This Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) is prepared pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and the New York Power Authority’s (NYPA’s) implementing regulations, 21 NYCRR Part 461.

A Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) was prepared by Tetra Tech EC, Inc. and The LA Group on behalf of NYPA, the Lead Agency. The SDEIS was accepted as complete and made available for public review on January 3, 2008. The comment period remained open until February 4, 2008. The Adirondack Park Agency (APA) was the only commenter on the SDEIS. The APA comment letter dated February 4, 2008 is included as Attachment 1.

The SDEIS for the Tri-Lakes Reliability Project (Project) is hereby incorporated by reference as part of this SFEIS. The SDEIS also incorporates by reference the DEIS dated November 30, 2005 and FEIS dated February 17, 2006. The SDEIS contains the following sections:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

SECTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1.1 Proposed Action

1.1.2 Project Background

1.1.3 Constitutional Amendment

1.1.4 Project Alternates

1.1.5 Permit Requirements

SECTION 2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

2.1 SOILS AND SLOPES

2.1.1 Description of Soils

2.1.2 Topography and Slope

2.1.3 Soil Characteristics and Restrictions

2.1.3.1 Bypass Route

2.1.3.2 Route 56 East Alternate and Underground Alternate

2.1.3.3 Route 56 West Alternate

2.2 Forest Cover

2.2.1 Bypass Route

2.2.2 Route 56 East and West Alternates

2.3 Wetlands and Streams

2.3.1 Streams

2.3.1.1 Bypass Route

2.3.1.2 Route 56 East and West Alternates

2.3.2 Wetlands

2.3.2.1 Ecological Community Characteristics

2.4 Cultural Resources

2.5 Land Use

2.5.1 Bypass Route

2.5.2 Route 56 East and West Alternates

2.5.2.1 Land Use Classification

2.5.2.2 Route 56 Corridor History and Regulatory Setting

2.5.2.3 Applicable Zoning Regulations

2.5.2.4 Shoreline Restrictions, and Scenic and Recreational Rivers Act

2.5.2.5 Access to Forest Preserve Lands

2.6 Visual Resources

2.6.1 Bypass Route

2.6.2 Route 56 West and East Alternates

2.7 Transportation and Traffic

2.7.1 Regional Road Network

2.7.2 Rail Service

2.7.3 Air Service

SECTION 3 ALTERNATES

3.1 No Action – No Transmission Line

3.2 Permitted Route: Bypass Route (the “Bypass”)

3.2.1 Route

3.2.2 Construction Assessment

3.2.3 Operation Assessment

3.3 Preferred Route: Route 56 West Alternate (the “West Alternate”)

3.3.1 Route

3.3.2 Construction Assessment

3.3.3 Operation Assessment

3.4 Route 56 East Alternate (the “East Alternate”)

3.4.1 Route

3.4.2 Construction Assessment

3.4.3 Operation Assessment

3.5 Route 56 Underground Alternate (the “Underground Alternate”)

3.5.1 Route

3.5.2 Construction Assessment

3.5.3 Operation Assessment

3.6 Conclusion

SECTION 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTION AND MITIGATION MEASURES

4.1 Soils and Slopes

4.2 Forest Cover

4.3 Wetlands and Streams

4.3.1 Streams

4.3.2 Wetlands

4.4 Cultural Resources

4.4.1 Archeological Resources

4.4.2 Architectural and Historical Resources

4.5 Land Use

4.5.1 Land Use Classification

4.5.2 Route 56 Corridor History and Regulatory Setting

4.5.2.1 Impacts

4.5.2.2 Applicable Zoning Regulations

4.5.2.3 Shoreline Restrictions and Scenic and Recreational Rivers Act

4.5.2.4 Access to Forest Preserve Lands

4.6 Visual Resources

4.7 Traffic and Transportation

4.7.1 Construction Equipment and Traffic

SECTION 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

5.1 Soils and Slopes

5.2 Forest Cover

5.2.1 Danger Tree Removal and Maintenance

5.3 Wetlands and Streams

5.3.1 Streams

5.3.2 Wetlands

5.4 Cultural Resources

5.5 Land Use

5.5.1 Land Use Classification

5.5.2 Route 56 Corridor History and Regulatory Setting

5.5.3 Applicable Zoning Regulations

5.5.4 Shoreline Restrictions and Scenic and Recreational Rivers Act

5.5.5 Access to Forest Preserve Lands

5.6 Visual Resources

5.7 Traffic and Transportation

SECTION 6 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

SECTION 7 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE LOCAL SHORT-TERM USE OF MAN’S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY

SECTION 8 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF

RESOURCES

SECTION 9 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS, GROWTH INDUCING EFFECTS AND SECONDARY IMPACTS

9.1 Soils and Slopes

9.2 Forest Cover

9.3 Wetlands

9.3.1 Wetlands and Streams

9.3.2 Streams

9.4 Cultural Resources

9.5 Land Us

9.6 Visual Resources

9.7 Traffic and Transportation

SECTION 10 IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ON THE USE AND CONSERVATION OF ENERGY

SECTION 11 REFERENCES

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1-1: State and Federal Agencies Reviewing the Tri-Lakes Project

Table 2.1-1: Soils Comparison for All Routes

Table 2.1-2: Soils with Moderate to High Erosion Potential and Steep Slopes

Table 2.2-1: Plant Species Encountered in Uplands

Table 2.3-1: Waterbodies Crossed by the Bypass and Route 56 Alternates

Table 2.3-2: Plant Species Encountered in Wetlands

Table 2.7-1: Annual Daily Traffic for Routes 3 and 56

Table 3.1-1: Alternates Analysis

Table 4.2-1: Trees to be Cleared within Forest Preserve Lands Along NYS Route 56

Table 4.3-1: Wetland Crossings - West Alternate

Table 4.3-2: Summary of Wetland Crossings by Cover Class - West Alternate

Table 6.0-1: Unavoidable Adverse Impacts

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Overview Map

Figure 2 Alternates Map (Maps 1-4)

Figure 3 Slope and Soils

Figure 4 Vegetation Cover Type

Figure 5 Streams

Figure 6 Wetlands

Figure 7 Land Use

Figure 8a Canoe Carry Trailhead from Across Route 56 Looking East

Figure 8b Canoe Carry Trailhead Looking East

Figure 9 Bypass Typical ROW Cross Sections

Figure 10 West Alternate Typical ROW Cross Section Looking North

Figure 11 East Alternate Typical ROW Cross Section Looking North

Figure 12 Selective Clearing

Figure 13 Selective Clearing Simulation

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Public Support

Appendix B Environmental Work Plan

Appendix C Wetlands and Streams

Appendix D Visual Impact Assessment

Appendix E Tree Counts

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 conveyed to National Grid.

The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the 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 1.46 mile portion of the line on Raquette Boreal State Forest (Forest Preserve) east of State Highway 56 and Grass River Wild Forest (Forest Preserve) west of State Highway 56 known as the “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 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 1.46 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, 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.

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. Therefore, 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 and the affected communities 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. The Project’s main purpose is to improve the reliability of the power delivery system to the Tri Lakes region. Power can only be delivered reliably when the line is clear of obstructions, including off right-of-way (ROW) hazard [1] and danger [2] trees.

In advance of the Constitutional Amendment and to accommodate the in-service date, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) 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, 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). Hazard tree removal has been included as part of the Agreement.

THE SDEIS

In the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS), NYPA and National Grid evaluated 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. The SDEIS examined the environmental impacts of the three proposed alternate routes through the Forest Preserve along State Route 56. For the purpose of the 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. The above information provides historical context for the Tri-Lakes Reliability Project as currently permitted. The SDEIS only addressed the Project Area as defined herein. The Project Area is described in greater detail in Section 1 of the SDEIS.

The SDEIS described existing conditions within the Bypass Route and Route 56 Alternate Routes and identified 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 within the ROW. 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 ROW on lands to be removed from 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 the 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 from the hazard and danger tree zones outside of the ROW. Reliability is the key to the success of this transmission line and cannot be achieved without removing hazard and danger trees, on Forest Preserve lands and on private lands, respectively. Cutting hazard and danger trees would reduce the need for continual maintenance for many years and would significantly minimize the possibility of outages. After hazard and danger tree removal, the herbaceous and shrub layer would be allowed to regenerate. In the Forest Preserve, outside the transmission line ROW, hazard tree removal would occur on a selective basis, determined by the condition of the tree and by certain existing environmental factors (dead, diseased, leaning, or environmentally unstable trees), 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.

THE SFEIS

This SFEIS summarizes the impacts of construction and operation of the Route 56 West Alternate, which has been selected as the Preferred Route, and the measures proposed to mitigate these impacts. Section 1 of the SFEIS discusses impacts and mitigation. In Section 2 of this SFEIS, NYPA responds to the comments submitted by the APA in its letter dated February 4, 2008 and provides modifications to the SDEIS text to incorporate corrected and/or new information.

1.0 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED ROUTE

The following is a summary of impacts of the Route 56 West Alternate, the Preferred Route as determined in the SDEIS for the Tri-Lakes Reliability Project.

