NORTHEAST GATEWAY PIPELINE LATERAL - ZONING f RECEIVED
Duke Energy® MAR fl 7 2005
Transmission cow �� �IE&j_"1o2MEKIT
*Gas &
ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC
890 Winter Street, Suite 300, Waltham,MA 02451
Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM
March 15, 2005
Prepared For:
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs
Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Office
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114
Prepared By:
■■ TRC Environmental Corporation
Boott Mills South, Foot of John Street
Lowell, MA 01852
'I TRC
Customer-Focused Solutions
In Association With:
Battelle
397 Washington Street
Duxbury, MA 02332
rac
Customer-Focused Solutions
March 15, 2005
To: Environmental Review Distribution List
From: TRC Environmental Corporation(on behalf of Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC)
Subject: Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
MEPA Environmental Notification Form("ENF")
Dear Reviewer:
Enclosed please find one copy of the Environmental Notification Form ("ENF") for the Algonquin Gas
Transmission, LLC ("Algonquin") Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral ("Pipeline Lateral"), which was
filed with the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs("EOEA"),Massachusetts Environmental Policy
Act("MEPA")Office on March 15,2005.
Algonquin is proposing to construct and operate a new approximately 16.4-mile long, 24-inch diameter
natural gas pipeline lateral that will interconnect the proposed Northeast Gateway Energy Bridge L.L.C.
("Northeast Gateway") offshore deepwater port ("NEG Port") with Algonquin's existing offshore
("HubLine")natural gas pipeline system in Massachusetts Bay. Algonquin's proposed Pipeline Lateral to
the NEG Port will facilitate the delivery of regasified liquefied natural gas("LNG")from the NEG Port to
onshore markets in New England.
Algonquin and Northeast Gateway are filing coordinated ENFs under MEPA in advance of filing the
federal regulatory applications for the NEG Port and the Pipeline Lateral. Public notices for both the
Pipeline Lateral ENF and the NEG Port ENF will be published in the March 23, 2005 edition of the
Environmental Monitor. Additional information on the ENFs can be obtained from the MEPA office by
calling(617)-626-1020 or by visiting the MEPA website at hiM://www.state.ma.us/envir/mem.
Regards,
TRC Environmental Corporation
Richard C.Paquette,Jr.
Project Scientist
Boott Mills South, Foot of John Street • Lowell, Massachusetts 01852
Telephone 978-9705600 • Fax 978-453-1995
_-DukTr%al(.
C'Gas hansm�ssIon
ucamwHws nunswrssov�cc
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM
ATTACHMENT A-PIPELINE LATERAL PERMIT LIST
ATTACHMENT B-ENF DISTRIBUTION LIST
D ATTACHMENT C-AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
ATTACHMENT D-PROJECT NARRATIVE
Section Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 1-1
1.1 Project Description.................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.2 Permits, Approvals,and Regulatory Requirements................................................................ 1-1
1.2.1 Pre-Filing Coordination Plan............................................................................................ 1-5
1.3 NEPA/MEPA Coordination.................................................................................................... 1-5
1.4 Purpose and Need.................................................................................................................... 1-5
1.5 Public Consultations................................................................................................................ 1-6
2.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES......................................................................................................2-1
2.1 Pipeline Routing Constraints Analysis....................................................................................2-1
2.1.1 Offshore Surveys..............................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Alternative Routes Evaluated..................................................................................................2-3
3.0 PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION.....................................................................................................3-1
3.1 Preliminary Construction Procedures......................................................................................3-1
3.1.1 Construction Anchor Spread.............................................................................................3-1
3.1.2 Lay Barge..........................................................................................................................3-3
3.1.3 Line-up station..................................................................................................................3-3
a. Welding/X-ray or Ultrasonic Testing Stations..............................................................3-5
b. Tensioner....................................................................................................................... 3-5
C. Corrosion Coating Station.............................................................................................3-5
d. Foam in-fill Station........................................................................................................3-5
3.1.4 Pipeline Trenching Methods.............................................................................................3-5
a. Post-lay Plow.................................................................................................................3-6
b. Backfill Plow.................................................................................................................3-8
C. Post-lay Jetting..............................................................................................................3-8
3.1.5 Post-lay Protection.......................................................................................................... 3-10
3.1.6 Hibernia Fiber Optic Cable Crossing.............................................................................. 3-10
3.1.7 Hydrostatic Testing.........................................................................................................3-10
3.1.8 Pipeline Lateral Tie-in to HubLine.................................................................................3-11
a. Subsea Hot Tap of HubLine........................................................................................3-11
b. Subsea tie-in with Flanged Connection.......................................................................3-11
3.1.9 Pipeline Drying...............................................................................................................3-11
' 3.1.10 Pipeline Commissioning.................................................................................................3-11
3.1.11 Survey.............................................................................................................................3-12
3.2 Preliminary Construction Schedule.......................................................................................3-12
3.3 Ancillary Facilities................................................................................................................ 3-12
3.4 References............................................................................................................................. 3-13
4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT...................................................................................................4-1
r�
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page i
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
�. __Duke Energx.
C'Gas'hansmrsslon
ucpmNxws raanswssw�,uc
4.1 Seafloor Conditions.................................................................................................................4-1
4.1.1 Geophysical Program........................................................................................................4-1
4.1.2 Geotechnical Program.......................................................................................................4-3
4.2 Surface Water Resources.........................................................................................................4-3
4.3 Benthic Resources...................................................................................................................4-4
4.4 Finfish......................................................................................................................................4-5
4.5 Shellfish...................................................................................................................................4-5
4.6 Lobster.....................................................................................................................................4-6
4.7 Commercial and Recreational Fishing....................................................................................4-6
4.7.1 Commercial Fishing..........................................................................................................4-6
4.7.2 Recreational Fishing.........................................................................................................4-7
4.8 Wildlife and Listed Species.....................................................................................................4-7
4.9 Navigation...............................................................................................................................4-8
�i 4.10 Historical and Archaeological Resources................................................................................4-8
4.11 References...............................................................................................................................4-9
5.0 WATERWAYS/COASTAL ZONE/WETLANDS......................................................................5-1
5.1 Waterways License..................................................................................................................5-1
5.2 Ocean Sanctuaries................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.3 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program and Ocean Management.......................5-2
5.4 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act..................................................................................5-2
5.4.1 Ancillary Facilities............................................................................................................5-3
List of Tables
Table No. Page
Table 1-1: Informational Open Houses Held to Date................................................................................ 1-7
Table 2-1:Pipeline Lateral Phase 2 Field Survey Summary.....................................................................2-3
Table 2-2: Pipeline Siting and Routing Criteria........................................................................................2-5
Table 3-1:Proposed Modifications to Existing Aboveground Facilities................................................ 3-13
List of Figures
Figure No. Page
Figure1-1: Site Location Map.................................................................................................................. 1-2
Figure 1-2:Pipeline Lateral Location....................................................................................................... 1-3 Figure 2-1:Preliminary Pipeline Lateral Study Corridor..........................................................................2-2
Figure 2-2:Route Alternatives on NOAA Chart.......................................................................................24
Figure 2-3:Route Alternatives on USGS Backscatter Intensity Map.......................................................2-6
Figure 3-1:Typical Vessel Anchor Spread...............................................................................................3-2
Figure 3-2:Typical Offshore Pipeline Lay Barge Spread.........................................................................34
Figure 3-3:Typical Offshore Pipeline Plow Barge Spread.......................................................................3-7
Figure 34:Typical Offshore Pipeline Backfill Plow Barge Spread.........................................................3-9
Figure 3-5:Methuen Meter Station Location..........................................................................................3-14
Figure 3-6: Salem Meter Station Location..............................................................................................3-15
Figure 3-7: Weymouth Meter Station Location...................................................................................... 3-16
Figure 4-1:Field Survey Sampling Locations..........................................................................................4-2
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page ii
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
r
� �
w
2
W
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive ForOfficeeojEfEUse Only
nvironmental Affairs
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs ■MEPA Office
EDEA No.:
Environmental MEPA Analyst:
ENFNotification Form Phone: 617-626-
The information requested on this form must be completed to begin MEPA Review in accordance with
the provisions of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act, 301 CMR 11.00.
Project Name: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
Street: The 16.4-mile long Pipeline Lateral is located entirely offshore in the waters of Massachusetts
Bay. Approximately 12.5 miles of the Pipeline Lateral is in state waters of the Commonwealth and
approximately 3.9 miles of the Pipeline Lateral is in federal waters.
Municipality: Offshore waters of Marblehead, Watershed: Massachusetts Coastal and
Salem,Beverly and Manchester-by-the-Sea. Merrimack
Existing aboveground facilities located in
Methuen Salem and Weymouth.
Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinates: Latitude: Start=42 28.764
Start= 1160612.49, 15434807.57 Stop =42 23.792
Stop= 1208690.70, 15403653.98 Longitude: Start=70 46.755
Stop= 70 35.932
Estimated commencement date: Estimated completion date:
Summer 2006 Spring 2007
Approximate cost: approx. $180 million Status of project design: 50 %complete
Proponent: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC Attention: George A. McLachlan
Street: 890 Winter Street, Suite 300
Municipality: Waltham I State: MA Zip Code: 02451
Name of Contact Person From Whom Copies of this ENF May Be Obtained:
1�
Tanya Howard
Firm/Agency: TRC Environmental Cor oratio Street: Boott Mills South,Foot of John Street
Municipality: Lowell I State: MA Zip Code: 01852
Phone: 978-970-5600 Fax: 978453-1995 E-mail:
thoward@trcsolutions.com
r Does this project meet or exceed a mandatory EIR threshold (see 301 CMR 11.03)?
®Yes ❑No
Has this project been filed with MEPA before?
❑Yes (EDEA No. ) ®No
Has any project on this site been filed with MEPA before?
❑Yes (EOEA No. ) ®No
Is this an Expanded ENF (see 301 CMR 11.05(7)) requesting:
a Single EIR? (see 301 CMR 11.06(6)) ❑Yes ®No
a Special Review Procedure? (see 301CMR 11.09) ®Yes [:]No
a Waiver of mandatory EIR? (see 301 CMR 11.11) ❑Yes ®No
a Phase I Waiver? (see 301 CMR 11.11) ❑Yes ®No
Identify any financial assistance or land transfer from an agency of the Commonwealth, including
the agency name and the amount of funding or land area (in acres): Not Applicable
Revised 10/99 Comment period is limited. For information call 617-626-1020
Are you requesting coordinated review with any other federal, state, regional, or local agency?
®Yes (Specify: United States Coast Guard/Federal Energy Regulatory Commission)
❑No
List Local or Federal Permits and Approvals: See Table in Attachment A for a complete list of
applicable permits and approvals for the Pipeline Lateral.
Which ENF or EIR review threshold(s) does the project meet or exceed (see 301 CMR 11.03):
❑ Land ❑ Rare Species ® Wetlands, Waterways, & Tidelands
❑ Water ❑ Wastewater ❑ Transportation
® Energy ❑ Air ❑ Solid & Hazardous Waste
❑ ACEC ❑ Regulations ❑ Historical &Archaeological
Resources
Summary of Project Size Existing Change Total State Permits &
& Environmental Impacts Approvals
® Order of Conditions
Total site acreage 1.e ❑ Superseding Order of
,� (aboveground Conditions
facilitles) ® Chapter 91 License
New acres of land altered 0 ® 401 Water Quality
Acres of impervious area o 0 0 CertiMHDfication
Square feet of new bordering N/A PermEJt MDC Access
vegetated wetlands alteration ❑ Water Management
Square feet of new other Temp.impact Act Permit
to Land Under ❑ New Source Approval
wetland alteration the Ocean PP
❑ DEP or MWRA
Approx.:
121 acres Sewer Connection/
Acres of new non-water o Extension Permit
dependent use of tidelands or ® Other Permits
waterways (including Legislative
Approvals)— Specify:
Gross square footage 15,000 2,000 17,000 CZM Federal
Number of housing units N/A N/A N/A Consistency Certification
Maximum height (in feet) 20 0 20
TRANSPORTATION
Vehicle trips per daywA N/A N/A
Parking spaces N/A N/A N/A
Gallons/day (GPD) of water use N/A
GPD water withdrawal N/A
GPD wastewater generation/ N/A
treatment
Length of water/sewer mains N/A
(in miles)
2
CONSERVATION LAND: Will the project involve the conversion of public parkland or other Article 97 public natural
resources to any purpose not in accordance with Article 97?
❑Yes (Specify ) ®No
' Will it involve the release of any conservation restriction, preservation restriction, agricultural preservation
restriction, or watershed preservation restriction?
❑Yes (Specify ) ®No
1 RARE SPECIES: Does the project site include Estimated Habitat of Rare Species, Vernal Pools, Priority Sites of
Rare Species, or Exemplary Natural Communities?
®Yes(Specify Estimated Habitat—Existing Methuen Meter Station site only) ❑No
HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Does the project site include any structure, site or district listed
in the State Register of Historic Place or the inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth?
❑Yes (Specify, ) ®No
If yes, does the project involve any demolition or destruction of any listed or inventoried historic or archaeological
resources?
❑Yes(Specify ) ®No
AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN: Is the project in or adjacent to an Area of Critical
Environmental Concern?
❑Yes (Specify. ) ®No
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project description should include (a) a description of the project site,
(b) a description of both on-site and off-site alternatives and the impacts associated with each
alternative, and (c) potential on-site and off-site mitigation measures for each alternative (You may
attach one additional page, if necessary.)
