BACKGROUND

In response to initiatives of elected and municipal officials and interested citizens in the Tri-Lakes Region, an Agreement was executed in September 2004 by and among the villages of Lake Placid and Tupper Lake, National Grid, and the New York Power Authority (NYPA) to help alleviate longstanding power problems in the Region through short- and long-term solutions. The Tri-Lakes Reliability Project (the Project), a new 46 kilovolt (kV) line and associated facilities from Stark to Piercefield, is one of the long-term solutions identified by National Grid and NYPA. The purpose of the Project is to increase the reliability of the electric system in the Region through improvements to capacity and delivery.

The Project is being developed as a cooperative effort between NYPA and National Grid (also known as the Applicants). NYPA is the applicant for all permits and approvals required for construction and operation of the Project. National Grid is responsible for design, engineering, procurement, construction, installation, testing, and overall Project management. National Grid will operate and maintain the new line after it is energized. NYPA will be owner of the line until 2012, at which time the line will be sold to National Grid.

The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for Project was accepted as complete and made available for public review on November 30, 2005. During the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) process in 2005 and 2006, the analysis of alternatives included an evaluation of the feasibility of building a 1.86 mile portion of the line on Raquette Boreal State Forest Preserve (Forest Preserve) lands along State Highway Route 56 (“Route 56 Alternate”). A Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was filed and deemed complete on February 17, 2006. A findings statement was issued which accepted the mitigation measures outlined in the FEIS and approved the proposed action.

On March 13, 2006, the Adirondack Park Agency (APA) approved routing for this 46 kV power line, which runs from Stark to Piercefield (“Stark Falls Alternate”). This approved route does not use the Route 56 corridor through the Forest Preserve; the approved route bypasses the Forest Preserve (“Bypass Route”). The Applicants obtained the required permits from federal, state, and municipal agencies to construct and operate the Stark Falls Alternate using the Bypass Route.

The Route 56 Alternate, which would have generally sited the 46 kV line along State Route 56 from Stark to Sevey Corners, was not selected as a part of the preferred route because of its susceptibility to the “potential for delays as a result of the Forest Preserve issues” (DEIS Appendix A, § 2.4.6). Specifically, there were concerns about a potential need for an amendment to the New York State Constitution (Constitutional Amendment) if the 46kV line was sited along and adjacent to Route 56 ROW, which includes over 1.8 miles of Forest Preserve lands.

The Constitutional Amendment process is lengthy, requiring first, passage of a concurrent resolution in the legislature authorizing the measure to be put on a state-wide ballot, second, passage of the identical resolution by a newly elected legislature after an intervening general election, and third, approval by the voters of the State at a general election. The time required made this option less attractive than the Bypass Route. Because of the pressing need to license and construct the Project, the Route 56 Alternate was not selected as the preferred route.

While the Applicants were moving forward with the Stark Falls Alternate using the Bypass Route, several legislators and members of four environmental groups encouraged the Applicants to pursue, by Constitutional Amendment, a route through the Forest Preserve adjacent to Route 56. An alignment along Route 56 partly on Forest Preserve lands represents a shorter route with potential for fewer environmental impacts than the cross-country Bypass Route, which is part of the Stark Falls Alternate. (See Appendix A for copies of position statements of environmental and resident associations supporting the route over Forest Preserve lands.)

In 2006, the Legislature passed a concurrent resolution authorizing the power line to cross Forest Preserve lands. Second passage was planned for 2007, and it was expected that the measure would be approved by the voters at the 2007 general election. However, the concurrent resolution had technical flaws that were not discovered until 2007. First passage of a concurrent resolution that corrected those flaws occurred in 2007. Second passage of the resolution is expected in 2009, after the 2008 intervening legislative election. The proposed amendment is expected to be on a state-wide ballot and approved by the voters in 2009.

