Connecticut Department of ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Robert J. Klee, Commissioner November 3, 2015 Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street NE, Room 1A Washington, D.C. 20426 RE: Northeast Energy Direct Project Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC Resource Report Comments Docket No. PF 14-22-000 Dear Secretary Bose: Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments on the pre-filing Resource Reports 1-13 submitted by Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC for the Northeast Energy Direct (NED) Project. Project components within Connecticut include 14.8 miles of 24” pipeline from East Granby to Farmington, referred to in the Reports as the Connecticut Loop, and modifications to an existing metering station in Easton. Southern Connecticut Gas Company and Connecticut Natural Gas are the two local distribution companies which will receive supplies from the NED project. As a matter of both public policy and economics, the use of natural gas as an energy source has been increasing in Connecticut and additional supply capacity is needed to meet the increased demand and to mitigate against volatility in natural gas and electricity prices. Permits The Resource Reports acknowledge the need for several permits from Connecticut DEEP. These include a Section 401 Water Quality Certificate, and permits for the discharge of both hydrostatic test water and for stormwater from the construction activities associated with the installation of the pipeline. Many of the site-specific design and resource issues not specifically addressed at the Resource Report stage will be evaluated in these reviews, particularly in the Section 401 Water Quality Certificate review. Farmington River Crossing The Resource Reports are not completely consistent as to the crossing technique for the Farmington River. Resource Report 1 says (p. 88) that horizontal directional drilling (HDD) will be used for the pipeline’s crossing of the Farmington River, while Resource Report 8 says (p. 89) Printed on Recycled Paper 79 Elm Street • Hartford, CT 06106-5127 www.ct.gov/deep Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer Somers Solar Center LLC Petition No. 1042 2 January 11, 2013 that the use of HDD is being investigated for this crossing. DEEP would strongly encourage that HDD be employed at this site to minimize impacts including impacts to the endangered dwarf wedgemussel. DEEP’s understanding of the status of the Farmington River at this location relative to Wild and Scenic River status is consistent with that expressed in the Resource Reports. The Upper Farmington River has been so designated while the Lower Farmington River remains proposed, but not officially designated, for Wild and Scenic River status. However, the specific location of the pipeline crossing lies within an exclusion area related to the Farmington River Power Company Rainbow Dam, and would not be part of the Wild and Scenic River designated segment for the Lower Farmington River even if that proposal is ultimately adopted. Page 87 of Resource Report 8 mentions that the south bank of the Farmington River is owned by the Town of Bloomfield at the crossing location. According to the USGS topographic map, the south bank of the river at the crossing location falls in Windsor, not Bloomfield, so the ownership status mentioned on page 88 might merit re-checking. Listed Species Fourteen listed plant species and eleven animal species have been identified as potentially present along the pipeline corridor. Coordination with biologists for Tennessee is ongoing. Survey procedures have been specified. Much of the survey work has not been completed during appropriate survey windows for 2015 and will continue into 2016. Biologists of DEEP’s Natural Diversity Database Program continue to work with the applicant’s biologists. Blasting Resource Report 6 says (p. 34) that two miles of the Connecticut Loop pipeline will occur in bedrock. A field review of the Connecticut Loop corridor reveals that many of the outcrop or shallow to bedrock areas occur at the higher elevations of the corridor, along ridges and other high ground but, for the bedrock areas near watercourse crossings, DEEP’s Inland Fisheries Division strongly discourages the use of blasting and urges that it be avoided if at all possible. Should blasting be necessary at any watercourse crossing, Tennessee should contact the Inland Fisheries Division in advance to advise of the impending blasting so that a field inspection by Division staff can be performed to insure the proper mitigation measures have been taken to prevent mortalities. Peter Aarrestad should be the contact for the project in regard to any blasting work and can be reached at 860-424-4171. Invasive Species Control Plan The development of an Invasive Species Control Plan is mentioned at several points in the Resource Reports. DEEP has worked with Spectra Energy and the Corps of Engineers on other gas pipeline projects to develop acceptable language which has been incorporated into the Section 401 Water Quality Certificate for the recent Algonquin Incremental Market pipeline project. This approach distinguishes between control of invasive species that occur solely within the pipeline ROW and are, thus, more easily isolated and controlled, and those which occur both on and adjacent to the ROW where control may be more difficult and more temporary in terms of its success. A field review of the Connecticut Loop alignment showed most invasive species occurrences to fall within the former category, i.e., confined to the pipeline right-of-way rather than being more extensive. Somers Solar Center LLC Petition No. 1042 3 January 11, 2013 Talcott Mountain State Park Three minor points and corrections are noted within the discussion of Talcott Mountain State Park in Resource Report 3. On page 3-29, the report states that the administering agency for Talcott Mountain State Park is ‘TBD’. It is DEEP that owns and