Amended Notice of Intent To Modify the Scope of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Champlain Hudson Power Express Transmission Line Project in New York State, 25472-25474 [2012-10304]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 83 (Monday, April 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25472-25474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10304]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Amended Notice of Intent To Modify the Scope of the Environmental 
Impact Statement for the Champlain Hudson Power Express Transmission 
Line Project in New York State

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Amended Notice of Intent.

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

SUMMARY: The United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) intends to 
modify the scope of the Champlain Hudson Power Express Transmission 
Line Project Environmental Impact Statement (CHPE EIS; DOE/EIS-0447) 
and to conduct additional public scoping. As described in the original 
Notice of Intent (NOI) (75 FR 34720; June 18, 2010), in January 2010, 
Transmission Developers Inc. (TDI) submitted, on behalf of Champlain 
Hudson Power Express, Inc. (Applicant), an application to DOE for a 
Presidential permit for the Champlain Hudson Power Express (Champlain 
Hudson) project. As explained in the NOI, DOE will assess the potential 
environmental impacts associated with the construction, operation, 
maintenance, and connection of the proposed new electric transmission 
line across the U.S.-Canada border in northeastern New York State. 
Public scoping originally closed on August 2, 2010. On February 28, 
2012, TDI submitted an amendment to the application for a Presidential 
permit to DOE that reflects proposed changes to the route of the 
Champlain Hudson project, and DOE now intends to revise the scope of 
the EIS to address these proposed changes. The proposed changes are the 
result of settlement negotiations among New York (NY) State agencies, 
Champlain Hudson Power Express, Inc., CHPE Properties, Inc. and other 
stakeholders as part of the project review under Article VII of the New 
York State Public Service Law, and are reflected in a February 24, 
2012, ``Joint Proposal'' submitted to the New York Public Service 
Commission.
    The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, New York Field Office (USFWS 
Region 5), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA Region 2), the New York State 
Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), and the New York 
State Department of Public Service (NYSDPS) are cooperating agencies in 
the preparation of the EIS.

DATES: DOE is accepting public comments on the revised scope of the 
CHPE EIS until June 14, 2012. DOE will consider comments submitted 
after this date to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: Please direct written comments on the scope of the EIS and 
requests to be added to the document mailing list to: Brian Mills, 
Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE-20), U.S. 
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 
20585; by electronic mail to Brian.Mills@hq.doe.gov; or by facsimile to 
202-586-8008. For general information on the DOE NEPA process contact: 
Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance 
(GC-54), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., 
Washington, DC 20585; telephone 202-586-4600, or leave a message at 1-
800-472-2756; by facsimile at 202-586-7031; or send an email to 
askNEPA@hq.doe.gov.
    For information on the USFWS's role as a cooperating agency, 
contact Tim R. Sullivan by electronic mail at Tim_R_Sullivan@fws.gov; 
by phone at 602-753-9334; or by mail at 3817 Luker Road, Cortland, NY 
13045.
    For information on the Army Corps of Engineers' permit process, 
contact Naomi J. Handell by electronic mail at 
Naomi.J.Handell@usace.army.mil; or by mail at 696 Virginia Road, 
Concord, MA 01742.
    For information on the EPA's role as a cooperating agency, contact 
Lingard Knutson by electronic mail at Knutson.Lingard@epamail.epa.gov; 
by phone at 212-637-3747; or by mail at 290 Broadway, Mail Code: 25th 
Floor, New York, NY 10007-1866.
    For information on the New York State Department of Environmental 
Conservation's role as a cooperating agency, contact Patricia Desnoyers 
by electronic mail to pjdesnoy@gw.dec.state.ny.us; or by mail at 625 
Broadway, Albany, NY 12233.
    For information on the New York State Department of Public 
Service's role as a cooperating agency, contact James Austin by 
electronic mail at james_austin@dps.state.ny.us; or by mail at 3 
Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Executive Order (E.O.) 10485, Providing for the performance of 
certain functions heretofore performed by the President with respect to 
electric power and natural gas facilities located on the borders of the 
United States, as amended by E.O. 12038 Relating to certain Functions 
transferred to the Secretary of Energy by the Department of Energy 
Organization Act, requires issuance of a Presidential permit by DOE 
before electric transmission facilities may be constructed, operated, 
maintained, or connected at the U.S. international border. The E.O. 
provides that a Presidential permit may be issued after a finding that 
the proposed project is consistent with the public interest and after 
favorable recommendations from the U.S. Departments of State and 
Defense. In determining consistency with the public interest, DOE 
considers the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project 
under NEPA, determines the project's impact on electric reliability 
(including whether the proposed project would adversely affect the 
operation of the U.S. electric power supply system under normal and 
contingency conditions), and considers any other factors that DOE may 
find relevant to the public interest. The regulations implementing the 
E.O. have been codified at 10 CFR 205.320-205.329. DOE's issuance of a 
Presidential permit would indicate that there is no Federal objection 
to the project, but would not mandate that the project be constructed.
    On January 25, 2010, TDI submitted an application, on behalf of 
Champlain