The Applicants cannot wait until 2009 to construct the power line because the Project is urgently needed to reinforce the delivery systems for the Lake Placid-Tupper Lake-Saranac Lake area. The existing electric transmission lines and associated facilities in the current configuration have reached their limit to reliably serve the load in the region, while the load of the Tupper Lake-Saranac Lake municipal electric systems continues to grow. Peak demand for electricity on the transmission and subtransmission systems in the Tri-Lakes Region occurs in the winter months, during severely cold weather, when outages can cause the loss of heat, light, and water service in residences, schools, and businesses. These events can create significant concerns for public health and safety.

In advance of the Constitutional Amendment and to accommodate the in-service date, New York State agreed to permit the use of lands that are in the Forest Preserve for the construction and operation of the Project. Under the Environmental Conservation Law and applicable regulations, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) has discretion to enforce compliance with the laws, regulations, rules, and policies affecting the Forest Preserve. NYSDEC has determined that the construction of the power line is in the best interests of the public and, in an agreement with NYPA and National Grid, has exercised its discretion in authorizing the use of the Forest Preserve lands for construction and operation of the 46 kV transmission line (the Agreement). Danger tree removal has been included as part of the Agreement.

THE SDEIS

In this Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS), NYPA and National Grid evaluate three alternate alignments to the Bypass Route: the Route 56 East Alternate (East Alternate), the Route 56 West Alternate (West Alternate), and the Route 56 Underground Alternate (Underground Alternate), which would include a portion over Forest Preserve lands. This SDEIS examines the environmental impacts of the three proposed alternate routes through the Forest Preserve along State Route 56. For the purpose of this SDEIS, the Project Area begins approximately 1.0 mile north of the northern boundary of the Forest Preserve on Route 56, ends approximately 0.05 mile south of the southern boundary of the Forest Preserve on Route 56, and includes the routes around and through the Forest Preserve. (See Figure 1, Project Overview) The above information provides historical context for the Tri-Lakes Reliability Project as currently permitted. This SDEIS only addresses the Project Area as defined herein. The Project Area is described in greater detail in Section 1 of the SDEIS.

This SDEIS describes existing conditions within the Bypass Route and Route 56 Alternate Routes and identifies the potential impacts of construction and operation. Existing conditions are described in Section 2. The impacts of construction and operation of the alternate routes are compared in Section 3. The effects of construction and operation of the West Alternate are discussed in Sections 4 and 5, respectively, along with any proposed techniques for impact mitigation.

The Bypass Route requires 55 total acres of clearing, of which 3.93 acres are forested wetlands and 0.87 acre is non-forested wetland. The Bypass crosses four regulated streams and three non-regulated streams and is approximately 6.9 miles in length. Permanent wetland impacts include 0.18 acre of fill to enable access trail construction. Approximately 19,000 trees would be removed from the Bypass right of way (ROW). Engineering and construction factors are rated as “difficult” based on the length and off-road location of this route. The Bypass affects four private property owners.

The West Alternate requires approximately 19.5 total acres of clearing, and the East Alternate requires 15 acres of clearing. Because wetlands occur on the portion of the route common to both Alternates, the total number of cleared acres on each Alternate includes 1.1 acres of forested wetlands and 0.16 acre of non-forested wetland. The East and West Alternates cross two regulated streams and no non-regulated streams. Visual impacts are considered to be low/moderate for the West Alternate and moderate for the East Alternate. Approximately 3,077 trees would be removed from the West Alternate ROW over privately owned lands, and approximately 1,762 trees would be removed from the East Alternate ROW over privately owned lands. Both routes would require the removal of 1,926 trees in the Forest Preserve. Engineering and construction factors for the West Alternate are rated as standard, and those factors for the East Alternate are rated difficult/standard. The Underground Alternate, although it results in only 2.6 acres of clearing and has minimal visual impacts, requires complex construction methodology and has the highest cost. During construction of the Route 56 Alternate Routes, impacts will generally occur in the immediate vicinity of the ROW. These impacts will be short-term and minimized by the timing of these activities and continuous movement of construction activities along the ROW. The use of appropriate environmental controls as specified in the Environmental Work Plan (EWP), Appendix B of this SDEIS, will avoid or mitigate impacts to environmental resources.