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC ("Algonquin")is proposing to construct and operate a new approximately 16.4-mile
long, 24-inch diameter natural gas pipeline lateral that will connect the proposed Northeast Gateway Energy Bridge
L.L.C. ("Northeast Gateway") offshore deepwater port (the "NEG Port") with Algonquin's existing offshore
("HubLine")' natural gas pipeline system in Massachusetts Bay(see Figure 1-1 and 1-2 in Attachment D). Algonquin's
pipeline lateral to the NEG Port (the "Pipeline Lateral") will enable the delivery of regasified liquefied natural gas
("LNG") from the NEG Port to onshore markets in New England. Approximately 12.5 miles of the Pipeline Lateral is
proposed in waters of the Commonwealth and approximately 3.9 miles of the Pipeline Lateral is proposed in federal
waters.
Algonquin's proposed Pipeline Lateral begins at the existing HubLine Pipeline in waters approximately 3.0 miles to the
east of"Marblehead Neck"in Marblehead,Massachusetts. From this point(milepost ["MP"] 0.0),the Pipeline Lateral
extends to the northeast, crossing the outer reaches of the territorial waters of the Town of Marblehead, the City of
' Salem, the City of Beverly, and the Town of Manchester-by-the-Sea for approximately 6.3 miles. At MP 6.3, the
Pipeline Lateral heads to the east and southeast, exiting Manchester-by-the-Sea waters and entering waters regulated
by the Commonwealth. The Pipeline Lateral continues to the south/southeast for approximately 6.2 miles,where it exits
Commonwealth waters and enters federal waters(MP 12.5). The Pipeline Lateral then extends to the south for another
approximately 3.9 miles in federal waters,terminating at the NEG Port.
In addition to constructing the Pipeline Lateral,Algonquin will also need to make minor modifications to the metering
equipment and valves at its existing aboveground facilities in Salem,Weymouth and Methuen in order to accommodate
the new gas supplies from the NEG Port.
' The siting objectives of the NEG Port encompass several factors, including that it be located at least 10 miles
offshore of the Massachusetts shoreline. Given the NEG Port's offshore siting criteria,the HubLine is the preferred
1 HubLine is an existing 30-inch diameter interstate natural gas pipeline that was constructed by Algonquin in 200212003. HubLine starts at its
connection with the Maritimes&Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C. Phase 111 Pipeline in Salem Harbor and runs offshore to the south to the Algonquin'T
System Pipeline in Weymouth.
3
M
gas transmission facility to transport natural gas to the heart of the New England market. Bypassing HubLine and
interconnecting the NEG Port to an existing land based pipeline would entail considerable additional environmental,
landowner, and societal impacts that preclude further consideration of this option. Therefore, the beginning and
ending points of the Pipeline Lateral are fixed as the HubLine and the NEG Port. Section 2.0 in Attachment D
contains additional information on the route alternatives evaluated for the Pipeline Lateral.
The NEG Port proposed by Northeast Gateway is subject to review and approval by the Secretary of the United
1 States Department of Transportation ("USDOT"), who has delegated his responsibilities to USDOT's Maritime
Administration ("MARAD") and to the United States Coast Guard ("USCG")within the Department of Homeland
Security. The USCG is the lead federal agency for National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") review and is
responsible for matters related to review of security, navigation safety, engineering and facility inspections.
Northeast Gateway expects to file an application with the USCG for the NEG Port in late May 2005.
Algonquin will file an application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Pipeline Lateral with
1 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission("FERC")contemporaneously with Northeast Gateway's filing with the
USCG. The FERC is responsible for the review and approval of interstate natural gas pipelines under the Natural
Gas Act. The NEG Port and Pipeline Lateral will undergo a single NEPA review conducted by the USCG. The
FERC will participate as a cooperating agency in the NEPA review conducted by the USCG.
Algonquin and Northeast Gateway are requesting a Special Review Procedure ("SRP") from the Secretary of the
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs ("EOEA") in accordance with 301 CMR 11.09(4)(c) to establish a
coordinated environmental review process that will satisfy the requirements of both the Massachusetts
Environmental Policy Act ("MEPA") and the NEPA. By combining the META and NEPA processes, Algonquin
hopes to establish channels of communication between all reviewing agencies that will facilitate a more efficient,
thorough,and logical review process for all parties involved,especially the public at large.
Algonquin and Northeast Gateway are intentionally filing coordinated Environmental Notification Forms("ENFs")
under META in advance of Ming the regulatory applications for the NEG Port and the Pipeline Lateral,planned in
May 2005. This will allow for an early round of formal public comment at the state and local levels prior to
finalizing the federal applications and will provide the Secretary of EOEA with the opportunity for early MEPA
scoping and coordination with the NEPA process. It is Algonquin's goal to coordinate the MEPA and NEPA review
processes such that the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements ("EISs") prepared and issued by the
USCG incorporate concerns identified during the META scoping period and will serve as the Draft and Final
Environmental Impact Reports("EIRs")for the purposes of MEPA review. Both Projects,the Pipeline Lateral and
the NEG Port(which is the subject of a contemporaneous ENF),will be evaluated in the same EIS/EIR documents.
t
III
1 4
LAND SECTION —all proponents must fill out this section
I. Thresholds I Permits
A. Does the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to land (see 301 CMR 11.03(1)
Yes X No; if yes, specify each threshold:
The Pipeline Lateral is located in the offshore waters of Massachusetts Bay. As such, there will be no
land impacts from the construction and operation of the Pipeline Lateral. The modifications to the
existing aboveground facilities in Methuen, Salem and Weymouth are minor in nature and will occur
within the fence-line of the existing facilities. As such, no additional land impacts are anticipated from
this work.
If. Impacts and Permits
1 A. Describe, in acres,the current and proposed character of the project site,as follows:
Existing Change Total
Footprint of buildings/structures 0.34 0.05 0.39
Roadways, parking, and other paved areas 0 0
Other altered areas (describe)
Undeveloped areas
B. any part of the project site been in active agricultural use in the last three years?
Yes X No; if yes, how many acres of land in agricultural use(with agricultural soils)will be
,- converted to nonagricultural use?
'
C. Is any part of the project site currently or proposed to be in active forestry use?
Yes X No; if yes, please describe current and proposed forestry activities and indicate whether
any part of the site is the subject of a DEM-approved forest management plan:
D. Does any part of the project involve conversion of land held for natural resources purposes in
accordance with Article 97 of the Amendments to the Constitution of the Commonwealth to any
purpose not in accordance with Article 97?_Yes X No; if yes, describe:
E. Is any part of the project site currently subject to a conservation restriction, preservation
restriction, agricultural preservation restriction or watershed preservation restriction? _Yes X No;
I ' if yes, does the project involve the release or modification of such restriction? Yes _No; if
yes, describe:
F. Does the project require approval of a new urban redevelopment project or a fundamental change
in an existing urban redevelopment project under M.G.L.c.121A? _Yes X No; if yes,describe:
G. Does the project require approval of a new urban renewal plan or a major modification of an
existing urban renewal plan under M.G.L.c.121 B?Yes _No X ; if yes, describe:
H. Describe the project's stormwater impacts and, if applicable, measures that the project will take to
comply with the standards found in DEP's Stormwater Management Policy: Not Applicable
I. Is the project site currently being regulated under M.G.L.c.21 E or the Massachusetts
Contingency Plan? Yes _No X; if yes,what is the Release Tracking Number(RTN)?
J. If the project is site is within the Chicopee or Nashua watershed, is it within the Quabbin,
Ware,or
Wachusett subwatershed?—Yes X No; if yes, is the project site subject to regulation under the
Watershed Protection Act?_Yes X No
K. Describe the project's other impacts on land:
See response to I.A above
-5-
' III.. Consistency
A. Identify the current municipal comprehensive land use plan and the open space plan and describe
the consistency of the project and its impacts with that plan(s): Not Applicable—Municipal land use
and open space plans are not applicable to the federally-regulated Pipeline Lateral or the existing
aboveground facilities.
B. Identify the current Regional Policy Plan of the applicable Regional Planning Agency and describe
the consistency of the project and its impacts with that plan: Not Applicable—Regional Policy
Plans are not applicable to the federally-regulated Pipeline Lateral or the existing aboveground
facilities.
C. Will the project require any approvals under the local zoning by-law or ordinance(i.e.text or map
amendment, special permit,or variance)? Yes _No X; if yes, describe:
D.Will the project require local site plan or project impact review?
Yes X No; if yes,describe:
i
L
1
1
1
-6-
' RARE SPECIES SECTION
I. Thresholds/Permits
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to rare species or habitat(see 301
CMR 11.03(2))? Yes X No; if yes,specify, in quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to rare species or habitat? _Yes X No`
*The existing Methuen Meter Station is located in an area mapped as Estimated Habitat and is partially
located within the 100-foot buffer zone of a bordering vegetated wetland. The work within the existing
Methuen Meter Station may require a Notice of Intent fling under the Massachusetts Wetlands
Protection Act for activities within the 100-foot buffer zone. However, the final design of the
modifications to the existing Methuen Meter Station ha not been completed yet. Therefore,Algonquin
cannot confirm at this time whether a Notice of Intent and Order of Conditions will be required for the
proposed modifications to the existing meter station. All work will occur within the existing fence line of
the facility and will not affect rare species habitat or wetlands.
C. If you answered "No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Wetlands,Waterways, and
Tidelands Section. If you answered"Yes"to either question A or question B,fill out the remainder
of the Rare Species section below.
iII. Impacts and Permits
A. Does the project site fall within Priority or Estimated Habitat in the current Massachusetts Natural
Heritage Atlas (attach relevant page)? X Yes_No. If yes,
1. Which rare species are known to occur within the Priority or Estimated Habitat(contact:
Environmental Review, Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, Route 135,
Westborough, MA 01581,allowing 30 days for receipt of information):blue-spotted
salamander(Ambystoma laterale),wood turtle(Glyptemys insculpta)
2. Have you surveyed the site for rare species? Yes X No; if yes, please include the
results of your survey.
3. If your project is within Estimated Habitat, have you filed a Notice of Intent or received an
Order of Conditions for this project? _Yes X No; if yes, did you send a copy of the Notice
of Intent to the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, in accordance with the
Wetlands Protection Act regulations? —Yes X No
B. Will the project"take"an endangered, threatened,and/or species of special concern in
accordance with M.G.L. c.131 A(see also 321 CMR 10.04)? _Yes X No; if yes,describe:
C. Will the project alter"significant habitat"as designated by the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries
and Wildlife in accordance with M.G.L.c.131A(see also 321 CMR 10.30)? _Yes X No; if yes,
describe:
D. Describe the project's other impacts on rare species including indirect impacts(for example,
stormwater runoff into a wetland known to contain rare species or lighting impacts on rare moth
habitat):
The species listed by the state and federal Endangered Species Act that are known or have the
potential to be present in the vicinity of the Pipeline Lateral include six endangered whales(right,
humpback,fin,sei,sperm,and blue whales),and rive endangered sea turtles(loggerhead,Kemp's
ridley,leatherback,hawksbill,and green turtles).Turtles are rare visitors to the area,more typically
occurring in proximity to Cape Cod.
To address issues related to protected species and the Pipeline Lateral, Algonquin is preparing a
Baseline Assessment which includes a description of the proposed project and the project site, the
natural history of endangered species known to be in the project area, and an analysis of possible
impacts of the Pipeline Lateral on the endangered species. The Baseline Assessment will identify
areas of interaction between the Pipeline Lateral and threatened/endangered species and enable
-7-
' reviewing agencies to make an informed decision during the NEPA and MEPA review.
The existing Methuen Meter Station is located in an area mapped as Estimated Habitat. The minor
modifications proposed for the site will occur entirely within the fenceline of the meter station facility
and will not alter any rare species habitat.
I Consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service ("NMFS"), United States Fish and Wildlife
Service("USFWS")Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries("MDMF"),and Massachusetts Natural
Heritage and Endangered Species Program ("NHESP") was initiated in February 2005. Informal
consultations with NMFS, USFWS, MDMF and NHESP representatives will continue in order to
prepare the proper level of detail for the state or federally listed species. The Baseline Assessment will
be included in Algonquin's Environmental Reports filed with the FERC and the USCG. Refer to Section
4.8 of the enclosed narrative in Attachment D for more detailed information on endangered and
threatened species.
_g.
' WETLANDS. WATERWAYS, AND TIDELANDS SECTION
I. Thresholds f Permits
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to wetlands,waterways, and
tidelands(see 301 CMR 11.03(3))? X Yes No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
➢ 301 CMR 11.03(3)(a)(1)(b)-alteration often or more acres of any other wetlands
B. Does the project require any state permits(or a local Order of Conditions)related to wetlands,
waterways,or tidelands? X Yes _No; if yes, specify which permit:
The Project will seek the following state permittapprovals:
➢ Local Orders of Conditions.
➢ 401 Water Quality Certification.
➢ Chapter 91 Waterways License.
➢ Coastal Zone Management Office Federal Consistency Review.
➢ Compliance with Ocean Sanctuaries Act.
C. If you answered "No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Water Supply Section. If you
answered"Yes"to either question A or question B,fill out the remainder of the Wetlands, Waterways,
and Tidelands Section below.
II. Wetlands Impacts and Permits
A. Describe any wetland resource areas currently existing on the project site and indicate them on
the site plan:See Section 4.0-Affected Environment in Attachment D.
B. Estimate the extent and type of impact that the project will have on wetland resources, and
indicate whether the impacts are temporary or permanent:
Coastal Wetlands Area lin square feet)or Length(in linear feet)
Land Under the Ocean 12.5 miles of Pipeline Lateral in state waters(Temporary Impact)
Designated Port Areas N/A
Coastal Beaches N/A
Coastal Dunes N/A
Barrier Beaches N/A
Coastal Banks N/A
Rocky Intertidal Shores N/A
Salt Marshes N/A
Land Under Salt Ponds N/A
i ' Land Containing Shellfish N/A
Fish Runs N/A
Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage Weymouth Meter Station—approx.600 s.f.
Inland Wetlands
Bank N/A
Bordering Vegetated Wetlands N/A
Land under Water N/A
Isolated Land Subject to Flooding N/A
Bordering Land Subject to Flooding N/A
Riverfront Area Weymouth Meter Station-approx.600 s.f.