[[Page 25473]]

Hudson Power Express, Inc., to DOE's Office of Electricity Delivery and 
Energy Reliability for a Presidential permit to construct, operate, 
maintain, and connect a 2,000-megawatt (MW) high-voltage direct current 
(HVDC) Voltage Source Converter (VSC) controllable transmission system 
from the Canadian Province of Quebec to the New York City and 
southwestern Connecticut regions. After due consideration of the nature 
and extent of the proposed project, including evaluation of the 
``Information Regarding Potential Environmental Impacts'' section of 
the Presidential permit application, DOE determined that the 
appropriate level of NEPA review for this project is an EIS. DOE issued 
its original NOI for this EIS on June 18, 2010 (75 FR 34720).
    On August 5, 2010, TDI submitted an amendment to the application 
that eliminated a portion of the proposed transmission line consisting 
of a bipole (two cables) that would have extended into Connecticut (the 
Connecticut Circuit). This change in the project's design resulted in a 
proposed HVDC transmission line that would consist of a bipole with a 
capacity of 1,000-MW. The amendment also proposed extending the route 
using existing railroad easements to Whitehall, NY, and connecting to 
the Consolidated Edison (Con Edison) system at a new substation in 
Astoria, Queens, NY. On July 7, 2011, TDI submitted an amendment to the 
application that addressed five conditions required by the New York 
State Department of State (NYSDOS). A copy of these amendments can be 
found at https://chpexpresseis.org.
    On February 28, 2012, TDI submitted another amendment to the 
Champlain Hudson project Presidential permit application to reflect 
changes to the proposed route that resulted from a project review 
process under Article VII of the New York State Public Service Law. A 
copy of the February 28, 2012, permit application amendment letter and 
other project-related documents can be viewed at https://chpexpresseis.org.

New York State Certification Review Process

    Article VII of the New York State Public Service Law establishes 
the review process for consideration of any application to construct 
and operate a major electric transmission system. As part of this 
process, the New York State Public Service Commission (Commission) 
received the application for a Certificate of Environmental 
Compatibility and Public Need from Champlain Hudson Power Express, Inc. 
in a series of documents dated March 29, 2010, and held public 
statement hearings on the original application in 2010.
    Subsequently, the Applicant entered into settlement negotiations 
with several parties regarding the proposed facility need and benefits, 
alternate locations, environmental impacts, and mitigation measures. 
These negotiations resulted in a ``Joint Proposal'' which includes a 
proposed project alignment and configuration that is different from the 
original proposal for the Champlain Hudson project. The Joint Proposal 
also contains provisions regarding construction methods, environmental 
controls and mitigation measures, including the creation of a trust to 
study and mitigate possible impacts of the Champlain Hudson project's 
underwater cables on habitat in the Hudson River Estuary, the Harlem 
and East Rivers, Lake Champlain, and their tributaries. A copy of the 
Joint Proposal and other related documents can be viewed at https://chpexpresseis.org.