During operation, occasional limited impacts will occur as a result of inspection and maintenance or due to restoration of storm damaged facilities. The most significant operational impact is the potential for incremental long-term visual effects. A significant portion of the Route 56 East and West Alternates is located along existing highway/utility corridors and will be overbuilt with existing utilities in approximately the same location as existing structures. The exception is the 1.0-mile segment of the West Alternate north of the Forest Preserve, which will be overbuilt with existing utilities that will be transferred from the east side of Route 56 and will be set back approximately 200 feet from the roadway, thereby screening the transmission facilities from view. The portion of the East and West Alternates in the Forest Preserve south of the parcel owned by Willis Coleman, formerly known as the Hamm’s in-holding, would be located where no power lines, overhead or otherwise, currently exist. The use of vertical configuration wood poles (similar to existing structures) along existing ROW and horizontal configuration structures in the Forest Preserve would reduce potential impact. Careful structure placement and appropriate ROW vegetation management should further reduce potential visual impact.

Long-term visual impacts also would result from the removal of trees from the transmission line ROW and within the danger tree zone outside of the ROW. Reliability is the key to the success of this transmission line and cannot be achieved without clearing danger trees. This includes the portion of the ROW that is adjacent to Forest Preserve lands. Cutting danger trees would reduce the need for continual maintenance for many years and would significantly minimize the possibility of outages. After danger tree removal, the herbaceous and shrub layer would be allowed to regenerate. In the Forest Preserve, outside the cleared transmission line ROW, danger tree removal would occur on a selective basis, determined by tree height at specific distances from the ROW, to preserve the visual quality of the Forest Preserve and minimize unnecessary tree removal.

The Project will enhance the reliability of the power delivery system in the villages and the region and should significantly reduce the number of power outages in the area. Benefits of increased reliability include fewer outages during the winter when the loss of heat can create significant public safety concerns, fewer lost days of school, and fewer losses to area businesses from closure due to outages.

The West Alternate affects three private property owners, and the East Alternate affects four private property owners. The private lands along the northern section of both the East and West Alternates are held by the same land owner. The West Alternate is the route favored by this landowner because he considers it is the best use of the land. For this reason, and based on visual and engineering and construction factors, the West Alternate has been selected as the preferred route.

In the event that for any reason one of the supplemental alternatives is not approved, the Applicants will construct and operate the Project as already approved in the Stark Falls Alternate.

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

1.1 pROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1.1 Proposed Action

This SDEIS compares the three alternate alignments- the Route 56 West Alternate, the Route 56 East Alternate, and the Route 56 Underground Alternate- and refers to the conditions of the approved Bypass Route. The Bypass Route and the three alternates are presented in Figure 2, Maps 1 through 4 and show respective pole numbers for each alternate. The northern limit of each route is shown at Pole 161 on the west side of Route 56. The southern limit of each route is shown at Pole 287 on the east side of Route 56.

The Bypass diverges from Route 56 at Pole 161 and proceeds cross-country north of the Forest Preserve in a generally southwest alignment through a largely unpopulated area. (See Figure 2, Map 1 of 4.) Most of this portion of the Bypass is located on logged over lands (previously disturbed forest). Near the northwest edge of the Forest Preserve the Bypass proceeds due south at Pole 208. At Pole 226, the Bypass is located adjacent to an existing jeep trail. The Bypass then proceeds south and east near the southern boundary of the Forest Preserve and just north of Sevey Bog on an existing logging road and merges with State Route 56 at Pole 286 and crosses to the east of Route 56 at Pole 287. There are 126 poles on the Bypass Route.

The West Alternate would begin at Pole 161 and proceed south along the west side of Route 56 to Pole 181, cross over to Pole 182 on the east side prior to the northern boundary of the Forest Preserve, and continue along the east side over Forest Preserve lands to Pole 189. The West Alternate then would cross to Pole 190 on the west side of Route 56. Poles 190 to 192 and 194 to 196 would be on the west side of Route 56, and Pole 193 would be on the east side. The West Alternate would continue on the east side of Route 56 from Pole 197 to Pole 287. (See Figure 2, Map 2 of 4.) This alternate, approximately 3.40 miles in length, would be offset between 100 and 400 feet from the west side of Route 56 north of the Forest Preserve and would be aligned along the eastern perimeter of the DOT ROW along the east side of Route 56. There would be 71 poles on the West Alternate.