C. Is any part of the project
1. a limited project? X Yes _No
2. the construction or alteration of a dam? _Yes X No; if yes,describe:
-9-
i3. fill or structure in a velocity zone or regulatory floodway? X Yes _No
4. dredging or disposal of dredged material? _Yes X No; if yes, describe the volume of
dredged material and the proposed disposal site:
5. a discharge to Outstanding Resource Waters? —Yes X No
6. subject to a wetlands restriction order? _Yes X No; if yes, identify the area (in square
feet):
II, D. Does the project require a new or amended Order of Conditions under the Wetlands Protection
Act(M.G.L. c.131 A)? X Yes No; if yes, has a Notice of Intent been filed or a local Order of
Conditions issued? —Yes X No; if yes, list the date and DEP file number: . Was
the Order of Conditions appealed? Yes No. Will the project require a variance from the
Wetlands regulations?—Yes X No.
E. Will the project:
1. be subject to a local wetlands ordinance or bylaw? X Yes —No
2. alter any federally-protected wetlands not regulated under state or local law?
Yes X No; if yes,what is the area(in s.f.)?
F. Describe the project's other impacts on wetlands (including new shading of wetland areas or
removal of tree canopy from forested wetlands): See Section 4.0–Affected Environment in
Attachment D.
III. Waterways and Tidelands Impacts and Permits
A. Is any part of the project site waterways or tidelands(including filled former tidelands)that are
subject to the Waterways Act, M.G.L.c.91? X Yes No; if yes, is there a current Chapter 91
license or permit affecting the project site? _Yes X No; if yes, list the date and number:
B. Does the project require a new or modified license under M.G.L.c.91? X Yes _No; if
yes, how many acres of the project site subject to M.G.L.c.91 will be for non-water dependent
use?
Current 0 Change 0 Total 0
C. Is any part of the project
' 1. a roadway, bridge, or utility line to or on a barrier beach? _Yes X No; if yes,
describe:
2. dredging or disposal of dredged material? _Yes X No; if yes,volume of dredged
material
3. a solid fill, pile-supported,or bottom-anchored structure in flowed tidelands or other
waterways? _Yes X No; if yes,what is the base area?
4. within a Designated Port Area? —Yes X No
D. Describe the project's other impacts on waterways and tidelands:
The Commonwealth owns submerged tidelands within the territorial sea. Approximately 12.5 miles of
the 16.4-mile long proposed Pipeline Lateral will be located within Commonwealth waters; the
remaining 3.9 miles are located in federal waters. Activities such as construction of piers,pipelines and
utilities on or under the tidelands owned by the Commonwealth may only occur upon receiving a
waterways license pursuant to M.G.L c.91 and Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
("MDEP") regulations at 310 CMR 9. Algonquin expects to seek a waterways license from MDEP
during the summer 2005 and to work closely with the MDEP to assure that the Pipeline Lateral meets
MDEP's requirements within Massachusetts territorial waters. See Section 5.0 in Attachment D for
additional information on waterways and tidelands.
IV.
_ l0_
' Consistency:
A. Is the project located within the Coastal Zone? X Yes _No; if yes,describe the project's
consistency with policies of the Office of Coastal Zone Management:
The Pipeline Lateral is subject to Federal Consistency Review by the Massachusetts Coastal Zone
Management ("MCZM") Office under the provisions of 301 CMR 20.00. The Federal Consistency
Certification submitted by Algonquin will describe the Pipeline Lateral's consistency with the MCZM
Program Policies. Algonquin expects to submit this Certificate to the MCZM Office in May or June
2005. Refer to Section 5.0 in Attachment D for additional information on the Pipeline Lateral's
consistency with the MCZM Program Policies.
Algonquin has closely followed the work and recommendations of the Ocean Management Task Force
(March 2004). Algonquin is taking those recommendations into consideration in the design and
construction of the Pipeline Lateral.
B. Is the project located within an area subject to a Municipal Harbor Plan? _Yes X No; if yes,
identify the Municipal Harbor Plan and describe the project's consistency with that plan:
� - tl _
WATER SUPPLY SECTION
I. Thresholds/Permits
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to water supply(see 301 CMR
11.03(4))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to water supply? _Yes X No; if yes,
specify which permit:
C. If you answered "No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Wastewater Section. If you
answered"Yes"to either question A or question B,fill out the remainder of the Water Supply Section
below.
While the Pipeline Lateral does not exceed the review thresholds for water supply, the construction
phase of the Pipeline Lateral will require the temporary use of seawater prior to backfilling the pipeline
and for hydrostatic testing of the pipeline. It is anticipated that the hydrostatic testing will be conducted
in phases,and it is intended to assure the integrity of the pipeline prior to the introduction of natural gas
to the system. Test water will be discharged back into Massachusetts Bay in accordance with the
Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
("NPDES")permit for the Pipeline Lateral. Two separate fill and discharge events will be required,one
for backfill and one for hydrostatic testing. It is estimated that the total combined water demand for
filling the Pipeline Lateral prior to backfilling and for hydrostatic testing will be approximately 3 million
gallons. Refer to Section 3.0 in Attachment D for additional information on construction procedures.
11. Impacts and Permits
A. Describe, in gallons/day,the volume and source of water use for existing and proposed activities
at the project site:
Existing Change Total
Withdrawal from groundwater
Withdrawal from surface water
Interbasin transfer
Municipal or regional water supply
B. If the source is a municipal or regional supply, has the municipality or region indicated that there is
adequate capacity in the system to accommodate the project?_Yes No
C. If the project involves a new or expanded withdrawal from a groundwater or surface water source,
I,I 1. have you submitted a permit application? =Yes No; if yes, attach the application
2. have you conducted a pump test? Yes No; if yes, attach the pump test report
D. What is the currently permitted withdrawal at the proposed water supply source(in gallons/day)?
Will the project require an increase in that withdrawal? Yes No
E. Does the project site currently contain a water supply well, a drinking water treatment facility,
water main, or other water supply facility, or will the project involve construction of a new facility?
Yes No. If yes,describe existing and proposed water supply facilities at the project site:
Existing Change Total
Water supply well(s)(capacity, in gpd)
Drinking water treatment plant(capacity, in gpd)
Water mains(length, in miles)
' F. If the project involves any interbasin transfer of water,which basins are involved,what is the
direction of the transfer, and is the interbasin transfer existing or proposed?
G. Does the project involve
_t2_
r
' 1. new water service by a state agency to a municipality or water district? _Yes _No
2. a Watershed Protection Act variance? _Yes _No; if yes, how many acres of
alteration?
3. a non-bridged stream crossing 1,000 or less feet upstream of a public surface drinking
water supply for purpose of forest harvesting activities? Yes No
H. Describe the project's other impacts (including indirect impacts)on water resources, quality,
facilities and services:
III. Consistency— Describe the project's consistency with water conservation plans or other plans to
' enhance water resources, quality,facilities and services:
r
� r -
� r
i
i
1
r
1
1
� 1
' WASTEWATER SECTION
I. Thresholds/Permits
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to wastewater(see 301 CMR
11.03(5))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to wastewater? _Yes X No; if yes, specify
which permit:
' C. If you answered"No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Transportation --Traffic
Generation Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B,fill out the remainder
of the Wastewater Section below.
While the Pipeline Lateral does not exceed the review thresholds for wastewater,the construction phase
of the Pipeline Lateral will discharge seawater back into Massachusetts Bay as part of the backfilling
and hydrostatic testing process of the Pipeline Lateral. Water from these two events will be discharged
back into Massachusetts Bay in accordance with the NPDES permit for the Pipeline Lateral.
11. Impacts and Permits
A. Describe, in gallons/day,the volume and disposal of wastewater generation for existing and
proposed activities at the project site (calculate according to 310 CMR 15.00):
' Existing Change Total
Discharge to groundwater(Title 5)
Discharge to groundwater(non-Title 5)
Discharge to outstanding resource water
I Discharge to surface water
Municipal or regional wastewater facility
TOTAL
B. Is there sufficient capacity in the existing collection system to accommodate the project?
Yes _No; if no, describe where capacity will be found:
' C. Is there sufficient existing capacity at the proposed wastewater disposal facility?_Yes _No;
if no, describe how capacity will be increased:
D. Does the project site currently contain a wastewater treatment facility, sewer main, or other
wastewater disposal facility, or will the project involve construction of a new facility? _Yes
No. If yes, describe as follows:
1
Existing Change Total
Wastewater treatment plant(capacity, in gpd)
Sewer mains (length, in miles)
Title 5 systems(capacity, in gpd)
E. If the project involves any interbasin transfer of wastewater,which basins are involved,what is the
direction of the transfer, and is the interbasin transfer existing or proposed?
F. Does the project involve new sewer service by an Agency of the Commonwealth to a municipality
or sewer district? Yes No
G. Is there any current or proposed facility at the project site for the storage, treatment, processing,
combustion or disposal of sewage sludge, sludge ash, grit, screenings, or other sewage residual
materials? _Yes _No; if yes, what is the capacity(in tons per day):
' Existing Change Total
- ta-
' Storage
Treatment, processing
Combustion
Disposal
H. Describe the project's other impacts (including indirect impacts)on wastewater generation and
treatment facilities:
III. Consistency—Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with federal, state,
regional, and local plans and policies related to wastewater management:
A. If the project requires a sewer extension permit, is that extension included in a comprehensive
wastewater management plan? _Yes _No; if yes, indicate the EOEA number for the plan and
' describe the relationship of the project to the plan
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 - IS-
iTRANSPORTATION --TRAFFIC GENERATION SECTION
1. Thresholds/Permits
' A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to traffic generation (see 301
CMR 11.03(6))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
' B. Does the project require any state permits related to state-controlled roadways?
Yes X No; if yes, specify which permit:
C. If you answered "No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Roadways and Other
Transportation Facilities Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B,fill out
the remainder of the Traffic Generation Section below.
11. Traffic Impacts and Permits
A. Describe existing and proposed vehicular traffic generated by activities at the project site:
Existing Change Total
Number of parking spaces
' Number of vehicle trips per day
ITE Land Use Code(s):
' B. What is the estimated average daily traffic on roadways serving the site?
Roadway Existing Change Total
1.
2.
3.
C. Describe how the project will affect transit, pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities and
services:
III. Consistency--Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with municipal, regional,
state, and federal plans and policies related to traffic,transit, pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities
and services:
II ,
- 16-
ROADWAYS AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES SECTION
1. Thresholds
' A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to roadways or other
transportation facilities(see 301 CMR 11.03(6))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative
terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to roadways or other transportation
facilities? —Yes X No; if yes, specify which permit:
C. If you answered"No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Energy Section. If you
answered"Yes"to either question A or question B,fill out the remainder of the Roadways Section
below.
II. Transportation Facility Impacts
A. Describe existing and proposed transportation facilities at the project site:
Existing Change Total
Length (in linear feet)of new or widened roadway
' Width (in feet)of new or widened roadway
Other transportation facilities:
B. Will the project involve any
1. Alteration of bank or terrain (in linear feet)?
' 2. Cutting of living public shade trees (number)?
3. Elimination of stone wall (in linear feet)?
Ill. Consistency--Describe the project's consistency with other federal, state, regional, and local plans
and policies related to traffic,transit, pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities and services, including
consistency with the applicable regional transportation plan and the Transportation Improvements Plan(TIP),
the State Bicycle Plan, and the State Pedestrian Plan:
' - t7-
ENERGY SECTION
1. Thresholds/Permits
' A.Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to energy(see 301 CMR 11.03(7))?
X Yes No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
The Pipeline Lateral will exceed 301 CMR 11.03(7)(a)(3)in that it will involve the construction of a new
fuel pipeline more than 10 miles in length. The proposed pipeline in state waters is approximately 12.5
miles in length,with an additional 3.9 miles in federal waters.
B. Does the project require any state permits related to energy? _Yes X No; if yes, specify
which permit:
C. If you answered"No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Air Quality Section. If you
answered "Yes"to either question A or question B,fill out the remainder of the Energy Section below.
11. Impacts and Permits
' A. Describe existing and proposed energy generation and transmission facilities at the project site:
Existing Change Total
Capacity of electric generating facility(megawatts) N/A
' Length of fuel line(in miles) 12.5(state)
Length of transmission lines (in miles) N/A
Capacity of transmission lines (in kilovolts) N/A
' B. If the project involves construction or expansion of an electric generating facility,what are
1. the facilitys current and proposed fuel source(s)? N/A
2. the facilitys current and proposed cooling source(s)? N/A
C. If the project involves construction of an electrical transmission line,will it be located on a new,
unused, or abandoned right of way?_Yes X No; if yes, please describe:
D. Describe the project's other impacts on energy facilities and services:
' Please refer to the Project Description section of this ENF and Section 1.0 of Attachment D for a
description of the Pipeline Lateral's affects on energy facilities and services.
III. Consistency--Describe the project's consistency with state, municipal, regional, and federal plans
' and policies for enhancing energy facilities and services:
The Pipeline Lateral will provide increased reliability of supply to the New England market by offering
access from a significant new source of high-pressure gas into the heart of that market. In turn,that will
benefit new and existing electric generation facilities as well as residential and commercial customers.
Algonquin has closely followed the work and recommendations of the Ocean Management Task Force
' (March 2004)and was an active participant in the process. Algonquin is taking those recommendations
into consideration in the design and construction of the Pipeline Lateral.
- IS-
AIR QUALITY SECTION
I. Thresholds
' A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to air quality(see 301 CMR
11.03(8))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to air quality? _Yes X No; if yes,
specify which permit:
C. If you answered "No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Solid and Hazardous Waste
Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Air
Quality Section below.