Applicant's Proposal

    As set forth in the Joint Proposal, the Applicant's preferred 
alternative now consists of a single 1,000-MW HVDC bipole. The bipole 
is comprised of two connected submarine or underground cables, one of 
which is positively charged, and the other negatively charged. In 
total, two cables would be laid between the Province of Quebec, Canada, 
and a proposed converter station in Astoria, Queens, NY. The converter 
station would change the electrical power from direct current to 
alternating current (AC). The converter station would be connected to 
the New York Power Authority gas insulated switchgear substation via an 
underground HVAC line, and the substation would be connected to Con 
Edison's Rainey Substation, located in Astoria, via HVAC cables 
installed under New York City streets. The proposed transmission line 
would connect renewable sources of power generation in Canada with load 
centers in and around New York City.
    The Champlain Hudson project would still originate at an HVDC 
converter station near Hydro-Qu[eacute]bec Trans[Eacute]nergie's 765/
315-kilovolt (kV) Hertel substation, located southeast of Montreal, and 
continue approximately 35 miles to the international border between the 
United States and Canada where the HVDC cables would originate 
underwater at the Town of Champlain, NY and extend south through Lake 
Champlain for approximately 101 miles, entirely within the 
jurisdictional waters of New York State. However, instead of exiting 
the southern end of Lake Champlain at the Village of Whitehall, NY, as 
originally proposed, the cables would now exit Lake Champlain at the 
Town of Dresden and run underground along New York State Route 22 to 
Whitehall.
    The Upper Hudson River portion of the Hudson River polychlorinated 
biphenyl (PCB) site (USEPA Identification Number NYD980763841) 
stretches from Hudson Falls, NY, to the Federal Dam at Troy, NY. To 
avoid installing and burying HVDC cables within this area and in 
certain sensitive areas of the lower Hudson River, the cables would now 
be buried along an overland route. From Whitehall, the cables would 
transition from the Route 22 right-of-way (ROW) to enter the originally 
proposed route in existing railroad ROW owned by Canadian Pacific 
Railway (CP) and would remain buried for approximately 65 miles in and 
along the railroad ROW from Whitehall to Schenectady, NY. The proposed 
route would enter Erie Boulevard just north of the railroad crossing at 
Nott Street and continue along Erie Boulevard to a point south of State 
Street where it would again enter the railroad ROW. Along this portion 
of the route there are various alternative routings that include both 
the railroad ROW and public ways for transitioning from the railroad to 
city streets. The public ways include Nott Street, North Jay Street, 
Green Street, North Center Street, Pine Street, Union Street, Liberty 
Street and State Street as well as private property (a parking lot) 
located at approximately 160 Erie Boulevard. The route would follow the 
railroad ROW for a short distance, and would then deviate west of the 
railroad property, pass under Interstate 890 then turn south, running 
approximately parallel with the CSX Transportation (CSX) railroad ROW, 
and would re-enter the CP railroad ROW just north of Delaware Avenue.
    From this point in Schenectady, the proposed route would follow the 
CP railroad ROW to the Town of Rotterdam, NY. In Rotterdam, the route 
would transfer from the CP railroad ROW to the CSX railroad ROW and 
would proceed southeast for approximately 24 miles before entering the 
Town of Selkirk, NY. The cables would then travel south for 
approximately 29 miles generally in and along CSX railroad ROW through 
the municipalities of Ravena, New Baltimore, Coxsackie, the Town of 
Athens, and the Town of Catskill, NY. As originally proposed the cables 
would have entered the Hudson River at the Town of Coeymans, NY. Now, 
the cables would enter the Hudson River at the Town of Catskill

[[Page 25474]]

(hamlet of Cementon), via horizontal direction drilling (HDD). The HVDC 
underwater cables would be located within the Hudson River for 
approximately 67 miles until reaching a point north of Haverstraw Bay. 
As part of the revised project route, the cables would then exit the 
Hudson River at the Town of Stony Point in Rockland County, NY, to 
allow for a 7.7 mile bypass of Haverstraw Bay; this portion of the 
route would include three HDD installations under the Stony Point State 
Historic Park Site and Rockland Lake State Park. After the HDD under 
the parks, the cables would enter the Hudson River via HDD and be 
buried in the river for approximately 20.7 miles to the Spuyten Duyvil, 
where it would now extend south-easterly within the Harlem River for 
approximately 6.6 miles before exiting the water to a location along an 
existing railway ROW in the borough of the Bronx, NY. The cables would 
then continue along that ROW for approximately 1.1 miles.
    At this point, the revised route would enter the East River via 
HDD, cross the East River and make land-fall at Astoria, Queens, NY. 
The cables would terminate at a new converter station proposed to be 
located near Luyster Creek, north of 20th Avenue, for a total length of 
approximately 330 miles from the U.S. border with Canada. The converter 
station would be installed on properties owned by Con Edison located in 
an industrial zone in Astoria and is proposed to have a total footprint 
of approximately five acres. The converter station would interconnect 
via underground circuit with the NYPA substation near the site of the 
Charles Poletti Power Project in Queens, NY. The substation would be 
connected to Con Edison's Rainey Substation, located in Astoria, via 
HVAC cables installed under New York City streets. A map of the 
proposed Champlain Hudson transmission line project route can be found 
at https://chpexpresseis.org.