The East Alternate would start at Pole 161 on the west side of Route 56, cross to Pole 162 on the east side of Route 56, proceed on the east side from Pole 162 to Pole 182, and continue along the same alignment as the West Alternate to Pole 287. (See Figure 2, Map 3 of 4.) This alternate, approximately 3.39 miles in length, would be aligned proximate to the eastern perimeter of the DOT ROW along the east side of Route 56. There would be 70 poles on the East Alternate. The Underground Alternate would begin at Pole 161 as overbuild to Pole 181. Starting at the northern boundary of the Forest Preserve (Pole 182), the line would be placed underground along the east side of Route 56 to Pole 228, the southern boundary of the Route 56 ROW siting over Forest Preserve lands. The 46 kV line would then be located on new overhead to Pole 287. (See Figure 2, Map 4 of 4.)

Access from Route 56 to the Raquette River is an issue on all of the Route 56 Alternates. There are two access points within the area of the proposed action. Jamestown Falls Road is the official, State-owned access point from Route 56; an easement across the transmission line ROW will be required for this road. The Moody Falls Canoe Carry Trailhead, also a State-owned access point, is an informal access point with no vehicular access or parking facilities; the Applicants do not consider this to be a safe location and cannot support its use.

The majority of the private lands along the northern section of both the East and West Alternates are held by the same land owner. The West Alternate is the route favored by this landowner because it is the best use of the land. For this reason, and based on the visual and engineering and construction factors discussed in this SDEIS, the West Alternate is the preferred route.

1.1.2 Project Background

In response to initiatives of elected and municipal officials and interested citizens in the Tri-Lakes Region, an Agreement was executed in September 2004 by and among the Villages of Lake Placid and Tupper Lake, National Grid, and NYPA to help alleviate longstanding power problems in the Region through short- and long-term solutions. The Project is located in the Adirondack Park in St. Lawrence County, New York is such a long-term solution. The purpose of the Project is to increase the reliability of the electric system in the Region through improvements to capacity and delivery.

In 2005, several route alternates were evaluated that were designed to bring a new 46 kV Line into Tupper Lake from either the west or northwest. The two alternate routes, known as the Newton Falls Alternate, and the Stark Falls Alternate, were discussed in detail in the previously submitted and approved DEIS and FEIS. On March 3 and 4, 2005 a pre-application meeting with the Adirondack Park Agency and the NYSDEC was held.

Environmental concerns about the alternate routes raised by Agency staff focused primarily on visual and wetland/water resources. Specific to the Newton Falls Alternate were concerns related to the alignment’s crossing of and proximity to the Oswegatchie River, an APA designated Study River. The APA’s “Policy on Agency Review of Proposals for New Telecommunications Towers and Other Tall Structures in the Adirondack Park” emphasizes the requirement that the project be “substantially invisible,” which raised concerns regarding the APA designated scenic river status of the South Branch Grass River and the alignment’s proximity to State Route 3. Adoption of a 150-200 foot offset from the edge of the proposed ROW was determined to be an acceptable setback to protect the visual quality viewed from the roadway. Also, the concept of overbuild as a means of consolidating existing and proposed utilities on the same structure within existing ROWs was supported as a routing option for much of the Newton Falls Route east of Sevey Corners, common also to the Stark Falls Alternate.