administers the park. The sectional heading on page 3-48 mistakenly refers to that property as a state forest. Also, on page 3-48, the pipeline crossing of the park is listed as 120’ but the mileposts for the crossing are shown as from MP 4.83 to MP 4.99, which is 0.16 miles or 845’. In either case, no impacts to the activities or facilities of the state park are anticipated as a result of this project. New England National Scenic Trail Resource Report 8, page 87, says the pipeline crosses the New England National Scenic Trail at milepost 5.40. The field review of the corridor showed the trail to cross the pipeline much farther to the south, at approximately MP 0.6 or MP 0.7. This crossing was very well marked. Unless the Trail crosses the Connecticut Loop in more than one location, the milepost figure given on page 8-87 is incorrect. DEEP Flood Control Property A similar comment is raised concerning a milepost crossing given in Table 8.3-3 on page 8-84 concerning the pipeline access road crossing of DEEP flood control property for the South Branch Park River Flood Control Project. Page 8-84 lists the pipeline access road as crossing this DEEP property at milepost 0.65, which would be just north of the Farmington/West Hartford town border. The flood control property owned by DEEP is adjacent to and just south of U.S. Route 44, which would be at approximately MP 3.3. DEEP does not own any property at milepost 0.65 which is on MDC land. Diversion from Existing Pipeline Alignment The proposed Connecticut Loop alignment diverts from following the existing Tennessee Gas Pipeline between mileposts 4.35 and 5.46 in West Hartford, and instead follows an existing electric transmission line corridor for this 1.11 mile segment. While the new alignment does avoid crossing almost one mile of Talcott Mountain State Park, the topography along the powerline corridor is much more challenging than that along the existing pipeline alignment. The proposed alignment does offer the advantage of being a very slightly shorter route. However, it would cross at least three steep basalt slopes, the first just south of CL&P structure 8106, the latter two on either side of a hollow between structures 8100 and 8099. The southern outcrop at this hollow, in particular, is a 30-35’ cliff and will represent a significant constructability challenge. There are also significant stands of Phragmites in the transmission line corridor, with a vigorous stand of plants to 10’ in height between structures 8100 and 8099 and a second stand of even taller plants south of structure 8099. These stands present more of a threat for the spread of invasive species than does use of the existing pipeline segment in this section which does not support any Phragmites. Topographically, the existing alignment is less challenging between mileposts 4.35 and 5.46. To the extent that it is a relevant concern, the existing pipeline corridor is incrementally farther from MDC Reservoir No. 6, by 800-900 feet, than is the transmission line ROW. As the Somers Solar Center LLC Petition No. 1042 4 January 11, 2013 owner of Talcott Mountain State Park, DEEP appreciates the fact that the proposed new alignment almost completely avoids crossing that park, but the existing pipeline corridor is well maintained, shows no signs of erosion, and would represent a much less disruptive alignment choice. We are not aware of the reasons Tennessee selected the new alignment over the existing one in this segment, but, if it is of interest to Tennessee, we would be willing to entertain discussions to allow the new pipeline to follow the existing alignment in this area in the interest of minimizing overall environmental impact. Observations from the Field A field review of the Connecticut Loop corridor was undertaken on October 23, 26 and 27. The existing 14.83 mile pipeline right-of-way is well maintained and does not evidence any signs of erosion, even in some very steep segments from Route185 in Bloomfield south into West Hartford. Vegetative cover is well established throughout the pipeline corridor. Stands of Phragmites and Japanese knotweed were encountered in a few locations but overall the right-ofway was surprisingly devoid of these species, in particular when compared to transmission line rights-of-way. The alignment crossed a series of about a dozen residential lawns on Harvest Lane and Habitat Lane in northern Bloomfield, some of which have landscaping which may be at risk from the pipeline construction. Other than this location, residential impacts are more scattered and not as direct. Corrections and Updates Several minor corrections are noted in the Resource Reports, some of which simply reflect that they were not updated with the most current information. In this latter category are the references on pages 2-129, 2-152, and 8-146 to the Glastonbury Loop pipeline segment as being part of Spectra’s Atlantic Bridge Project. The 7-mile Glastonbury Loop was deleted from Spectra’s Atlantic Bridge Project. Another example is the reference on page 2-59 to the Rippowam River floodplain crossing. This crossing was eliminated when Tennessee removed the Stamford Loop from the NED project. References on pages 8-39, 8-59 and elsewhere refer to Tennessee initiating correspondence with county agencies in Connecticut or not receiving any responses from them. Connecticut has no county level government and, therefore, no county agencies. The reference to Ashfield County on page 8-112 is apparently a reference to the Town of Ashfield, Massachusetts. There is no Ashfield County in Massachusetts. Thank you again for the opportunity to submit these comments on the Resource Reports for the Northeast Energy Direct Project. Should FERC staff have any questions concerning any points herein, feel free to contact me at (860) 424-4110 or at frederick.riese@ct.gov. Respectfully yours, Frederick L. Riese Senior Environmental Analyst cc: Connecticut Siting Council Somers Solar Center LLC 5 January 11, 2013 Petition No. 1042