Previous Public Scoping

    A public scoping period for the CHPE EIS began with the publication 
of DOE's NOI in the Federal Register on June 18, 2010. The 45-day 
public scoping period closed on August 2, 2010. DOE received scoping 
comments in the form of 22 written letters or emails from private 
citizens, government agencies, and nongovernmental organizations. DOE 
held public scoping meetings from July 8, through July 16, 2010, in 
Bridgeport, Connecticut and Manhattan, Yonkers, Kingston, Albany, 
Queensbury, and Plattsburg, NY. A total of 33 people gave verbal 
comments at the meetings, and their comments were transcribed by court 
stenographers.
    Commenters requested that the EIS establish evidence that the 
Champlain Hudson project is necessary to meet electricity demands 
(either current or future) in the project region, as well as address 
concerns over the impact of construction on existing transmission 
infrastructure. Commenters expressed concerns with regard to sediment 
disturbance and the potential impacts of contaminants in the water 
column on humans and wildlife from burying the transmission line in 
Lake Champlain and the Hudson River. Commenters also requested that the 
EIS specifically analyze potential thermal effects and effects of 
electromagnetic fields on aquatic ecosystems, and noted concern over 
impacts to visually important resources from construction of the 
transmission line. Commenters noted potential environmental and 
socioeconomic impacts from a proposed electric converter station in 
Yonkers, NY. Finally, commenters identified additional alternatives 
that they believed should be analyzed in the EIS. A copy of the Scoping 
Summary Report (December 2010) is available at https://chpexpresseis.org. DOE will address these comments, to the extent they 
are still relevant, as well as those submitted during the public 
comment period for this Amended NOI, in the CHPE EIS.

Public Scoping for the Revised Applicant Proposal

    Pursuant to the submittal of the Joint Proposal, the NY State 
Public Service Commission is holding six public statement hearings in 
April 2012 in a variety of locations along the revised Champlain Hudson 
project route, including the municipalities of Whitehall, Catskill, 
Ravena, Schenectady, Garnerville, and Astoria, NY. While DOE does not 
currently intend to hold further public scoping meetings, it recognizes 
that comments provided by the public during the Commission's public 
statement hearings may be relevant to DOE's NEPA process. Therefore, 
DOE intends to review the April public statement hearing transcripts, 
in addition to scoping comments submitted directly to DOE, and will 
consider them, to the extent matters relevant to the federal 
environmental review process arise, as scoping comments for purposes of 
the EIS.

Agency Purpose and Need, Proposed Action, and Alternatives

    The purpose and need for DOE's action is to decide whether to grant 
a Presidential permit for the Champlain Hudson project.
    The proposed Federal action is the granting of the Presidential 
permit for the construction, operation, maintenance, and connection of 
the proposed new electric transmission line across the U.S.-Canada 
border in northeastern New York State. The EIS will analyze potential 
environmental impacts from the proposed action and the No Action 
Alternative. Because the proposed action may involve actions in 
floodplains and wetlands, and in accordance with 10 CFR part 1022, 
Compliance with Floodplain and Wetland Environmental Review 
Requirements, the draft EIS will include a floodplain and wetland 
assessment as appropriate, and the final EIS or record of decision will 
include a floodplain statement of findings. If granted, the 
Presidential permit would authorize only that portion of the line that 
would be constructed, operated and maintained wholly within the U.S.
    DOE is seeking comment on the scope of the alternatives proposed 
and potential environmental impacts for analyses in the EIS and 
currently proposes to analyze the following alternatives in detail: (1) 
the Champlain Hudson project, as proposed by the Applicant in the Joint 
Proposal filed with the New York Public Service Commission on February 
24, 2012 and submitted to DOE on February 28, 2012 as an amended 
application for a Presidential permit, and (2) the No Action 
Alternative, which assumes that DOE would not grant a Presidential 
permit for the Champlain Hudson project and that the proposed line and 
associated facilities would not be constructed.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 24, 2012.
Brian Mills,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Permitting, Siting and Analysis, Office of 
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability.
[FR Doc. 2012-10304 Filed 4-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P