Environmental concerns specific to the Stark Falls Alternate focused on that portion of the route that would pass over the Forest Preserve on State Route 56. Specifically, any overhead alignment along State Route 56 would require several acres of clearing within the Forest Preserve. There would also be the introduction of utility structures within that portion of the NYSDOT ROW that is currently devoid of any overhead utilities, resulting in visual impact within the Forest Preserve. An underground alternate was also investigated that mitigated some of the potential for clearing and visual impacts but would have unacceptable construction and maintenance costs. Applicable to both an underground or overhead alternate over State Forest Preserve lands was the overriding question of the need for a New York State Constitutional Amendment. As a result of this meeting, a routing option was considered for the Stark Falls Alternate that included an alternate route to the west of the Forest Preserve that would avoid State Route 56 through the State Forest Preserve. The Stark Falls Alternate with the Bypass Route around the Forest Preserve was selected as the Preferred Route and the Newton Falls alignment was the Alternate Route.

A DEIS was prepared by Tetra Tech EC, Inc., The LA Group, and Vanderweil Engineers on behalf of NYPA, the Lead Agency. The DEIS was accepted as complete and made available for public review on November 30, 2005. A Public Hearing on the DEIS was held on January 11, 2006 at the Ivy Terrace Room, 38 Boyer Avenue, Tupper Lake, and the comment period remained open until January 31, 2005. Several non-government organizations (NGOs) spoke in favor of the Preferred Route versus the Alternate Route. However, some expressed concern that the alignment around the Forest Preserve near Sevey Bog was unacceptable and ecologically harmful. Additionally, the Adirondack Mountain Club expressed concern that the Bypass Route would prevent any future expansion of the Forest Preserve. Other concerns included the cost to maintain an electric line for six miles through forestland, the remoteness of the alignment jeopardizing maintenance and repair, and long-term electric reliability issues.

Notwithstanding the concerns of the NGOs, NYPA and National Grid were given the task of alleviating longstanding electrical power problems in an expeditious and cost effective fashion, while balancing environmental, engineering, and legal concerns, including the protection of the Forest Preserve. Because an amendment to Article XIV, Section 1 of the New York State Constitution might be required to remove land from the Forest Preserve for the transmission line ROW along Route 56 in the Forest Preserve, the Project applicants determined that the legislative process would preclude the timely completion of the Project. It was decided that the Bypass Route would be the most practicable route and would meet the projected in-service date of winter 2008. Therefore, the alignment along Route 56 through the Forest Preserve was not pursued.

An FEIS was filed and deemed complete on February 17, 2006. At this point the Preferred Route was the Stark Falls Alternate with the 6-mile bypass around the Forest Preserve. On March 13, 2006 a findings statement was issued by NYPA, which accepted the mitigation measures outlined in the FEIS and approved the proposed action. The Stark Falls Alternate was determined to be the best alternate with the least environmental impacts. NYPA and National Grid proceeded to obtain the required permits from federal, state, and municipal agencies to construct and operate the Stark Falls Alternate as approved through the SEQRA process.

The Preferred Route was approved by the APA on March 13, 2006. NYPA received permits for the Stark Falls Alternate Route from the APA, NYSDEC, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) (see Table 1.1-1 below). The Stark Falls Alternate Route, now known as the Permitted Route, is a transmission line that originates at a new substation in the Town of Parishville and terminates at a new regulator station located in the vicinity of the existing Piercefield Substation in the Town of Piercefield, a distance of 26.8 miles. The new Townline Substation is located approximately 3,100 feet north of the town of Colton town line on the east side of Raquette River Road. It will interconnect with the existing 115 kV system. The 46 kV line proceeds southwest about one-half mile and intersects with Joe Indian Road and proceeds on new ROW on the west side of State Route 56. The line continues along State Route 56 for about 7.1 miles and proceeds west, then south, and back east for 6 miles around the Forest Preserve. The line rejoins State Route 56 and proceeds south approximately 1.5 miles to Sevey Corners where it intersects with State Route 3. The line follows State Route 3 approximately 4.5 miles to a point one-half mile north of Gale, passes southeast on new ROW for about 4,000 feet, and rejoins State Route 3 south and east of Gale. The line parallels State Route 3 about 2.7 miles to a point due southeast of Dead Creek. At this location, the line leaves State Route 3 to avoid steep slopes and a narrow ROW and traverses 3,800 feet of new ROW. The line rejoins State Route 3 and proceeds into Piercefield. The line connects to a new regulator station near the existing Piercefield Substation at the Brookfield Hydroelectric facility where the line connects to an existing 46 kV line to Tupper Lake.