' 11. Impacts and Permits
A. Does the project involve construction or modification of a major stationary source(see 310 CMR
7.00,Appendix A)?_Yes _No; if yes, describe existing and proposed emissions (in tons per
day)of:
' Existing Chance Total
Particulate matter
Carbon monoxide
Sulfur dioxide
Volatile organic compounds
' Oxides of nitrogen
Lead
Any hazardous air pollutant
Carbon dioxide
' B. Describe the project's other impacts on air resources and air quality, including noise impacts:
' 111. Consistency
A. Describe the project's consistency with the State Implementation Plan:
B. Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with other federal, state, regional,and
local plans and policies related to air resources and air quality:
f - 19-
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION
I. Thresholds f Permits
' A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to solid or hazardous waste(see
301 CMR 11.03(9))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to solid and hazardous waste? _Yes
' X No; if yes, specify which permit:
C. If you answered "No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Historical and Archaeological
' Resources Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder
of the Solid and Hazardous Waste Section below.
11. Impacts and Permits
A. Is there any current or proposed facility at the project site for the storage, treatment, processing,
combustion or disposal of solid waste? Yes No; if yes,what is the volume(in tons per day)
of the capacity:
Existing Change Total
Storage
Treatment, processing
Combustion
Disposal
B. Is there any current or proposed facility at the project site for the storage, recycling,treatment or
disposal of hazardous waste?_Yes _No; if yes,what is the volume(in tons or gallons per day)
' of the capacity:
Existing Change Total
' Storage
Recycling
Treatment
Disposal
' C. If the project will generate solid waste (for example, during demolition or construction),describe
alternatives considered for re-use, recycling,and disposal:
' D. If the project involves demolition, do any buildings to be demolished contain asbestos?
Yes —No
' E. Describe the project's other solid and hazardous waste impacts(including indirect impacts):
' Ill. Consistency--Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with the State Solid Waste
Master Plan:
-20-
' HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SECTION
1. Thresholds/ Impacts
' A. Is any part of the project site a historic structure, or a structure within a historic district, in either
case listed in the State Register of Historic Places or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological
Assets of the Commonwealth? _Yes X No; if yes,does the project involve the demolition of all
or any exterior part of such historic structure? _Yes _No; if yes, please describe:
' B. Is any part of the project site an archaeological site listed in the State Register of Historic Places
or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth? Yes —X—No; if
' yes,does the project involve the destruction of all or any part of such archaeological site? _Yes
No; if yes, please describe:
C. If you answered"No"to all parts of both questions A and B, proceed to the Attachments and
Certifications Sections. If you answered "Yes"to any part of either question A or question B,fill out
the remainder of the Historical and Archaeological Resources Section below.
' D. Have you consulted with the Massachusetts Historical Commission? X Yes _No; if yes,
attach correspondence See Attachment C—Agency Correspondence
E. Describe and assess the project's other impacts,direct and indirect,on listed or inventoried
historical and archaeological resources: See Section 4.10 in Attachment D.
It. Consistency--Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with federal, state,
regional, and local plans and policies related to preserving historical and archaeological resources:
The Massachusetts Board of Underwater Archaeological Resources ("MBUAR") has jurisdiction over
' underwater archaeological resources in Massachusetts jurisdictional waters. Algonquin is conducting an
underwater archaeological investigation utilizing a marine magnetometer, side scan sonar, sub-bottom
profiler, and fathometer, in conjunction with a program of vibratory coring to ensure that all project
' activities comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and MBUAR's role under
MGL c. 16,section 179. The marine archaeological field survey is presently underway. Completion of the
survey is anticipated for April 2005. Algonquin will continue to consult with the MBUAR on the results of
the field surveys.
-21 -
1
' ATTACHMENTS:
1. Plan, at an appropriate scale,of existing conditions of the project site and its immediate
context, showing all known structures, roadways and parking lots, rail rights-of-way,wetlands
and water bodies,wooded areas, farmland, steep slopes, public open spaces, and major
utilities. (see Attachment D)
2. Plan of proposed conditions upon completion of project(if construction of the project is
proposed to be phased,there should be a site plan showing conditions upon the completion
of each phase).(see Attachment D)
3. Original U.S.G.S. map or good quality color copy(8-'/2 x 11 inches or larger) indicating the
' project location and boundaries(see Figures 1-1, 1-2,3-5,3-6 and 3-7 in Attachment D)
4 List of all agencies and persons to whom the proponent circulated the ENF, in accordance
with 301 CMR 11.16(2). (see Attachment B)
5. Other:
t ➢ ATTACHMENT A-PIPELINE LATERAL PERMIT LIST
➢ ATTACHMENT B-ENF DISTRIBUTION LIST
➢ ATTACHMENT C-AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
➢ ATTACHMENT D-PROJECT NARRATIVE
' CERTIFICATIONS:
1. The Public Notice of Environmental Review has been/will be published in the following
newspapers in accordance with 301 CMR 11.15(1):
' ➢ The Marblehead Reporter
➢ The Salem Evening News
➢ The Beverly Citizen
➢ The Manchester Cricket
➢ Gloucester Daily Times
➢ The Patriot Ledger
➢ The Lawrence Eagle Tribune
➢ The Boston Globe
➢ The Boston Herald
' (Name) (Date)
2. This form has been circulated to Agencies and Persons in accordance with 301 CMR 11.16(2).
/D6te i re o sponsible Officer Date ignat a of person preparing
or Prop t i�p E (if different from above)
' George A.McLachlan Michael Tyrrell
Name(print or type) Name(print or type)
' Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC TRC Environmental Corporation
Firm/Agency Firm/Agency
890 Winter Street,Suite 300 Boott Mills South,Foot of John Street
Street Street
Waltham,MA 02451 Lowell,MA 01852
Municipality/State/Zip Municipality/State/Zip
617-560-1391 978-656-3637
Phone Phone
' -22-
1
' a
A
ea
1 �
N
1
1
ATTACHMENT A
PROJECT PERMIT LIST
i
� 1
� 1
II
1
II
1
� 1
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
� 1
1 ==Duke Energy
r`Gas Transmission
ucalanHcas mnwse yi;
:.wowrc::s'e.xssm mm�..,w.mai pp
.e
FEDERAL rEs,�Fo'�
-- _- ,,. PScmtfanousgltaaon.P_rocedn
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Certificate of Public Convenience and 2" Quarter 2005
Necessity to construct,install,own,
operate,and maintain a pipeline under
Section 7(c)of the Natural Gas Act
' 15 USC§717 c
Assessment of environmental impact
under the National Environmental
Policy Act(42 USC§§4321 et seq.,
18 CFR Part 380
U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Authorization for activities that will 2 Quarter 2005
occupy navigable waters under Section
10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899 33 USC§403
Authorization to discharge dredged or 2 Quarter 2005
fill materials into waters of the United
States under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act(33 USC§ 1344)
Advisory Council on Historic Comment on the project under Section Consultation ongoing
Preservation,Massachusetts Historical 106,National Historic Preservation
Commission Act(16 USC 470
U.S.Department of Commerce National Consultation under Section 7 of the Consultation ongoing
Oceanic and Atmospheric Endangered Species Act;the
Administration,National Marine Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Fisheries Conservation and Management Act;
and the Marine Mammal Protection
Act 16 USC§§ 1856 et seg.)
United States Department of the Interior, Consultation under Section 7 of the Consultation ongoing
' U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered Species Act;the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act;and the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
16 USC§§ 1531 et s
U.S.Environmental Protection Agency National Pollutant Discharge No EPA approval required- file notice of
(EPA) Elimination System(NPDES)permit intent and establish S WPPP prior to start of
for stormwater associated with construction
construction activities under Section
402 of the CWA(33 USC§ 1342 and
40 CFR§§ 122-125
Spill Prevention,Control and No EPA approval required- establish SPCC
Countermeasures Plan(33 USC§ Plan prior to start of construction immediately
1321 6)and 40 CFR§ 112prior to start of construction
Section 404 of the CWA(EPA review Consultation through the Army Corps of
of wetland permits issued by the U.S. Engineers process commencing in 2"a Quarter
A Army Corps of Engineers). 2005
Minerals Management Service Right-of-Way(ROW)Grant and Consultation ongoing
General Consultation
Stellwagen Bank National Marine Consultation and Review of Project Consultation ongoing
Sanctuary Consultation relative to Stellwagen Bank National
Marine Sanctuary regulations
STATE
Executive Office of Environmental Consistency Review with the MCZM I 2 Quarter 2005
Affairs,Coastal Zone Management Program Policies(15 CFR 923, 15
Office CFR 930,G.L.a21 A,§4A,310 CMR
20.00 and 21.00)
1
ENF-ATTACHMENT A 1
1
Duke EnergX.
SGas,gj sm�ssion
ucorvoinry casmnrvsurssimi,uc
-evoxcd�se.Ksw aaxwm.:w oziv
` QRA$ ELINELATERAL g" m�� �,
Executive Office of Environmental Compliance with MEPA Regulations 1"Quarter 2005
Affairs,Massachusetts Environmental (G.L.c.30§§61,through 62H,301
Policy Act Office CMR 11.00
Massachusetts Energy Facilities Siting Review and comment on FERC- EFSB participates as commenter in the FERC
Board regulated energy projects(G.L.c.164, proceedings
.� §§69H,691,980 CMR
Massachusetts Department of Water Quality Certification pursuant 3' Quarter 2005
Environmental Protection to Section 401 of the CWA(G.L.c.21,
314 CMR 4.00 and 9.00
Chapter 91 Waterways License(G.L. P Quarter 2005
c.91,310 CMR 9.00
Wetlands Protection Act Order of 1"Quarter 2006
Conditions(G.L.c.131,§40,310
CMR 10.00)(will be sought from
local Conservation Commissions
Massachusetts Division of Marine Marine fisheries consultations Consultation ongoing
Fisheries
Massachusetts Department of Consultation under the Ocean No formal application required;DCR
Conservation and Recreation Sanctuaries Act-G.L.c.132A,§§ 12A participates as part of the MEPA process and
—18,302 CMR 5 the process to obtain a Chapter 91 waterways
license.
Massachusetts Board of Underwater Review and comment on undertakings Consultation ongoing
Archeological Resources potentially affecting underwater
cultural resources(Section 106,
National Historic Preservation Act)
Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and State-listed threatened and endangered
Wildlife,Natural Heritage and species consultations(G.L.c.l3al,§ [Consultation ongoing
Endangered Species Program 5B,321 CMR 10.00
LOCAL
Local Conservation Commissions Orders of Conditions for wetland1'r Quarter 2006
resource area impacts,issued through
the local conservation commissions.