1.1 Introduction

The Project (APA permit number 2005-325), which includes the Bypass of the Forest Preserve, is currently under construction as approved under the SEQRA process and permitted by the regulatory authorities. National Grid has completed a significant portion of the construction of the northerly portion of the Permitted Route; has commenced construction in the southern portion of the southern portion of the route; and has delayed the start of construction in the area of the Forest Preserve pending review of the SFEIS, SEQRA determination, and revisions to the existing permits. The following discussion concerns the Route 56 West Alternate, which has been selected as the Preferred Route. The mitigation measures described below include, but are not limited to, the methods available and/or proposed for management of construction and operation impacts of the West Alternate.

1.2 Environmental Impacts of Construction and Mitigation Measures

The following discussion concerns the Route 56 West Alternate, which has been selected as the Preferred Route. The mitigation measures described below include, but are not limited to, the methods available and/or proposed for management of construction impacts of the West Alternate.

1.2.1 Soils and Slopes

Soil disturbance would be minimal during West Alternate construction. Most soil disturbing construction activities would occur during drier summer months. Tree clearing is proposed to take place in April; pole sleeve excavation from May through August; pole framing and installation from July through September; and conductor stringing from August through October. Streams and wetlands would be avoided to the greatest extent possible. To minimize the potential for soil erosion, the Applicants have proposed the mitigation techniques as described in the EWP, Appendix B of the SDEIS. Soil erosion is a function of soil texture, vegetative cover and slope. Finer textured soils tend to be more erodible than more coarse textured soils. Soils that occur only on nearly level slopes may have soil textures that are highly erodible, but because the soils are nearly level, the erosion hazard is very low while the erodibility may be relatively high. In areas where steep slopes and erodible soils coincide, push braces would be used to provide additional support to the poles. The design of the transmission facilities would take these conditions into consideration, and the structures most appropriate for particular soil and slope conditions would be used.

Vegetation removal would occur within the 75-foot transmission line ROW on private property along Route 56 outside of the Forest Preserve on the West Alternate, or within the 32-foot transmission line ROW on Route 56 within the Forest Preserve. Temporary and permanent erosion control measures, as specified in the EWP, would be used for grading and construction activities. These control devices that would include stabilized construction entrances, use of geotextiles, log culverts, French drains, silt fences, mulch, seeding, rolled erosion control products, turbidity curtains, check dams, sediment basins and dewatering devices.

Following construction, to ensure the long-term stability of the ROW and adjacent properties, disturbed areas would be restored to as natural a state as practicable using conservation seed mixes comprised of native species and low growing native plants. To avoid the introduction of invasive species, hay bales would not be used. If deemed necessary, straw bales might be used, but only on a limited basis.

Approximately 25 percent of the total West Alternate route consists of areas where the mapped soil complexes have high erosion potential and are located on slopes ranging from 15 to 30 percent. In the areas where the slope is 30 percent or greater, approximately 4 percent of the total ROW crosses potentially highly erodible soils. In the areas where slope is greater than 15 percent, mitigation measures would be used during construction. Such mitigation measures would include rolled erosion control products and geotextile erosion control fabrics, among others listed above. Erosion control practices would be implemented that are tailored to the specific conditions of each area of concern.

1.2.2 Forest Cover

Forested uplands account for the greatest amount of land area that will be impacted by construction activities. The existing vegetation within these areas is primarily made up of second or third generation deciduous, coniferous, and mixed forest communities. Vegetation removal may directly impact these areas by converting successional forest to herbaceous and open shrub cover. In addition, the removal of existing canopy species would increase moisture loss and surface temperature within the ROW. These impacts would be greatest on the west side of Route 56 north of the Forest Preserve, which would be off-road, new construction where the landscape is unbroken forest and there is currently no existing ROW. Following construction activities it is expected that natural regeneration of vegetative species would occur; therefore, it is expected that the resulting plant community will be early successional low shrubs and young trees that may be selectively managed every five years.

Existing roads, improved trails, and private driveways would be used to gain access to the ROW on the west side of Route 56 north of the Forest Preserve. Where access to the ROW cannot be achieved via existing roads, a 12-20 foot wide work trail would be constructed of native subsoil materials. Work trails would also be constructed inside the ROW and serve as an access route between transmission line structures and used during construction and maintenance activities. The access road may be stabilized with wood chips as described in the EWP.

In addition to direct impacts from vegetation removal, there could be secondary effects on vegetation that is not removed during construction. Construction of the ROW through forested areas would create vegetation edges where none previously existed. This may expose the species remaining on the edge of the ROW to increased levels of sunlight and wind, which could increase moisture evaporation and wind throws. This could result in a change in species composition adjacent to the ROW, were species adapted for open, dry habitat with direct sunlight may begin to establish.