1.1.3 Constitutional Amendment

While the Applicants were moving forward with the Permitted Route, representatives from several environmental groups encouraged the pursuit of a Constitutional Amendment that would allow construction of a transmission line over Forest Preserve lands along State Route 56. This alignment represents a shorter route and results in potentially less environmental impact than the Bypass Route due to its shorter length, from pole 161 to pole 287. Additionally, this alignment has the support of the environmental groups and interested citizens as demonstrated by the letters and testimony favoring this alignment over the Bypass during the public review process. (See Appendix A.)

The constitutional change process involves action by the state legislature in two separate legislative sessions.. The final step in the legislative process is the ratification of the Constitutional Amendment by the voters. During the initial submission of the Constitutional Amendment for approval by the Senate and Assembly, it was determined that the proposed Amendment had errors. The public vote on the corrected Constitutional Amendment will not occur prior to the required September 2008 in-service date. The Project must be operational by the winter of 2008-2009 as per a Settlement Agreement approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).

In advance of the Constitutional Amendment, by means of the Agreement, NYSDEC has authorized the use of the Forest Preserve lands for construction and operation of the Project. Danger tree clearing outside of the ROW is an important reliability factor of this Project. The limited acreage available for construction on the lands to be removed from the Forest Preserve could affect the integrity of the transmission line. To maintain the reliability of the line, National Grid and NYPA have been granted the right under the Agreement to cut danger trees outside of the transmission line ROW.

The Agreement does not change or cause the State to relinquish ownership of the Forest Preserve land, until passage of the Constitutional Amendment. National Grid and NYPA, with the support of NYSDEC, will exercise good faith in attempting to secure the Constitutional Amendment. Should the legislature fail to act, or the referendum vote fail to succeed, National Grid and NYPA will continue to pursue a Constitutional Amendment. The Agreement remains in full force as long as the Applicants continue good faith attempts to obtain the Constitutional Amendment

1.1.4 Project Alternates

This SDEIS examines the environmental, visual, cultural, and traffic impacts of the of the three proposed Route 56 Alternate Routes through the Forest Preserve along State Route 56 described in Section 1.1.1, juxtaposed with the approved Bypass Route. The Bypass Route and the alternate routes are discussed in more detail in Section 3 of this document. The SDEIS is prepared pursuant to the SEQRA and NYPA’s implementing regulations, 21 NYCRR Part 461.

The remainder of the Project is currently under construction as approved under the SEQRA process and permitted by the regulatory authorities. National Grid has commenced construction of the northerly portion of the Permitted Route, and has delayed the start of construction in the area of the Forest Preserve pending SEQRA determination and permit review submission and completion of this SDEIS and the subsequent Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Statement (SFEIS) and revisions to the existing permits.

1.1.5 Permit Requirements

Table 1.1-1 identifies the state and federal agencies that are involved in the review of this Project and indicates the status of their reviews.