1
' ENF-ATTACHMENT A 2
ATTACHMENT B
ENF DISTRIBUTION LIST
Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
Attachment B-ENF Distribution List
MASSACHUSETTS STATE AGENCIES
Attorney General's Office Mr.James Milkey 200 Portland Street,311 Floor
Environmental Division Chief,Environmental Division Boston,MA 02114
Attorney General's Office Mr.Joseph Rogers One Ashburton Place
Utilities Division Chief,Utilities Division Boston,MA 02108
Board of Underwater Archeological Mr.Victor Mastone 251 Causeway Street,Suite 800
Resources Director Boston MA 02114-2199
State House
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney Office of the Governor
Office of the Governor Room 360
Boston,MA 02133
State House
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey Office of the Governor
Office of the Governor Room 360
Boston,MA 02133
Mr.Michael Gildesgame 251 Causeway Street,Suite 600
Department of Conservation and Recreation Ocean Sanctuaries Coordinator Boston,MA 02114
Department of Conservation and Recreation Mr.Stephen R.Pritchard 251 Causeway Street,Suite 600
Acting Commissioner Boston,MA 02114
�. Department of Telecommunications and Diedre Matthews One South Station,3`"Floor
Energy Executive Director Boston,MA 02110
Energy Facilities Siting Board
Department of Telecommunications and MEPA Coordinator One South Station,3'Floor
Energy Boston,MA 02110
Commissioner's Office
Department of Environmental Protection Robert W.Golledge,Jr. One Winter Street
Boston Office Commissioner 2nd Floor
Boston,MA 02108
Mr.Lealdon Langley
Director
Department of Environmental Protection One Winter Street
of Bureau of Wetlands
Boston Office
and WaterwaysBoston,MA 02108
Department of Environmental Protection Mr.Phillip Weinberg One Winter Street
Boston Office Boston,MA 02108
Department of Environmental Protection MEPA Coordinator One Winter Street
Northeast Regional Office Boston,MA 02108
Bureau of Wetlands and Waterways
' Department of Environmental Protection Yvonne Unger One Winter Street
Boston,MA 02108
Department of Public Health Director of Environmental Health 250 Washington Street
Boston,MA 02115
Department of Energy Resources Mr.David O'Connor 100 Cambridge Street,Suite 1020
Director Boston,MA 02114
Department of Energy Resources Joanne McBrien 100 Cambridge Street,Suite 1020Boston,MA 02114
Ms.StephanCunningham
Stephanie CAmsquam River Station
Division of Marine Fisheries Aquatic Biologist 30 Emerson Avenue
Gloucester,MA 01930
Division of Marine Fisheries Mr.Paul Diodati 251 Causeway Street,Suite 400
Director Boston,MA 02114-2152
Division of Marine Fisheries Mr.Vincent Malkoski 50 A Portside Drive
A uatic Biologist Pocasset,MA 02559
Energy Facilities Siting Board MEPA Coordinator One South Station
Boston,MA 02110
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Mr.James Stergios 100 Cambridge Street
Policy Director Undersecretary for Policy 9th Floor,Suite 900
- do Nancy Gabriel-Sackie Boston,MA 02114
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC I
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
Attachment B-ENF Distribution List
A NA DitZ SS
Executive Office of Transportation Environmental Reviewer 10 Park Plaza,Room 3510
Boston,MA 02116-3969
Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission MEPA Coordinator 10 Park Plaza,Suite 3510
Boston,MA 02116
Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority MEPA Coordinator 10 Park Plaza,61h Floor
Boston,MA 02216-3966
MEPA Office Mr.James Hunt 100 Cambridge Street
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Director Suite 900
Boston,MA 02114
MEPA Office 100 Cambridge Street
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Mr.Rick Bourre Suite 900
Boston MA 02114
Public/Private Development Unit
Massachusetts Highway Department MEPA Coordinator 10 Park Plaza
Boston,MA 02116
Massachusetts Highway Department District MEPA Coordinator 519 Appleton Street
#4 Arlington,MA 02174
The Massachusetts Archives Building
Massachusetts Historical Commission MEPA Coordinator 220 Morrissey Boulevard
�. Boston,MA 02125
Ed Bell The Massachusetts Archives Building
Massachusetts Historical Commission Senior Archaeologist 220 Morrissey Boulevard
Boston,MA 02125
Mr.Bradley Wellock I Harborside Drive
Massachusetts Port Authority Manager,Contracts and Suite 200-5
Regulatory Affairs East Boston MA 02128
100 First Avenue
Massachusetts Water Resource Authority MEPA Coordinator Charlestown Navy Yard
Boston,MA 02129
Merrimack Valley Planning Commission MEPA Coordinator 160 Main Street
Haverhill,MA 01830-5000
60 Temple Place
Metropolitan Area Planning Council MEPA Coordinator 6th Floor
Boston,MA 02111
Massachusetts Department of Fisheries&
Natural Heritage&Endangered Species MEPA Coordinator Wildlife
Program Route 135
Westborough,MA 01581
Office of Coastal Zone ManagementAlex Strysky 251 Causeway Street,Suite 800
j
Proect Review Coordinator Boston,MA 02114
Ms.Kathryn Glenn CZM-North Shore Regional Office
Office of Coastal Zone Management #2 State Fish Pier
Acting Regional Coordinator Gloucester,MA 01930-3016
Office of Coastal Zone Management Ms.Susan Snow-Cotter 251 Causeway Street,Suite 800
Acting Director Boston,MA 02114-2136
Office of Coastal Zone Management Ms.Derrin Babb-Brott 251 Causeway Street,Suite 800
Assistant Director Boston,MA 02114-2136
State Representative's Office
Mr,
Anthony J.Verga State House
State Representative Room 134
Boston,MA 02133
Mr.Douglas W.Petersen State House
State Representative's Office Room 544
State Representative Boston,MA 02133
Mr.Bradford Hill State House
State Representative's Office State Representative Room 550
Boston,MA 02133
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC 2
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
E
FIR,
Attachment B ENF Distribution List
IR,6
Mr.Bruce E.Tarr State House
Slate Senator's Office State Senator Room 313-A
Boston,MA 02133
Mr.Frederick E.Berry State House
State Senator's Office State Senator Room 333
Boston MA 02133
Mr.Thomas M.McGee State House
State Senator's Office State Senator Room 413E
Boston,MA 02133
FEDERAL AGENCIES
Mr.Ted Lento New England Division
Army Corps of Engineers
Permit Project Manager 696 Virginia RoadConcord,MA 01742-2752
Ms.Christine Godfrey New England Division
Army Corps of Engineers Chief,Regulatory Branch 696 Virginia Road
Concord,MA 01742-2752
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency Mr.Phil Colarusso One Congress Street
Suite 1100
Boston,MA 02114-2024
EPA-NEPA Unit
Environmental Protection Agency Ms.Elizabeth Higgins One Congress Street
Suite 1100
Boston,MA 02114-2023
EPA—NEPA Unit
Environmental Protection Agency Mr.Timothy Timmerman One Congress Street
Suite
Boston,MA 0211 02114-2023
USEPA Region 1
Environmental Protection Agency Mr.Timothy Williamson One Congress Street
Suite
Boston,MA 02I 0211 14-2023
NOAA Mr.Peter Colosi Northeast Regional Office
National Marine Fisheries Service Assistant Regional Administrator One Blackburn Drive
Gloucester,MA 01930
NOAA Ms.Mary Colligan Northeast Regional Office
National Marine Fisheries Service Assistant Regional Administrator One Blackburn Drive
Gloucester,MA 01930
NOAA Northeast Regional Office
National Marine Fisheries Service Mr.Chris Boelke One Blackburn Drive
Gloucester,MA 01930
NOAA Northeast Regional Office
National Marine Fisheries Service Mr.Jack Terrill One Blackburn Drive
Gloucester,MA 01930
New England Fisheries Management Council Mr.Paul Howard 50 Water Street,Mill 2
Executive Director Newburyport,MA 01950
Office of Congressman John Tierney
Office of Congressman John Tierney District
Gary Barrett District Office
District Director 17 Peabody Square
Peabody,MA 01960
Office of Congressman John Tierney
Office of Congressman John Tierney Mr.George McCabe District Office
District Aide 17 Peabody Square
Peabody,MA 01960
United States Coast Guard Mr.Mark A.Prescott 2100 Second Street,SW
Chief,Deepwater Ports I Washington,D.C.20593
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC 3
INortheast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
Attachment B-ENF Distribution List
United States Coast Guard Ms.Patience Whitten 2100 Second Street,SW
Washington,D.C.20593
United States Coast Guard Sector
James McDonald 455 Commercial Street
Sector Commander Boston,MA 02109
Lt.Commander Claudia Gelzer 455 Commercial Street
United States Coast Guard Chief,Port Operations&Maritime Boston,MA 02109
Security
Mr.Michael Bartlett New England Field Office
United States Fish and Wildlife Service Supervisor 70 Commercial Street,Suite 300
Concord,NH 03301-5087
New England Field Office
United States Fish and Wildlife Service Mr.William Neidermyer 70 Commercial Street,Suite 300
Concord,NH 03301-5087
Francis Crowley,IV Office of United States Senator John F.Kerry
United States Senator's Office Policy Advisor One Bowdin Square, 10th Floor
Boston,MA 02114
Office of United States Senator John F.Keny
United States Senator's Office Mr.Graham Shalgian 2400 JFK Building
Boston,MA 02203 -
�, Stellwagen Bank. Mr.Craig MacDonald 175 Edward Foster Road
National Marine Sanctuary Superintendent Scituate,MA 02066
Stellwagen Bank Mr.David Wiley 175 Edward Foster Road
National Marine Sanctuary Research Coordinator Scituate,MA 02066
MUNICIPAL AGENCIES
City of Beverly Honorable William Scanlon Beverly City Hall
Mayots Office Mayor Beverly,
Cabo[Street
verl ,MA 01915
City of Beverly Mr.Paul Guanci Beverly City Hall
City Council President,City Council ve Cabot Street
Beverl ,MA 01915
City of Beverly Ms.Leah Zambemardi Beverly City Hall
Planning Department Assistant Planning Director Cabot Street
Beveverl ,MA 01915
City of Beverly Ms.Amy Maxner Beverly City Hall
Conservation Commission Environmental Planner 191 Cabot Street
Beverly,MA 01915
City of Beverly Mr.William Burke 90 Colon Street
Board of Health Director of Health Beverly,MA 01915-3604
City of Gloucester Honorable John Bell Gloucester City Hall
Mayor's Office Mayor 9 Dale Avenue
Gloucester,MA 01930
Manchester-by-the-Sea Town Hall
Town ofManchester-by-the-Sea Mr.Daniel W.Senecal 1st Floor,Room 1
Board of Selectmen Chairman 10 Central Street
Manchester-by-the-Sea,MA 01944
Town of Manchester-by-the-Sea Ms.Rosemary Cashman Manchester-by-the-Sea Town Hall
Town Administrator Town Administrator 10 Central Street
Manchester-b -the-Sea,MA 01944
�
Town of Manand the-Sea Ms.Carroll Cabot Planninging Board Chairr 10 Central Street Manchester-by-the-Sea Town Hall
Manchester-by-the-Sea,MA 01944
Town of Manchester-by-the-Sea Conservation Ms.Olga Hayes Manchester-by-the-Sea Town Hall
Commission Chair 10 Central Street
Manchester-by-the-Sea,MA 01944
Town of Manchester-by-the-Sea Manchester-by-the-Sea Town Hall
Board of Health Ms.Lynn Warnock 10 Central Street
Chair Manchester-by-the-Sea,MA 01944
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC 4
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
Attachment B-ENF Distribution List
Town of Marblehead Ms.Judith Jacobi Marblehead Town Hall
Board of Selectmen Chair 188 Washington Street
Marblehead,MA 01945
Town of Marblehead Mr.Anthony Sasso Marblehead Town Hall
Town Administrator Town Administrator 188 Washington Street
Marblehead MA 01945
Town of Marblehead Ms.Rebecca Curran Marblehead Town Hall
Planning Board Tow188 Washington Streetn Planner Marblehead,MA 01945
Town of Marblehead Mr.Douglas Saal 7 Widger Road
Conservation Commission Marblehead MA 01945
Town of Marblehead Mr.Wayne Attridge 7 Widger Road
Board of Health Marblehead,MA 01945
Searles Building
City of Methuen Honorable Sharon Pollard 41 Pleasant Street
Mayor's Office Mayor Room 305
Methuen MA 01844
Searles Building
City of Methuen Mr.Michael Hennessey 41 Pleasant Street
City Council City Council President Room 310
Methuen,MA 01844
City of Methuen Mr.Curt Bellavance Searles Building
Planning Board Director 41 Pleasant Street
Methuen,MA 01844
City of Methuen Mr.Joseph Giarusso Quinn Building
Conservation Commission Conservation Officer 90 Hampshire Street
Methuen,MA 01844
City of Methuen Mr.Lou-Ann C.Clement Quinn Building
Health Department Director 90 Hampshire Street
Methuen MA 01844
City of Salem Honorable Stanley Usovicz Salem City Hall
Mayor's OfficeMayor 93 Washington Street
Salem MA 01970
City of Salem Mr.Michael Bencal Salem City Hall
City Council City Council President 93 Washington Street
Salem,MA 01970
City Hall Annex
City of Salem 120 Washington Street
Planning Department Ms.Valerie Gingrich 3rd Floor -
'., Salem,MA 01970
City Hall Annex
City of Salem Mr.Frank Paormina 120 Washington Street
Conservation Commission 3rd Floor
Salem,MA 01970
City Hall Annex
City of Salem Ms.Joanne Scott 120 Washington Street
Board of Health Health Agent 4th Floor
Salem,MA 01970
Town of Weymouth Weymouth Town Hall
Mayor's Office Mr.David Madden 75 Middle Street
Mayor Weymouth,MA 02189
Town of Weymouth Mr.Thomas Lacey Weymouth Town Hall
Town Council President 75 Middle Street
Weymouth,MA 02189
Town of Weymouth Mr.James Clarke Weymouth Town Hall
Planning Board Planning Director 75 Middle Street
Weymouth,MA 02189
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC 5
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
1 Attachment B ENF Distribution List
f
Town of Weymouth Weymouth Town Hall
Conservation Commission Ms.Mary Ellen Schloss 75 Middle Street
Conservation Agent Weymouth,MA 02189
Town of Weymouth Mr.Richard Marion Weymouth Town Hall
Board of Health Director 75 Middle Street
We oath,MA 02189
NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
222 Berkeley Street
Associated Industries of Massachusetts Ms.Angela O'Connor PO Box 763
Boston MA 02117
Pier I
Boston Pilots Mr.Gregg Farmer S.Bremen Street
East Boston,MA 02128
Ms.Carol Lee Rawn Massachusetts Advocacy Center
Conservation Law Foundation Staff Attorney 62 Summer Street
Boston,MA 02110-1016
Ms.Pricilla Brooks Massachusetts Advocacy Center
Conservation Law Foundation Economist/Conservation Program 62 Summer Street
Director Boston,MA 02110-1016
The Gloucester Fishermen's Wives Ms.Angela Sanfilippo 11-15 Parker Street
Association President Gloucester,MA 01930
Massachusetts Lobstermen's Association Mr.William Adler, 8 Otis Place
President Scituate,MA 02066-1323
Tavern on the Harbor
Northeast Seafood Coalition Jackie O'Dell 30 Western Avenue,Suite 213
Gloucester MA 01930
i
IAlgonquin Gas Transmission,LLC 6
I ATTACHMENT C
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
i
1
1
i
i
I
1
i
1
1
1
1
Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
I VP
� 3 4 gS' S��h `7= .+�
A� .� t yt9
4: wr ti un M::1 rn vwy'xttl �4..Yi� rJ 2
ccv. '',
S ul ti m n roe Y e �' St;
r ,
w � (^ � O ;: t ✓+� a 1 +�? T'C N•F`+p tC17 D f,�. N � tom!' x ,pn �-y�,•,�� �nrgry.,.Y � �- i � RrMo
fff333 e �i
1 a! Q Oi
�kx�
Er
..yy��.=�n Iry `�y � ��Lts 'n ��Y � ���# � n �L�D�1�"Y N+4t f �, �r�-�:5.'r °� �:I •g_'E
f J i.'7~
yi'ro
"t s� Y4 i
i'lnC� 5 E 4 vd"4 If �� � h ���j, C7• a I.g �I {<D f ''� � i a � +�F' 1 saSY4 e }'
�sa� rlm r x ,f. d Int- Vs S *r�}'tl '��c nt i c ttiv
feeltY ! `i= ti i f `{T i( e a € f , fir e z
$�Cd
Abj. 1,
Will
�. tr�jAj�
W S"yM1 et "' L� ' G .r '$ 'R r v ' PA'dp �
.,Q a r 3D W n < r lr & 3
iili ! �r
d r
�w .�TM,1+ ✓` k 1 i .R• w �I{ iu 1i � ' "' S f Y k, 1 al �` i u,,. �F
a"
co �•�1•�t' r fx'�Q�p'" �3' 4,T'
W
i'
N) �S
f
Q
4
5Y'�4t�'.w to i
lit TI,
to
lorf
y z-
Y
-coMn2o�uu�
,25-1-Cau wwy fleetIae e 900
r ,c oAn, .4&mao400A 0204-21'19
BOARD OF
UNDERVATER November 26,2004 Tet.(sir)626-1000
ARCHAEOLOGICAL Fax(617)626-1181
RESOURGES http:/Av .magnetstate.ma.us/erMr
Deborah C.Cox,President
Public Archaeology Laboratory
210 Lonsdale Avenue
Pawtucket,RI 02860
RE: Technical Memorandum—Excelerate Northeast Gateway Project,Massachusetts Bay and
Northern Atlantic Ocean—Marine Archaeological Sensitivity Assessment
li
D-at Ms. Cox:
The staff of the 1vIa:,sa::husetts Board of Urdorwater Archaeological Resourcas leas . .
reviewed the above refire};tad Technical memomedrum 1rep rcd by PWAW Amhc o)it;;y
Laboratory :',PAL).
In consideration of thr. rbsence of any charted inu admed land formations (i.e.
1 tte proposed project area and ibe fact that much of the northeast region's pre-inundatiou iand
stnface was disturbed,destroyed or extensively buried as a result of the marine transgression,the
Board concurs with PAL'S characterization of the potential for encountering contextually intact
pre-historic archaeological deposits in the proposed project area as"low".
Concerning the potential of encountering historic or post-contact archaeological
n:sources in the proposed project area, the Board also concurs with PAL'S sensitivity
characterization. The large number of reported shipwrecks or ship wrecking incidents in the
proposed project area, the ambiguity of wreck locations in the Historical record, and the
proximity of the proposed project area to significant modem and historic shipping lanes,supports
tl:i0 appraisal of high sensitivity for possible shipwreck occurrence.
The Board agrees with PAL's recommendation of a marine archaeological
reconnaissance survey for the Excelerate Northeast Gateway Project area to locate targets
potentially associated with National Register-eligible archaeological sites and is satisfied with
the parameters of the survey as defined in the memorandum. Although typically requiring a
survey track line interval of no more than 50 feet (15.24 meters), the Board recognizes the
technological limitations of surveying in water depths greater than I00 feet, specifically the
ability to-control-and accurately record the location of instrument sensors. For this reason, the
'Board concurs in this case with the proposed survey track line interval of 100 feet(30.48 meters)
for portions of the proposed project area where sub surface impact to the seafloor substrates are
anticipated (200-foot wide centerline corridor for proposed pipeline and approximate 7 square
mile buoy area). In portions of the proposed project area where the anchoring of construction
r,+WmMeceasmaxwPoacma We
vessels could potentially impact archaeological resources extending above the sealloor (area
comprising 3000 feet from each side of centerline corridor),the Board concurs in this case with
proposed survey track line intervals of 165 feet(50.29 meters).
- The Board appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Should you have any
questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me at the address above, by
telephone at(617)626-1141,or by email at Victor.Mastoneastate.ma.us.
Sincerely,
Victor T.Mastone
Director
' Cc: Brona Simon,MHC
i
i
t
r
w Y y1
t wa" d
;ttP
e'I
r
t ��" k `S Ys n ♦ ''"6 1. X
"."I ! e
, m r�t $$�"i�'y,!@. �. Ppa„ fs�t = ,; ^gyp Y ���� .• '§ x �i���JJ..`t'S+}��d�ly�E'k".: �.�?=. 7��j�.� �a,� ,v d r�
T r• a+ kr, k
r �!'' < i x0
x+ 4t `. >; "��+�Ar t•' :���{O`'�r lil�n:k ': �'r�Rp�u�.p
..
ku Px SK
3 pvb N7 -k E'er
Lt 'LZL
t4z
r � .
ttj'`L
g� t �. Fb A,. fiM 37tr � � ",t 'err r �+�x tri Ai rl C
C7 Qtf: )sa - 3¢ O ° 59N
rk i + y
i ax a t YI mt t n �* - r + P;+eS x + u 't s
'! 4 dv
L �” r;ri 'I I
"�ca
1 t 'CL),�� rt
L ILL
p+ 3b
,� :r ' Lj
y IaA 4rti
y 3IN-
Its
t2Y'x'' Az it
.v
ti
zz
_ t _ . , ,
+� r� r � � � +�■� � � � ani r� � r � � � � r
x
I;
s'✓kNay'.Y+ tg '°'� & 'F" Sx4` pWt�,. " n t,ya pt4 c� 'r `F � a 'tr�' "f
�i7t-. ,v ',� � .• v :,t! t � t� "�� !°ii�,�,�, e�y�.^E �" ��. '�� �j, i`hy r d
� � a G3f kt - '�'�,i�1 � r Y p ,-,ksa r � • re
,� 4�tft,.j � -r•�' f"r � Y, '� F i q i � '�, xa� .�: � r �" ���t `'+� �' u�?� � +� `xp its -tea k` -a e
,
` � ' i k�;�
'x ix k i PV h x3, i x a. q x
77
It '� A i t, .�.tr ? � ,• t 1frF z�i
I�
}p° wr,x�'�".�t�l
ry' fig- i J VI�
IF'
Y• 6 R J j
Fit131
� ��� �i��l �i' cp��+� }.� �F� i �1 jw•t, �.'Phn � � p �V y� tF -
g y
3 V.
A4xt. '
I� Oi
xk �
3
d
9
it
tZJ
�bes 2004
�� ���s t�ychauwo�an��
-�,-
ur`
�� ��' '{11�r20 C�2ti�6235
"' ` Andiew�a�Maltazs
• vaM1 C �* y k .,.
,tens Txansm�sston fDuke} add'BacceaerateEnupy>'LLC(Exceteref�3 aSe,Co��1Y
Ae BxceleFate T lurffieazt Gatavaay P[oject m M4ssaghusetks Bad, The offshore
,� �a �e�locauons,of�proposed deepwaferpifap7tty and an assocnited'
ttanswssaoa �eimq gowmatet� 1, "kgile in1w$th.proFb pdzfoi
F ,�,� `�-�accz�ernte�`and D+t6e.� The proposed'-'Excelerate,No�fheast�Gatewa3' J�
�d � �y�mfo�e�oshngT:�nePip`,elmesysCepa, aboactls�eraali�ad
-����Auli�and Excelexate m addressing the Seeu�„1 Ob coiicein�of the i?edeial
�f2e'�' �LL"Coxrmnssion��`hs�-pA'tt of the mtttal effrnt,i'AT.?Nas prepared>the attached:
w w7uGA��ai-ist�ea�rtsol"aaarchaeolOgcalst�frviiyasses.9neeotSnil _-
'�.t'��fma"rectum�a��ssan�ere�ot?e`'sensmgsurveq
"o � `� �tru�t�onsjor�sh to+offet'c�mmertts about the.attachedvYformaU�or.the.
hesrtntetocontad �rett ProjeetMan�gea,orme`aEyotdcouvncnoe;
YE
s.
1 �
3 �
C,�R(Lt�P.QiC�}
oaladtan Affatzs(w/enol
aL-
o� 4 7
ixwrr�n,r_�ue�
.ra£
ATTACHMENT D
PROJECT NARRATIVE
1
' AI�onquin Gas Transmission, LLC Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral
®®Duk'EnergX
G/►Gas'!}�ansmrssion
ucnxw ux aas n+u+swscax uc
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC ("Algonquin") is proposing to construct and operate a new
approximately 16.4-mile long, 24-inch diameter natural gas pipeline lateral that will interconnect the
proposed Northeast Gateway Energy Bridge L.L.C. ("Northeast Gateway") offshore deepwater port
("NEG Port") with Algonquin's existing offshore ("HubLine")' natural gas pipeline system in
Massachusetts Bay (see Figure 1-1). Algonquin's proposed pipeline lateral to the NEG Port (the
"Pipeline Lateral") will facilitate the delivery of regasified liquefied natural gas ("LNG") from the NEG
Port to onshore markets in New England.
The following project narrative expands upon the information provided in the Environmental Notification
' Form ("ENF"). Information, provided in this attachment includes a detailed project description, a
discussion of the project's purpose and need, project alternatives, construction procedures, affected
environment, compliance with state wetland and waterway programs, and the project's consistency with
the state coastal zone management program.
1.1 Project Description
The Pipeline Lateral begins at the existing HubLine Pipeline in waters approximately three miles to the
east of"Marblehead Neck" in Marblehead, Massachusetts (see Figure 1-2). From this point (milepost
["MP'''] 0.0), the Pipeline Lateral route extends towards the northeast, crossing the outer reaches of the
territorial waters of the Town of Marblehead, the City of Salem, the City of Beverly, and the Town of
Manchester-by-the-Sea for approximately 6.3 miles. At MP 6.3, the Pipeline Lateral route curves to the
east and southeast, exiting Manchester-by-the-Sea territorial waters and entering waters regulated by the
Commonwealth. The Pipeline Lateral route continues to the south/southeast for approximately 6.2 miles
to MP 12.5, where it exits state waters and enters federal waters. The Pipeline Lateral route then extends
to thc:south for another approximately 3.9 miles,terminating near the NEG Port.
' In addition to constructing the Pipeline Lateral, Algonquin will need to make minor modifications to its
existing aboveground facilities in Salem, Weymouth and Methuen. These modifications are not
significant and are discussed in more detail in Section 3.3.
1.2 Permits,Approvals,and Regulatory Requirements
The NEG Port proposed by Northeast Gateway is subject to review and approval by the Secretary of the
United States Department of Transportation ("USDOT"), who has delegated his responsibilities to
USDOT's Maritime Administration("MARAD")and to the United States Coast Guard("USCG")within
the Department of Homeland Security. The USCG is the lead federal agency for review under the
National-Environmental Policy Act("NEPA")and is responsible for matters related to review of security,
navigation safety, engineering and facility inspections. Northeast Gateway anticipates filing an
application with the USCG for the DWT in late May 2005.
Algonquin anticipates filing an application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the
Pipeline Lateral with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission("FERC") contemporaneously with
Northeast Gateway's filing with the USCG. The FERC is responsible for the review and approval of
interstate natural gas pipelines under the Natural Gas Act.
HubLine is an existing 30-inch diameter interstate natural gas pipeline that was constructed by Algonquin in
2002/2003. HubLine starts at its connection with the Maritimes&Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C. Phase III Pipeline in
Salem Harbor and runs offshore to the south to the Algonquin"I"System Pipeline in Weymouth.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 1-1
Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC -
--. wi nw 'rn n WENHAM' .•HAMI@TON
RIAS_ CSS BAY �— o^- G V-Z—=
OCKPORT` z
d
Mc'Is Y ' 1�t'GLO CESTER
mono 'nm rn aG` ia'w 999
s.nv�w y BEVERLY xc ere tr v .J'¢1^4olt gip• � � / \
LYNNF`ELD "� - PEABDDY � J � 9�'"F "4`A� r.-5,n
tlYWWM1I..
no, v r�..u ..rau. SALEM u•y> .+� 4 ry' n�j eL ij.t�' r� +( Y \ ` e '"
WAKEFIELD i`+� �•""'" "" Ca i11tir;• ''Y.• :;:: r a
m
,uu .u, air :`Z ,,,,•_ eF' H1Y
41
wrM� 0 f Sby
aEr<rvi nw LYNN 4 • 4._1•, 4'Y' -/;k'y�e - - 1
( SWAMPSCOTT
WALDEN - Y •iJ'PREFERRED PIPEL 'LATERAL RUUTE`(16da
!4
1 f�� Y 7°,•' 1 r
QEVERE-
ryAHANTy/
al
NORTHEASTIGATEWAY '•!"
DEEPWATER
WINTHROP
€ '(�" �: �� � EXISTINGHUBL•INE' " / � _ /' '9•-"' ° � �/ •.;;� "`�,
m \ u a T y.' f�m� ` r A Y• ') r d Base mapo?1.80,000 Massachusetts
chart..
„•+,,,,• ° +.( b '�I(; pTB+ '( ^•� n r \ yr d ,. NOAA chart. SaunErhB are in feet of
ma
mean/ower/Ow water.
Map Prepared bY: TRC
. "+' '.� 'k� -f"�`1� n p6 .T'4.Aa�• a ., � i �u -.'1:.
NORTHEAST GATEWAY PIPELINE LATERAL 0 1 2 4
Miles
�
$ �� ,a„� � xW/ r '�\+ �.• �., •,,� ri r 6 � �• P / i n `45 \i m, d ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION,LLC
FIGURE 1-1
�sY'` 'Huli7.- g„�r r /,� ". y \ - SITE LOCATION MAP
e QUINCY 7 - /� �`q au'%F e/�[
ATE' "/ - - �u80 8hHiI13117dasio 1
HINGHAh1+
° .Fd[ti,r 10 164 rr 1 r»h iR .' 13f .���'7�11fJg ,_.Y �. ... I _.
Bak .si 41 WaR - If 141 vf� t '1 Y
_.. - -
dery Lr275J 0 fA 13M 9„� 61 �"+ 123 MJ GUEES'T,ER,
a e� a4 -79
HORN' +4+4 91�.p128 74� '] .,r.yyl•'�
COL. £GS OEAVtiCATFONLNU6 25j4� ' 26O•-�� 0..5.108 'Et 79 `w / uhiny7-t'i Lr ti 0 \
b 80.1 vistenote,V 0 ' "� d0• x8 16 • 1112YYY�4a+6 d I _ ate•• PREFERRED.PIP L 1
Ad \\
e.a 27 87 --„Y k /LATERA Rb \
• gl.1 5 8" .S 6 r 72 70 (15MA E ' 1 NORTH SHORE
NCHES•T R
} •+r 13" u"Rk, Elul-- 'wU `
2 fiz ;/ leo // OCEAN SANCTUARY. 1 �ry o 176
Weu�s in, ,.... 3 7,F 1� 2 - ". SBEVERL 9�St`. c'9-i 67 {d t35 Lao ,•• tL...—.—. .0
` .1931 .� 4 a 27 a ..• ,'//��
` Q � ALEM \12y SOUTH ESSEX, N 3D
_ •� •A I..ti EXIS GYi`.
\\ { 2 ySO 97. 192
Cat1 3 i9 I 72 t°T' i3'. / ` 23a, 144 i\By ••••+ 18 /// OCEAN SANCTUARY 2
'P/ i'iY R 93 96 6 .71/µr�tin Le�cfye .• ••• 1 /
Cly 73.. �. N i.i. � N,� Yty' .i' -0 ••� 6g 194 '� IVP go
16C`1 3lx '4:7 b2 ' ✓ i +a. up7iE
1 14 7 Nd rPa48Eli 76 ^ 47 h. 76 4 16 M« 215
----_— ...—.y 119 T♦•• \. 67 \
4 a 49•L5 - rfY_ Hnlfwey Rh \ I 1 2_ 4
�6 2* 62 s s 207 a �5 I
114
i .. -a+ ` 95
a1Cr au• / l7 197 \
c�east%go k9d�/p 4% 111 !ke r42
TOWER r 19-- L�' c' 3� 124e eS7-r 5 5 • 07 194 l76 237 $
•••• 6
2eR4 L��$7•�4�2 LOW-7 .14 I e969 c•� IT4 PREFERRED PIPELINE LATERAL ROUTE(16 4 M_11 21 ' . 6
s: .�1E. - I g •• ,�sNffG // STELLWAGEN BANK
346. a6. 8 to It IB3 / NATIONAL MARINE 199
P 4B mer - '" I , 1 197 251 f 1 - 227 SANCTUARY -,
.6' 17q..11 MARBLEHEAD I !.'�•-�
' 52 j .11
-,2� GOt� la P 232
L 1 _.§4 „y `ae'L. ski 120 108 /104 139 18 L2 22. 19'
yb Ir/ d0 !4M 12 ,.
to Io91d� — _ EXISTING HIBERNIAhCABLE I'6 L67 3 leD Ig
'1� , ;4f•- 153t _ _�.` \ _ ! -
,`i7 .tit 101 ' CiaJ _I5T 175
60 1 240
Roehn. ,SL;'. —. \� •.• / 139 . 150 216 ,K 7 ✓
, \
:.., tp 1.g��c�Nas FELL Ar { 136 39 1 BOA 251 2s0 167
r 132 / .706 LEGEND
144
Preferred Pipeline Lateral Route
34 : / .� ••'•• a 150 151 150 Northeast Gateway Deepwater Pan
l„• / 1r
„�•�r 106 / 132+N ?'ng Cvound 255 2 ® ! (NEG Pon)
/ A06''• A�scPnanurd 150 163 150 _ _
.290_,-� NEG Pon Flaw Line
32
270 �
139 ` ,,II7. 26 126 1. �lOti SG 211 /Tw \' HubLine Pipeline(ensting)
/ Ice SM `SG $8 I+,� •H' - 272 / \ 1591 ....� Hibernia Cable(existing)
/ !j % /•' IS 216 \ Massachusetts Ba Di Psal Site
SWAMPSCOTT lea II .� `� 131 \ f"OUL Ae 270. O v w
-- — _ — —— — 22 £XPLOSIV Q Town Boundary
1 p i ~ �'i-- _ _ L s 144 I Marine/Ocean Sanctuaries
114 \ 1 f6 192 p 2 2 1 Y I C3 NORTH SHORE
1. g295 v 99 �pY
110 r'�_ .I 0+ d DU SRE 704
E m � 1 2 4 •�_) _.l `; . 190 2pT di+ pNv 2671 ® SOUTH ESSEX
104 S j •� � - I 8 g 2t 226 j 2� ( ( 1 \ "'M” ® STELLWAGEN BANK
0 n �07 _ p MAS$ACHUSETTS1BAY y
LSYNN `' U�• tae d17 oeotns r DISPOSAL SITE
E ' 4 O !tit `-'U/aazpl+ N M.parlad e 6 242W •� _— /� 0 0.5 t 2Miles
LL' 92 `+' �`. F O 144 � -� r.•
00
9
2 112 rU ISl s''p ISO 6 a it s �Qg3� - , ' 261 U Base map consists of 7:80,000'Massachusetts
S� w� sl 7 ¢2 \\ 1 •�'•+ �•/ & 6 2z7 Q nding am in feet at
261 an lowerchart u
lowwaterFederaiMate/u sdiclional
y NAHA`NT r/ /'I75. 412 U IS .\ -` 174 I - 3
boundary and Marine/Ocean sanctuary data
from Masui,chusells Ocean Resources
71 (� 1 AJ 2 r q �0 ? Information System,Massachusetts O fice of
105 SC .� 172 t§B 2t6LQ 27T 3 1N nnl 11tr 1111111 Ih,r f. Coastal Zone Management
q9 NORTHEAST�,GATEIII 234 Map Prepared by TRC
DEEPWATER PORT .276
2 WINTHROP \ afr A '1 J l35
' i 81 7 '\ O2 '• 936 � 243 \^' - - NORTHEAST GATEWAY PIPELINE LATERAL
TB 5 99 — n rj 136 2 ' Il„oVVll�1!I'I"'I Hfp111� //271 ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION,LLC
v 90 �.. i �oJV� ' 11 I r Ilyp11//
.\ (
R 72 /m' e - — �\ - A• ' I � y101\`t IET1C 264 / FIGURE I-2
0 7G" 'BOSTON'1 60 IS'J 1 3 II4 i- 1 15 ,326 rr.P PIPELINE LATERAL LOCATION
g 63 n6 / +raA2
OH�N w I I44 180 16 \ 13 � a
a r 1a 1\ aRacar” . -1• M3 \ 252 I �_
CI�safon
IGas 7Yae=ssion
Both the NEG Port and Pipeline Lateral will undergo a single NEPA review conducted by the USCG.
The FERC will participate as a cooperating agency in the NEPA review conducted by the USCG.
As part of the certification process, the Pipeline Lateral will be required to comply with Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 ("ESA"), the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act ("MSA"), Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act ("NHPA"), Section 307 of the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 ("CZMA"), and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Algonquin
must also obtain a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ("ACOE") pursuant to Section 10 of
1 the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The EPA issues National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permits for stormwater and hydrostatic test water discharge
activities pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. .
The proposed offshore pipeline will be designed, installed, tested,operated and maintained in accordance
with the USDOT regulations 49 CFR Part 192, "Transportation of Natural and Other Gas by Pipeline:
Minimum Federal Safety Standards."In addition to regulatory requirements, the pipeline will be designed
in accordance with guidelines of the most recent editions of the following codes and standards:
• ANSI/ASME B31.8—Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
• API-STD-1104—Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
• API-5L—Specification for Line Pipe
• API RP 1111 — Design, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Offshore Hydrocarbon
Pipelines
The FERC encourages interstate pipelines to cooperate with state and local authorities, to obtain any
federally required state approvals, and to seek other applicable approvals so long as the non-federal
approvals are consistent with the Certificate and do not prohibit or unreasonably delay the construction
and operation of FERC-approved facilities. In its review under NEPA, the FERC considers state and
local requirements and comments from state and local agencies and the public in determining whether to
issue Certificates, in selecting among alteratives and in conditioning any Certificate. Accordingly,
Algonquin is proceeding to seek the appropriate state and local, as well as any required federal permits
and approvals.
The Pipeline Lateral will involve state and local reviews or approvals including a Secretary's Certificate
under MEPA, which incorporates consultations with applicable state agencies including, but not limited
to, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection ("MDEP"), the Massachusetts Historical
Commission ("MHC"), Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program ("NHESP"), the Department
of Conservation and Recreation ("DCR"), the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries ("MDMF"),
' and the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management("MCZM").
The Pipeline Lateral will also need state permits including a coastal zone consistency determination from
the MCZM Office, a Chapter 91 Waterways license and a Section 401 Water Quality Certificate from the
MDEP, and municipal Conservation Commission orders of conditions from at least four coastal
communities. See Table 1 in Attachment A for a complete list of all applicable federal, state and local
permits and consultations.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in this document, nothing set forth herein shall be
construed to indicate that any state,regional or local agency referred to has the power to refuse to issue or
to delay unreasonably the issuance or processing of any state,regional,or local permit,license,certificate,
approval, review or other requirement, nor shall this document be construed to limit the legal rights of
Algonquin under the Federal Natural Gas Act(15 U.S.C. 717 et seq.), the re-codified Pipeline Safety Act
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 14
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
' S Duke Energ7t.
IGas Tran=sion
LL�D]WIflN 4R�IMHSMI95.dJ�LLL
(49 U.S.C. 60, 101 et seq.) or under the other applicable Federal Laws and the Federal Constitution,
including but not limited to the Supremacy Clause and the Commerce Clause.
1.2.1 Pre-Filing Coordination Plan
1 During the past nine months, Algonquin and Northeast Gateway have had numerous meetings with
federal, state and local representatives to introduce the various aspects of the proposed facilities and
solicit early input. To further facilitate early agency, stakeholder and public participation,Algonquin and
Northeast Gateway have proposed a coordination process prior to the formal filing of the various permit
applications necessary for the Pipeline Lateral and the NEG Port(it is expected that many of the permit
applications will be filed in spring-summer 2005). Algonquin and Northeast Gateway have invited a
range of interested parties to participate in this informal, non-binding, applicant-sponsored process
including: permitting agencies, elected officials, local municipalities and important stakeholders such as
commercial fishermen. The first of a series of coordinated interagency meetings was held in February to
discuss the various aspects of the Pipeline Lateral and NEG Port. Algonquin and Northeast Gateway
' anticipate that such an early integration effort will lead to a more effective permitting process for the
proposed facilities.
1.3 NEPA/MEPA Coordination
Given the Pipeline Lateral's review under NEPA, Algonquin is requesting a Special Review Procedure
("SRP") from the Secretary of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs ("EOEA") in accordance
with 301 CMR 11.09(4)(c) to establish a coordinated environmental review process that will satisfy the
requirements of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act ("MEPA") and the NEPA. By combining
the MEPA and NEPA processes, Algonquin hopes to establish channels of communication between all
reviewing agencies that will facilitate a more efficient,thorough,and logical review process for all parties
involved, including the public at large.
Algonquin and Northeast Gateway are filing coordinated Environmental Notification Forms ("ENFs')
' under MEPA in advance of filing the federal regulatory applications for the DWP and the Pipeline
Lateral, as planned in May. This will allow for an early round of formal public comment prior to
finalizing the applications and will provide the Secretary of the EOEA (the "Secretary") with the
opportunity for early MEPA scoping and coordination with the NEPA process. It is Algonquin's goal to
facilitate coordination of the MEPA and NEPA review processes and to help ensure that the Draft and
Final Environmental Impact Statements ("EISs") prepared and issued by the USCG fully incorporates
state concerns identified during the MEPA scoping period and will serve as the Draft and Final
Environmental Impact Reports ("EIRs") for the purposes of MEPA review. Both Projects, the Pipeline
Lateral and the NEG Port(which is the subject of a contemporaneous ENF),will be evaluated in the same
EISs/EIRs.
1.4 Purpose and Need
' The Pipeline Lateral will provide increased reliability and flexibility of supply to the New England
market by offering access from a significant new source of gas supply directly into the heart of that
market.
The FERC has approved numerous New England infrastructure development projects over the past few
years in response to the acknowledged growth in demand for, and benefits of, natural gas as an energy
source. The Pipeline Lateral furthers the development and benefits of a robust natural gas transportation
system in several ways.
Specifically, the Pipeline Lateral will provide new and existing electricity generation facilities with
greater sources of supply,in turn improving air quality and the reliability of the electric system. This new
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 1-5
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
Duke EneMx
IGas'hansmrsslon
N.GMWNNWSIWJlS415SICN.LLC
B1ww9wY Ma.NYvwlu Ntii
' supply source will also help meet the residential and commercial demand for natural gas in the northeast
region. Increased use of natural gas also will foster competition in gas and electric markets,which will be
reflected in regional energy prices. Greater availability of natural gas in New England will help reduce
demand surges for fuel oil which will in tum, help reduce fuel oil price spikes. The region's reliance on
heating oil will also be reduced with the increase of diversity in fuel supplies.
' The Pipeline Lateral will make available a portal for a new natural gas supply in the greater Boston area
and the northeastern pipeline grid. This new connection will directly benefit the Algonquin system's
flexibility to manage contingencies such as operational or facility outages due to damaged lines or
maintenance, and will strengthen the operational ability to mitigate other capacity restrictions on the
eastern end of its system.
In addition, natural gas consumers, utilities and electric generators located along the Algonquin system
will benefit from enhanced competition among suppliers and upstream pipeline transportation providers.
Direct benefits to Algonquin's existing customers as well as other gas users include pressure increases,
' maintenance of existing hourly swing capabilities,and supply diversity.
The Pipeline Lateral also helps transform Algonquin's pipeline system from a land-locked pipeline
system into a regional header system, thereby increasing the supply and delivery options available
throughout New England. Historically, Algonquin's system was dependent upon a limited number of
interconnecting pipelines for its supply of natural gas. Algonquin and its customers had to rely upon
' traditional Gulf Coast, mid-continent or western Canadian gas supply sources and the long line interstate
pipelines that transport those supplies to Algonquin's system at the end of the long-haul transportation
path. Algonquin has increased its ability to receive significant quantities of natural gas from eastern
Canada and local LNG supplies following the FERC's recent certification of various Algonquin
expansion projects. The Pipeline Lateral will be an important component to this regional header system
by providing a new direct source of natural gas supply.