Potential impacts to forested wetlands are similar to impacts to forested upland areas and are mainly associated with the change from forest vegetation to that of scrub-shrub and emergent vegetation. Because the composition of wetland vegetation is heavily dependent upon hydrology, it is important to avoid rutting of wetland soils by construction equipment. Responsible construction techniques such as exploiting existing roads for access to wetland sites and the use of matting, as detailed in Section 4.4.2 of the EWP, would help to minimize rutting. Woody wetland vegetation that must be removed during construction would generally be left were it falls, unless it is feasible to remove it by use of a winch line without causing damage to the wetland.

Non-forested areas within the ROW consist of emergent and scrub-shrub wetlands, residential areas, recently logged lands, and existing maintained ROW. Impacts to non-forested wetlands and areas already disturbed by logging are expected to be short term and the vegetation should return to pre-construction conditions in one to two growing seasons. The impacts to maintained ROW would vary depending on the width and the type of vegetation adjacent to the existing ROW. In many of these areas the vegetation consists primarily of various grasses and weeds commonly used for roadside stabilization.

The width of vegetation removal along Route 56 would be wider than the current Route 56 roadway ROW. The tree clearing along the Route 56 ROW would be either 32 feet from the centerline adjacent to Forest Preserve lands or 37.5 feet from the centerline on private lands, increasing the overall width of the ROW. However, the ROW of the portion of the West Alternate north of the Forest Preserve would be between 100 and 400 feet off the roadway, thereby retaining the existing ROW width on that portion of Route 56. There are vegetation edges along the existing Route 56 maintained ROW; therefore, ROW vegetation removal for the West Alternate is not expected to contribute to a change in species composition. On the remainder of the West Alternate ROW, detectable changes in the forest cover would depend on the quality of the forest impacted. In the areas where the ROW has been maintained and managed, the tree stands may be less mature; therefore, the visual impact of tree removal would be minimal. According to the “Adirondack Atlas” (Jenkins 2004), the Project Area was part of agricultural lands and areas affected by forest fires prior to 1916. These areas were subsequently planted with pines, and natural re-growth occurred where planting did not occur. In the Forest Preserve where cutting is prohibited, the trees tend to be larger. There, the removal of large trees as part of the ROW preparation would be more conspicuous. Regardless, conversion of forested lands to herbaceous and open shrub cover as a result of vegetation removal along an existing, maintained ROW would not be as significant as clearing in unbroken forest.

For the West Alternate to have an open space impact, the change in the environment must be perceivable and at a level of impact that is readily apparent to the public. Commitment of the land to a wider utility corridor or to a new utility corridor does not change the open space characteristics of the area. Open space, or the image of open space, is a development pattern that preserves greenspace to an extent that the undeveloped landscape is the dominant portion of the setting. Open space can range from untouched forest to an agricultural setting that includes necessary agriculturally related buildings or facilities. The transition from developed lands to undeveloped properties is an important component of open space, as these areas show the changes in the environmental conditions. The development of a wider ROW that involves pushing the tree line back from the roadway does not change the transition from developed to undeveloped land. The new tree line edge would remain a definitive beginning of the undeveloped land and would not alter the overall context of the mixed forest tree species.

One means of determining impacts to Forest Preserve lands is to assess the number of trees to be cut. Three separate field investigations were conducted to determine the number of trees to be cut on the Route 56 Alternates. The complete field reports are included in Appendix E, “Tree Count Estimates.” Approximately 5,003 trees would be cut in the West Alternate ROW. Of those 5,003 trees, 3,077 trees are in the 75-foot ROW on privately owned land and 1,926 trees are in the 32-foot ROW outside of the NYSDOT ROW on Forest Preserve land.

Table 1-1: Trees to be Removed within Forest Preserve Lands Along NYS Route 56

Table 1-1: Trees to be Removed within Forest Preserve Lands Along NYS Route 56
Tree Species	Number Counted	Trees within DOT ROW	Trees outside DOT ROW
Abies balsamea (Balsam Fir)	401	68	333
Acer rubrum (Red Maple)	241	39	202
Acer saccharum (Sugar Maple)	173	16	157
Amelanchier sp. (Shadbush)	3	-	3
Betula alleghaniensis (Yellow birch)	9	-	9
Betula papyrifera (Paper Birch)	21	6	15
Betula populifolia (Gray Birch)	10	1	9
Fagus grandifolia (American Beech)	85	5	80
Larix laricina (Tamarack)	170	21	149
Malus sylvestris (Wild Apple)	1		1
Ostrya virginiana (Hop Hornbeam)	9	1	8
Picea mariana (Black Spruce)	7	2	5
Picea rubens (Red Spruce)	64	15	49
Pinus resinosa (Red Pine)	464	254	210
Pinus strobus (White Pine)	540	83	457
Pinus sylvestris (Scotch Pine)	96	96	-
Populus balsamifera (Balsam Poplar)	18	-	18
Populus grandidentata (Bigtooth Aspen)	67	18	49
Populus tremuloides (Quaking Aspen)	96	17	79
Prunus serotina (Black Cherry)	107	16	91
Thuja occidentalis (Eastern White Cedar)	2	-	2
Totals	2,584	658	1,926

The Project’s main purpose is to increase the reliability of the power delivery system to the Tri Lakes region. Power can only be delivered reliably when the line is clear of obstructions and hazard and danger trees. To ensure this level of reliability, it is absolutely necessary to remove off ROW hazard trees outside of the 32 foot ROW in the Forest Preserve and danger trees outside of the 75 foot ROW on private lands as soon as vegetation removal for the line and pole placement are complete. This would provide a dependable transmission line immediately after it is energized. From a reliability perspective, it is preferable to remove danger trees as well as hazard trees, but the removal of trees in the Forest Preserve is a controversial issue. Therefore the removal of trees in the Forest Preserve is more selective than in areas outside the Forest Preserve.

The northern 1.0 mile of the proposed route along Route 56 is located on private lands and would consist of a 75 foot wide ROW with danger tree rights obtained for an additional 50 to 60 feet on either side of the ROW. Where danger tree rights have been obtained on private lands, all trees that are of a height that could potentially contact the transmission line would be removed, leaving smaller trees, underbrush, and shrubs. On Forest Preserve lands, trees also must be removed; however a more selective process would be employed.

Between June 13 and 15, 2007 and on July 24 and 25, 2007, danger trees were counted along Route 56 on Forest Preserve lands. A conservative estimate of danger trees in the Forest Preserve for the entire length of the Route 56 Alternate routes was 1,005. Danger trees were identified based on height only, and species recorded.

The Agreement authorizes the removal of hazard trees outside of the transmission line ROW on Forest Preserve lands. The limited acreage available for construction of the line on lands to be removed from Forest Preserve severely constrained design; therefore, NYPA, National Grid and DEC developed a more flexible definition of a hazard tree that includes “environmentally unstable conditions” as well as the traditional criteria of “dead, diseased or leaning”.

1.2.3 Streams

The majority of the stream crossings occur on streams that are perennial. The West Alternate crosses only two streams. Potential impacts to surface waters are likely to be minimal and occur during the construction. Construction methods employed to minimize impacts to surface waters include silt fencing, dewatering structures, silt bags, and mats according to permit specifications and the plan drawings as described in the EWP.

Areas adjacent to the two streams crossed by West Alternate facilities would be allowed to revegetate with herbaceous and low growing shrubby vegetation. Also, low-growing vegetation and ground cover immediately adjacent to stream banks would be preserved. In addition, reseeding would occur within 14 days of the crossing. Native plantings may be used to help stabilize banks and any wetland disturbances to reduce degradation in environmentally sensitive areas.

Transmission facilities have been engineered as practicable to avoid pole placement in stream banks. To compensate for streamside vegetation removal, a complex of sun tolerant low growing grasses, forbs and shrubs would be encouraged in accordance with the National Grid long-term vegetation management plan.

Stream banks disturbed during construction would be restored to their original contour and adequately stabilized, to the greatest extent practicable. Procedures used to ensure stabilization would include segregation of excavated soils and restoration to original horizons, revegetation with conservation grasses and clover, installation of erosion control blankets on all exposed surfaces following final grading, use of transplanted wild plantings to provide additional bank stabilization, and use of rip-rap to stabilize stream banks that exhibit chronic erosion problems.

Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Rivers are regulated by both the NYSDEC and APA. The Raquette River is classified as a Scenic River in the vicinity of the West Alternate and is therefore subject to two sets of rules. The NYSDEC administers the law and rules for Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Rivers (6NYCRR 666) statewide and in Adirondack Park for lands held by New York State and State Agencies. The APA regulates private land use as it relates to Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Rivers. Each regulation has a river area that surrounds the river corridor. The NYSDEC river area is the land within 0.5 mile of the river bank while the APA river area is 0.25 mile of river bank.

The two sets of rules regulate similar activities and are both concerned in this case with the visual impact of the poles on the river and the river area. The Project has minimized the visual impact of the poles to the greatest extent practical. The poles are located within the Route 56 corridor and are heavily screened from the river and the river area by vegetation and topography. There will be no impact to the scenic nature of the river or the river areas as a result of this Project.

1.2.4 Wetlands

Wetland impacts on the West Alternate include only ROW vegetation removal. Wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the greatest extent practicable through careful line and work trail routing. Section 578.3(p) of the APA Act does not regulate clearing of wetlands less than three acres. Using the calculated wetland clearing impacts and the EWP mapping, it was determined that there would be no impacts equal to or greater than 3 acres to any one wetland.

1.2.5 Archaeological Resources

The West Alternate would not require any avoidance measures because there have been no archeological sites identified on this route. However, West Alternate construction techniques could involve ground disturbing activities that have the potential to impact undisturbed human remains. If ground-disturbing activities result in the exposure of unanticipated human remains, work would stop temporarily in the immediate vicinity of the discovery. National Grid would consult with New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) to determine the appropriate steps to evaluate the discovery and to develop acceptable mitigation measures. Construction activities would resume only following written confirmation from the OPRHP that the mitigation measures were satisfactorily implemented.

1.2.6 Architectural and Historical Resources

The Forest Preserve is an NHL property based on its political history. The West Alternate would use six acres of Forest Preserve lands for construction of the 46 kV transmission line. However, construction of the West Alternate would not impact the NHL status of the Forest Preserve. The only impact to the NHL (removal of Forest Preserve lands) would be mitigated by the addition of private lands into the Forest Preserve. The private parcel proposed to be added to the Forest Preserve is located along the south branch of the Grass River within the Town of Clare. Construction activities are not expected to have any effect on the NHL.

1.2.7 Land Use

Construction of the West Alternate would not significantly impact the land use of the area. Construction would not encourage a shift in existing land uses nor encourage new land uses in the area. The only changes in land use would occur in the Forest Preserve south of the Coleman parcel where the new 46 kV line would be constructed where no electric lines currently exist. In these situations, land would be cleared for the ROW and maintained as a dedicated utility corridor. Wherever possible, to reduce overall clearing and land use impacts, the ROW follows existing distribution corridors.

Land along the West Alternate is classified by APA as Rural Use and Resource Management. In Rural Use and Resource Management lands, major public utilities have a secondary compatibility rating. Lands along state highways adjacent to Rural Use and Resource Management areas are regulated by the APA as critical environmental areas (CEAs). In locations in the travel corridor’s CEAs where poles and local distribution lines already exist, the construction of the West Alternate transmission facilities, including higher poles and a wider ROW, would not significantly alter the character of the ROW. An offset from the NYSDOT ROW was considered, but was rejected because of the need to remove more land from the Forest Preserve and of the closer proximity of the transmission line ROW to the River Area.

The lands required for the transmission line ROW would be removed from the Forest Preserve by the proposed Constitutional Amendment. Part of the Constitutional Amendment requires that other lands be added to the Forest Preserve from private land stock. The land use classification of these new lands would be changed from private to state-owned Forest Preserve.

1.2.8 Visual

Visual impact is assessed in terms of the anticipated change in visual resources, including whether there would be a change to the visual character or quality of significant scenic and aesthetic resources. Construction activities that may result in visual impacts include ROW vegetation removal, access road construction, installation of poles, conductor stringing, traffic management and horizontal directional drilling and trenching. These potential impacts are discussed below.

The northern one mile of the West Alternate is offset from the Route 56 corridor several hundred feet. Therefore, the visual impacts associated with construction activities are confined to the two access locations along Route 56. Visual impacts during construction along the eastern edge of Route 56 would be associated with ROW vegetation removal, grubbing, installing poles, stringing conductors and placement of traffic management setups in accordance with NYSDOT specifications. In general, construction activities would be very similar to routine roadway and local distribution ROW maintenance that occurs along Route 56 from Pole 182 to the end of Coleman’s parcel. Several pieces of construction equipment would be present along the corridor for a few months. Depending on the time of the year, exposed soils could result in fugitive dust. This fugitive dust would be controlled by periodic wetting as described in the EWP.

1.2.9 Transportation

An analysis of traffic impacts associated with the construction of the West Alternate must encompass vegetation removal, material delivery, and installation activities because all of these activities would require travel on or work adjacent to Route 56. Construction of the West Alternate would result in minor traffic delays and additional vehicular traffic on the local roadway network. Construction would cause short-term lane closures along the Route 56 corridor. Most of the vegetation removal and pole setting activities would occur between April and September. This schedule would impact traffic during the summer months when seasonal visitation is highest. However, notification of any anticipated lane closures would be posted and provided to local media outlets for distribution prior to construction of that section of ROW. Detour routing of traffic would not be necessary because the work along Route 56 is not anticipated to require closure of the entire roadway, and lane closures are not anticipated to cause extensive delays for motorists. Lane closures would be clearly marked with cones or similar barriers, and flag personnel would direct and control traffic. In addition, construction workers would be required to park in one of the staging areas identified for the Project and would be transported to the construction sites as a group.

1.3 Environmental Impacts of Operation and Mitigation Measures

1.3.1 Soils and Slopes

Operation of the West Alternate is anticipated to have no effect on soils within the ROW or on adjacent properties. Once operational, the only activity that would occur on the ROW would be routine maintenance and emergency repairs to the 46 kV line and regular vegetation maintenance (mowing, brush cutting, etc.), neither of which are soil disturbing activities.

1.3.2 Forest Cover

National Grid generally requires that all danger and hazard trees be removed outside of a transmission line ROW to maintain reliability. In the case of the West Alternate ROW on Forest Preserve lands, this would require selective hazard tree identification and removal in a zone approximately 50 feet outside of the ROW. A selective clearing method would be used adjacent to Forest Preserve lands. All trees outside of the ROW that meet the definition of hazard tree under the Agreement would be considered for removal, subject to approval by DEC.

Reliability is the key to the success of this transmission line, and reliability cannot be achieved without the removal of hazard and danger trees along the length of the ROW. This includes both the portion of the ROW that is adjacent to Forest Preserve lands and the portion of ROW on private lands. Hazard tree removal has been included as part of the initial administrative action (the Agreement) that allows for construction of the line on Forest Preserve lands. The Agreement authorizes hazard tree removal in the Forest Preserve. Cutting hazard trees during construction would greatly reduce the chances of fallen trees creating outages. The cutting of danger and hazard trees would virtually eliminate the chances of fallen trees creating outages

The Agreement authorizes removal of hazard trees outside of the 32 foot transmission line ROW on lands that remain in the Forest Preserve. After ratification of the Constitutional Amendment, the mechanism for hazard tree maintenance on Forest Preserve lands would be a temporary revocable permit (TRP) from the NYSDEC. A TRP is required from the NYSDEC for use of state lands for certain purposes, including the use and maintenance of ROWs or easements on Forest Preserve lands.

1.3.3 Streams

The loss of vegetation that serves to shade surface waterbodies can lead to an increase in water temperatures and related adverse effects to local fisheries. An inspection and monitoring program is proposed on a 5-year schedule to locate vegetation growth and the presence of danger and hazard trees that have the potential to interfere with transmission line operation. Vegetation determined to be a threat would be removed. Stream warming is not expected to be an issue during the operation phase of the West Alternate, primarily because the amount of vegetation being removed would not cause great changes in the amount of light penetrating to the ground. The relatively narrow ROW width proposed (75 feet on private lands and 32 feet in the Forest Preserve) and maintenance of a scrub-shrub or herbaceous cover adjacent to streams and wetlands would provide adequate amounts of shade species to help sustain existing water temperatures.

1.3.4 Wetlands

The post-construction species composition within wetlands crossed by the ROW is expected to be characteristic of local scrub-shrub and emergent non-forested cover types. Impacts to these areas resulting from 5-year management schedule would be limited to the effects of maintaining low-growing vegetation within wetlands in the ROW. Inspection and monitoring would be conducted along the ROW to determine whether vegetation has reached heights considered to pose a threat to the normal operation of the transmission line. Woody vegetation, in or out of wetlands, that has grown to a height that could potentially compromise the transmission line would be considered for removal or trimming. However, selective clearing is unlikely to affect the vegetation composition of wetlands within the ROW.

The APA, NYSDOT, NYSDEC, and the Adirondack Nature Conservancy have worked together to inventory and control invasive vegetative species in the Park by developing management plans specific to certain locations. Invasive species control was conducted in 2006 in compliance with the Right of Way Vegetation Management Plan. National Grid would follow the guidelines outlined in the invasive species management plans during the operation phase of the West Alternate.

1.3.5 Cultural Resources

It is anticipated that operation impacts to archeological resources would be minimal. Operation and maintenance of West Alternate facilities would have no effect on archeological resources because no additional ground disturbing activities are anticipated.