Table 1.1-1: State and Federal Agencies Reviewing the Tri-Lakes Project
AGENCY	PERMIT/REVIEW	STATUS
Adirondack Park Agency	Involved agency for review of the DEIS Issues Adirondack Park Agency Act, Section 814 Order for construction of new facilities in the Adirondack Park by a state agency Issues Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers System Act Permit. Issues Article 24 Wetland Permit	Permit # 2005-325 Permit # 2005-325A (first set of Notices of Minor Change [NMC]) Letter of permit compliance dated April 16, 2007 for Condition C to address field changes Permit # 2005-325B for NMC 06-03C Letter of permit compliance dated Aug 8, 2007 for Condition 10e Sevey Bog Road Relocation Letter of permit compliance dated August 7, 2007 for Condition 10a for Environmental Inspector Permit # 2005-325C dated October 3, 2007 for southern marshalling yard NMC Permit # 2005-325D (second set of NMC’s) dated October 31, 2007
NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation	Involved agency for review of DEIS. Consults and comments on potential impacts to rare, threatened and endangered species. Issues Section 401 Water Quality Certificate Issues State Pollution Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) permit for construction stormwater.	Only NYS endangered species identified is the spruce grouse DEC Permit # 6-4099-00048/0001 DEC Permit #NYR 10N413 under General Permit No. GP-02-01 or GP-0-08-001
NYS Dept of Transportation	Involved agency for review of DEIS Issues Highway Work Permit for any work in state roads.	NYS DOT Utility Highway Work Permit # 07-07-0634 Issued permit for Northern Section of Route on August 30, 2007 Pending: NYS DOT Utility Highway Work Permit for remainder of Project
NY Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation	Consults with State Agencies regarding potential impacts to historic properties and archeological sites.	No adverse affect letter, with conditions, from James Warren of OPRHP February 16, 2006. No adverse affect letter from Cynthia Blakemore, SHPO, on 1st 8.5 miles, based on Phase IB dated July 7, 2007.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers	Issues Section 404 (Clean Water Act) permit for work in wetlands. Issues Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act) Navigable Water Crossing permit.	ACOE Permit #2005-01263-YN Dated July 23, 2007
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service	Consults with ACOE concerning potential impacts to federally listed threatened and endangered species.	USFWS letter dated May 27, 2005 - No federally listed species

SECTION 2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

2.1 SOILS AND SLOPES

2.1.1 Description of Soils

A variety of soils, including hydric, upland, and highly erodible soils are found in the Project Area, along the proposed Bypass and the Route 56 Alternates. Identified in the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s (NRCS) Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO) for St. Lawrence County, NY, these soils have formed from parent materials such as glacial till, glacial outwash and fluvial deposits, so textural families are coarse (coarse loamy, sandy skeletal, sandy, etc.). The variation of slope between all of the soils is from 0 percent to 35 percent.

Table 2.1-1 summarizes the soil complexes that are found within the Bypass and the Route 56 Alternate ROWs. For a description of the soil series encountered on all routes, see Section 3.1.2 of the DEIS.

Table 2.1-1: Soils Comparison for All Routes
Map Unit ID	Soil Complex	Route 56 East Alternative	Route 56 West Alternative	Bypass Route
376C	Colton-Duxbury-Adams 3 to 15 percent slope	X	X	X
376D	Colton-Duxbury-Adams 15 to 35 percent slope	X	X	X
021	Dawson-Fluvaquents-Loxley 0 to 2 percent slope	X	X
023	Loxley-Dawson 0 to 2 percent slope	X

AADT	Annual Average Daily Traffic
ACOE	U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
APA	Adirondack Park Agency
APE	area of potential effect
asl	above sea level
Bypass Route	6.0 mile route around the Forest Preserve
CEAs	critical environmental areas
cfl	compact florescent light
Constitutional Amendment	Amendment to New York State Constitution
dbh	diameter at breast height
DEIS	Draft Environmental Impact Statement
East Alternate	Route 56 East Alternate
EWP	Environmental Work Plan
FEIS	Final Environmental Impact Statement
FERC	Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Forest Preserve	Raquette Boreal State Forest Preserve or State Owned Lands in the Adirondack Park
HDD	horizontal directional drilling
kV	Kilovolt
NGOs	non-government organizations
NHL	National Historic Landmark
NMC	Notices of Minor Change
NRCS	Natural Resources Conservation Services
NRHP	National Register of Historic Places
NYPA	New York Power Authority
NYSDEC	New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
NYSDPW	New York State Department of Public Works
PVC	polyvinyl chloride
Route 56	State Highway Route 56
ROW	right of way
SDEIS	Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement
SEQRA	State Environmental Quality Review Act
SFEIS	Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Statement
SHPO	State Historic Preservation Office
SLMP	State Land Master Plan
SPDES	State Pollution Discharge Elimination System
SSURGO	Soil Survey Geographic Database
TRP	Temporary Revocable Permit
UMP	Unit Management Plan
Underground Alternate	Route 56 Underground Alternate
West Alternate	Route 56 West Alternate

January 2008

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION