting 
midwestern energy to New England.
    <bullet> The construction of additional transmission lines through 
New York or the states of the PJM systems could encounter various 
regulatory, legal, and environmental obstacles that could prevent or 
delay implementation and raise the final cost of the energy.
    Installing the transmission line underground and alternative 
structure designs were also considered. The environmental impacts and 
construction costs of installing the transmission line underground 
would be greater than those for the proposed project, and the 
reliability would be lower than that of an overhead system. The wood H-
frame structure was chosen largely because of economic considerations, 
and because the impacts caused by most structure types would be 
similar. The primary impacts associated with an underground system that 
precluded it from consideration as a viable alternative included (1) 
extensive excavation, grading, and backfilling; (2) potential for oil 
contamination of soils; (3) disruption of land use patterns along the 
entire length of the route; (4) limitation on land uses allowed over or 
near the route; (5) instream disturbance of all waterways crossed by 
the route; (6) potential for oil spills or leaks into surface water and 
wetlands; (7) potential for oil contamination of groundwater; (8) 
decreased habitat diversity along the route because the area would have 
to be maintained as grasses; (9) increased potential for damage to 
surface and subsurface archaeological sites; and (10) increased worker 
safety concerns because of the increased construction and maintenance 
activities that would be required.

Environmentally Preferred Alternative

    Upon completion of a thorough review of all proposed alternatives, 
DOE has concluded that construction of the Stud Mill Road route is the 
environmentally preferred alternative and that adequate safeguards of 
the environment can be accomplished using mitigation measures 
identified in the EIS as well as the standard practices of utility 
companies constructing and maintaining ROW. With approximately 83 miles 
of transmission line to be sited within Maine, the Stud Mill Road route 
is the shortest when compared to the 106 mile Existing Line and 115 
mile Straight-Line routes. The preferred route would require the fewest 
transmission structures with the greatest spacing. The preferred route 
would require the least amount of forest clearing, stream crossings and 
new service road construction due to use of existing service roads and 
timber haul roads that traverse the route. Construction of the 
transmission line along the preferred route will have the least impact 
to wildlife species due to the reduced amount of vegetation clearing. 
Where the proposed alternative will parallel existing 345-kV 
transmission facilities, interactions between the phases (conductors) 
of the existing and proposed line will decrease magnetic field exposure 
to residents located near the two-line corridor. Application of the No 
Action alternative would likely have a negative impact on air quality 
in the region as a result of continued or increased fossil fuel use in 
the New England region. The technology for use of nonconventional 
generation sources in place of the proposed facilities is not 
considered to have advanced sufficiently to provide the energy 
resources required today. Construction of a new, non-oil-fired 
generating plant, would require an extensive design and construction 
phase and would clearly have significant negative environmental impacts 
especially in terms of air emissions.

Decision

    DOE will issue Presidential Permit PP-89 to BHE for the 
construction, connection, operation, and maintenance of a 345-kV 
transmission line across the international border between the United 
States, at Baileyville, Maine, and Canada for interconnection with 
facilities of the New Brunswick Power Commission in New Brunswick, 
Canada. In the United States, the transmission line will follow the 
Stud Mill Road route, as described in Presidential Permit PP-89. As a 
condition of granting the Presidential permit, BHE will be required to 
implement all mitigative measures to which BHE has committed, as 
presented in the EIS. This conditional requirement shall be deemed 
adequate mitigation protection to satisfy the requirements for a 
Mitigation Action Plan (10 CFR 1021.331).
    Copies of this Record of Decision will be made available upon 
request, for public inspection and copying at the Department of Energy, 
Room 3F-090, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585, between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday.

    Issued in Washington, D.C. on January 18, 1996.
Anthony J. Como,
Director, Office of Coal & Electricity, Office of Fuels Programs, 
Office of Fossil Energy.
[FR Doc. 96-1070 Filed 1-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P