1.3.6 Land Use

The West Alternate would have a negative effect on the northern most parcel of this route by limiting the recreational use of the property. However, operation of the West Alternate would not significantly impact land use in the area. Following the Route 56 corridor, the transmission line essentially maintains the current use and minimizes the introduction of utilities among non-utility land uses. Construction of the 46 kV transmission line adjacent to the existing NYSDOT ROW reduces the overall amount of land being committed to development. This expansion of the transportation corridor in Rural Use and Resource Management areas is an appropriate use of corridors to consolidate development. The six acres being removed from the Forest Preserve for the transmission line may be reclassified as Resource Management or Rural Use. Because six acres are less than either of the required minimum lot sizes, no building rights would be associated with this land. In Resource Management or Rural Use lands the construction of a major public utility has a secondary compatibility rating. As a secondary compatible use, it does not change the fundamental character of the area.

The 46 kV transmission line would require the removal of trees in the ROW. Currently in an area classified as Rural Use there is a local distribution line that ends at the Coleman parcel. This local distribution line is within the NYSDOT ROW and is not subject to intensive management. The 46 kV transmission line would, on the contrary, have a ROW that would be cleared of trees.

A major public utility has a secondary compatibility rating under the Adirondack Park Land Use Plan. Secondary compatible uses “are those which are generally compatible with such areas depending upon their particular location and impact upon nearby uses and conformity with overall intensity guidelines for such areas.” The West Alternate is generally compatible with existing land use, particularly the overbuild portion of the routes, which follows the APA’s guidance regarding the consolidation of utilities. The intensity of the tree removal activity has been moderated by building adjacent to the NYSDOT ROW. In the areas adjacent to Forest Preserve, the forest edge would be subject to a restricted level of clearing.

The Applicants would not provide formal access to Forest Preserve lands at any location along the West Alternate. Any use of the existing canoe carry trailhead access point is at the risk of the user and would remain that way once the West Alternate is operational.

1.3.7 Visual

The general character of the Project area, with gently rolling hills and medium to dense forest cover, prevents the opportunity for long, open vistas. As a result, routine operation and maintenance of the West Alternate would result in little visual impact. However, there would be certain activities that may result in localized visual impacts. These activities include: inspection, maintenance and repair, and vegetation management. Also, the structures and conductors would be viewed for the operational life of the West Alternate.

At a minimum, transmission lines and support structures are inspected by aerial and ground surveillance on an annual basis. The inspections would be conducted to locate damaged lines, structures, and conductors, and to report any conditions that may adversely affect transmission operations or the area surrounding the transmission facilities. During inspections, the condition of vegetation in the ROW and access roads would also be noted. Inspection observations would be used to plan routine maintenance and vegetation management. Maintenance and repair to poles and the line would occur as needed. Maintenance and repair work would be visually the same as routine maintenance and repair work on existing lines.

Vegetation would be periodically cleared to maintain adequate clearance from conductors and poles. Vegetation management would include controlling vegetation within the ROW and removing trees adjacent to the ROW that could fall onto the conductors and/or poles. Vegetation control would mainly be achieved by mowing with tractor-mounted brush mowers.

1.3.8 Traffic and Transportation

Operation and maintenance of the West Alternate would have little effect on area transportation systems. It would generate minimal traffic, introducing new vehicles in the area during routine maintenance activities as workers use the local road network to access the ROW. In the event of emergency maintenance activities that might occur during an outage event, additional repair and maintenance vehicles would be using the local road network. This would occur infrequently and have little effect on the local traffic.

1.4 Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts

In both construction and operation of the proposed 46 kV line, adverse impacts are unavoidable. During construction of the proposed facility, impacts such as construction noise, air emissions, traffic delays on Route 56, and temporary displacement of animals and birds, are unavoidable and adverse, but of short duration and/or contingent on mitigation. In the long-term, operation of the proposed line would result in impacts such as changes in land use for newly acquired ROW, some loss of forest habitat, and changes in visual quality which would last for the life of the Project.

The following table identifies unavoidable adverse impacts that would occur as the result of construction and operation of the West Alternate Route.

Table 1-2 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts

Table 1-2: Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Impact	Long or Short-Term	Mitigation
Erosion and Sedimentation	Short-term for duration of construction	Detailed plans have been developed to minimize erosion and sedimentation.
Displacement of species in edge habitat	S Short-term for duration of construction	Displaced individuals would most likely move to adjacent undisturbed areas during construction.
Periodic disturbance and displacement,of wildlife from ROW maintenance	In Intermittent long-term	Limit maintenance activities during breeding and nesting seasons. Limited use of herbicides in ROW.
Alteration of wetlands	Long-term	Minimize vegetation removal in wetlands. Protect areas around wetlands. No herbicide applications in wetlands
Clearing or alteration of habitat in ROW	Long-term	Maximize use of previously disturbed road or utility corridors.
Loss of canopy tree species in forested wetlands/creation of scrub shrub wetlands