The need for significant new supplies of natural gas to serve the growing demand for residential,
industrial, and electrical generation uses in Massachusetts and New England has been confirmed by a
number of studies, including the Energy Information Administration's "Annual Energy Outlook 2004"
(January 2004), the National Petroleum Council's "Natural Gas Study" (September 2003); the ISO -New
England's "Interim Report on Electricity Supply Conditions in New England during the January 14-16,
2004 'Cold Snap"' (May 10, 2004); and the Governor's Task Force on Electric Reliability and Outage
Preparedness"'Status of the Electric Grid in Massachusetts" (March 2004).
With completion of the Pipeline Lateral,these projects will have put significant supplies at each comer of
Algonquin's system. Algonquin has evolved from a limited source, end of the path system, and would
now provide the equivalent of a northeast gas supply header system with regionally located supplies.
This transformation provides significant supply security, supply and transportation competition, higher
pressures, operational flexibility, and greater reliability to the Algonquin system and the northeast natural
gas transmission pipeline grid.
1.5 Public Consultations
Beginning in May 2004, Algonquin representatives met with federal, state and local officials. At these
meetings, Algonquin and Northeast Gateway provided background information concerning the Projects,
the proposed survey corridor, project need, and the scope and anticipated timing of the permit
1 applications. At the local community level, the information was provided to the Mayors and their senior
staff in the cities of Salem, Beverly and Gloucester. In the towns along the proposed route, information
was provided to public officials. Additional individuals within each community were also contacted if
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 1-6
Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC
�DukeEnerg)(,
1'lGas hansm�ssion
' r11G3NJNN WSiRW.PN440V.LLC
' wwwan p8sa,ulwnW Wi
specifically requested. Similar information was also provided during this period to the USCG, senior
officials within the Romney Administration, the Massachusetts Congressional delegation, the state
legislative delegation and various stakeholders representing maritime, environmental and commercial
fishing interests.
Public officials at the federal, state and local levels as well as other stakeholders were advised when
survey activities commenced in the fall of 2004. As the preferred and alternate routes became more
clearly defined based on the preliminary results from the surveys, Algonquin and Northeast Gateway
accepted invitations in early 2005 to provide project presentations to the Boards of Selectmen in
Marblehead and Manchester-by-the-Sea and to the Salem City Council. Similar presentations were also
provided to the Port Operators Group and the Cape Ann Chamber of Commerce during this period.
' Informational Open Houses were co-hosted by Northeast Gateway and Algonquin in February 2005. In
addition to public announcements placed in local newspapers, letters were sent to federal, state and local
I ' officials for the purpose of notifying them of the schedule and the locations for the informational
meetings. The schedule of meetings was as follows(see Table 1-1).
Table 1-1:Informational Open Houses Held to Date
' Date Location Communities Covered
February 1 Salem Salem,Marblehead,Beverly
February 3 Gloucester Gloucester,Manchester-by-the-Sea,Rockport
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 1-7
' Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
' Duko EnergK.
C/Gas 7Yansm�ssion
.«.r. �
2.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
III ' The scope of the alternatives analysis for the Pipeline Lateral is limited to the siting and design of a
pipeline that would extend from Northeast Gateway's NEG Port to the existing pipeline infrastructure.
The siting'objectives of NEG's Port encompass several factors, including that the NEG Port be located at
least 10 miles offshore of the Massachusetts shoreline. Given the NEG Port's offshore siting criteria,the
existing HubLine Pipeline, owned and operated by Algonquin, is the closest and preferred gas
transmission facility to transport natural gas to the heart of the New England market with the least
environmental impact. Northeast Gateway, in its companion ENF, presents a more comprehensive
alternatives discussion relative to locating the NEG Port.
2.1 Pipeline Routing Constraints Analysis
The initial pipeline route considered by Algonquin for the Pipeline Lateral was a straight-line pipeline
route which avoided the Precautionary Area and extended eastward from the existing HubLine pipeline
' interconnecting with the NEG Port. However, once Algonquin initiated its data collection effort, it
became clear that this"direct"route was not preferred from a pipeline design and construction standpoint
due to the presence of extensive amounts of rock and hard substrate and excessively variable seafloor
topography. After this initial feasibility analysis,Algonquin considered a broader area for route selection.
In an effort to select a pipeline route that balanced design,construction and environmental considerations,
Algonquin surveyed a study corridor that measured approximately 4 miles wide and up to 17 miles long
' (see Figure 2-1).
A multi-phase approach was used in assessing potential pipeline routes within the study corridor to
connect the proposed NEG Port to the HubLine Pipeline. Within this study corridor a variety of existing
seafloor mapping information was collected and evaluated to develop specific centerline routes that could
be considered as alternatives. Four routes were designated as alternatives and additional data collection
was undertaken to assist in the evaluation of these routes. Ultimately one of the alternatives was
considered optimal from a broad range of criteria, becoming designated as the preferred route. The data
collection efforts are summarized in Section 2.1.1 while each of the alternatives evaluated to date are
described below in Section 2.2.
2.1.1 Offshore Surveys
I ' Algonquin conducted a detailed offshore geophysical and marine resource survey to aid in designing a
pipeline route that is the most favorable for pipeline construction and operation while minimizing impacts
to marine resources. The survey was composed of two phases. The first phase ("Phase 1") occurred in
December 2004 and focused on siting the pipeline in areas that are most favorable for construction and
II'I operations while minimizing impacts to marine resources. Geophysical surveys of potential centerline
routes were completed using sidescan sonar, multibeam sonar, and subbottom profiling equipment. The
data was rapidly interpreted and if a route was determined to have adverse geophysical characteristics
' (e.g. extensive rock outcropping or glacial till), it was either adjusted left or right and the adjusted route
segments were surveyed. If the entire route appeared problematic from a construction and environmental
impact standpoint, it was eliminated from further survey. The intent of this phase was to ensure there
were no obvious obstacles within the pipeline construction corridor that would prevent or have a material
adverse affect on construction. In addition, preliminary information about seafloor habitat in terms of
heterogeneity and sensitivity to construction impacts was considered using the geophysical survey of
' sediment and geologic conditions combined with the known marine ecological conditions of
Massachusetts Bay. The outcome of the Phase 1 effort was the selection of a preferred centerline route.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 2-1
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
1
-' - - - - - -
=4q
b
W e =u....ei ! e4 a 1 r t'I9�S�T 8g .102 99
t ,. _ -
K 2 270
i
RNCgT STEp7S .20 r 9' s� 9z
7d
@8Y&�I.Y yJ Q' 4 ♦ z "8 }• *'7�8 5J f 102 90 :III I 145 �.
89 99 '49 8fi ioS 1l1 i
4' ` ye 6EVERLY I;e6etWt.y! SPr 4 hd los q4. - }� 157 .. 5 ?
F:891i, a. 11 6 44�te5 4e [9 `5t.T5 "a9•' t 15G{tL.OUCESTERI PREFERRED PIP ELi 253
Y SPIRF/' r@\ oa d•tPl a 'A IRS T1 34 ^I 6798 lea at g6 83 y Rag 129 63 .I LATERA '. O 1b
e c4Y ..rTn P 33fi1i 64 09 r56' 17 AQ ,y�
« a✓A' �t ' 7`' TO lW 117 a rtl1 $�eiel dgu t • NE" W 4'1B
---- /. 3� ro
s p6 n SA 70 MAfJCHESITE�I % Ia1 4 S.Am RkA 191
aak A'YIeR." 111HOM
a 6'T < ^C Y river UZ'9/ :t a9 i;:;;90 'yM,4 61 9t4
r'3 � 2
.T .F y` d `�.: Oot s'b$ne4+4RGAr7aN tJh: 25�! 2fiGC2 C'a-I°6 E� g i y'hC tr S In
. 21 59 a7 I NORTH'SNORE Y '
..,. yI
m alloai w -> t 7 'der .. ` .ogle rW °1'I„y �s �'aytw a az.3 y1..•. i t29' ' -""7 .• - I
"1 s2 _ s ,+A 4 M too IM. Y04
1 �: u o- "' 88 f• N Se' b 8�3i r471 a ve y"S" 81
l
" '° ,.w '�`•' 17a r 230
3.::
EAN ANCTUA \\
,. eye 1rasY 11P �$ ..>•i.' s `a2 '6 a'IY h" �. e1 a'r "'cai fy. r- SOUTH,ESSEX', \ 2r2. 16] '
�� ry Ib•1N• 'k+¢d ✓. Intl la SALEM ... P3' �#. ay . 'a ` "'f.' ¢ `.� � - % e OCEAN'SANCTUARY"' z r92 - 307 t .
4a 3 1Rr f
.°J 43 76 49 P" 'fi• oa
1O f0 3N 4 7 n 3 N^sR ®� aia"€ �c 2z6 1e6 ^ 9q END
f YT4Yalf�F 1 C r 179
]Q:• ,1y� _ " t37, xx: }, •E
f °3 Pe MAR9I.Et16AB U4� - � a Ri fi Y+d to - _. yie.l. 315 ZSS
I a9•Z5 t v� � PRELIMINARY PIPELINE -z` z: z v sa n
4°�4en i T o 2 —� o f a e LATERAL STUDY CORRIDOR a 0 s%
•ttE t ', ;>a ,.� �a 72 7i.-: �S�`"M ' �c-Y.��£y�'. t. .r . t�k .t'" ; r �'.. � , STELLWAGEN BANK 270
pa r L11.<ad
Ncel4&o Cr. ' .5% C�, ralnb ,�.X x.• f ' „"""': TIONAL MARINE 't
lb gJ6,,_....�a 14 r`3a?rZL.. . ''Q'} m; ..bst : S" ,e ,e;.• fb - ' `: 1s4 2� 176 NA SANCTUARY_
GR
rYa`+*;. . Ja 69 211MA `. y,• ,,. .. 2c9
jj o-"
r •c' ` RBLrEHEAD
34 .8]45 J5 .:� tF 4 .. dl' •�' .'' .l. 14 F . fJ N t I :199 .
99 �4� I MY
52 2Tq A> 48 48. _37r GGR 7rA-
ONG 6g 1 / �.. 251 t .
37..,
i120 108
14a .•t" 2z t. ' 1g0 ms
�1. §
14
— ElealY XSTING HIBERN--CABLE
6 � lz 2ao
LEGEND
130 Isi .zr 'Tl.
iv-, 33
+`4E r20~ �4 v•- 44a L �J -T : 3 y
x%�jT•r N 9 Oc q,4e BElG �G / 138 38 1 O M1�^ x q 251 / Z,T O6 'Sry ®i; Preliminary Pipeline Lateral Study Corns"
2 41 61 2 132 / _ - Northeast Gateway Deepwater
ai 2i 40 3 a,�sT ' i44 , INORTHEAST..GATEWAY: 1 r p~
' � � •• =� ' Port Survey Area
1 s6 ,�: , �,. ` .• DEEP WATER P y
31 / • •'•" 150 15t ISa P1 16! HubLine Pipeline ezisOn
el ,... / �; " FSURVEY AREA. 2 o � p 1 9)
16 az SWAMPSCOTT../ tos / 1° 192-r u,m D,, d !SO leo 16e - 270 .zso�_ �, ; (existing)
........... ... ` ....I Hibernia a
I _ 1O 132 SG J ^\ H'b Cole ay Di
' gq a ` 0 Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site
148 a6 1 M• � 272 ! \ .69 Q Town Boundary
64 °1�' r 1 !2a 1 ! '" l `4 1e1 \ f �IB a AR _ 2� Marine/Ocean Senctuedes
\ \
.67.98: + L%XQS tt � NORTH SHORE
_
' m ' 6 1 13�J� y- 1 u 194 Q P �8 2�/ 1 Y « I SOUTH ESSEX
w \=61 ez LYNN 1 ' a iJo r 99 1 4 r,\i �°. Ia c 1 j fIUMP SRE/' 304 A. ., I
5 /j pc STELLWAGEN BANK
184 S CA O ('7L7L 1 e 21 426 m 263 R v - r k i
+r o 41m too y p1`Flxe:Ydp 1 MASSAMiles
CHUSETTS BAYy
7 ° s9 sa �`d 8�,• \ DISPOSAL S/TE o 0.5 t z
z „p"� 4 4 t.2 -Uneipl� nplrred c - e 291W ' /
ti r L'9' Q
� �ep
77 90� 92 a 112 .a^ 10m F 8 InoS 2B4 Base map consists o/7:30,000'Masseehusatt5
2 15l I50 6 e I v 2a1 Bay NOAA chart. Sounding are in feet at
'•� e�iSY 'fin 66 a 67 \ - - °: Q� l\ mean lowerlow water. FederiMafejunsdctional
ANT z 6 Zn 74 2sl r�ic2 S1, boundary and Marme/Ocean sanctuary data
q I O obtained from Massachusetts Ocean Resources
V C/ tJ ll2 na W tats d.�.
.'� w4 1175 H2 -. 231R�.,,.111 1, „r�� 2 Coastal Zone Mtion anagement
agementchusefts Office o/
'�` US zl6 Q — 0 �1'r11\' 1i.,•/,rr. Map Prepared by: TW
'76 09 4 -136 ~ j3 t .`
y@ ti0' a9a .y ` X459 4�``v1• 12 276 23 ''+l
zl Ln�i3 al 2 �,` 02�_ - `.� 038 13� 243 A2�:*`t� 1 ° NORTHEAST GATEWAY PIPELINE LATERAL -
WINTHROP 11 198 i , Iwd , I 276
�ne1i°' 9 ALGONOUIN GAS TRANSMISSION,LLC
a
72 e 4
RA 6 FIGURE 2-1
h ♦ %M _ 3. I e ' 2� PRELIMINARY PIPELINE STUDY CORRIDOR
fib
1BOSTON >a Recon- 180
' y 6 61 M - CA •h, IK B 1.
2 N6 52 Lyv�f� 63 /'•+. THORN DW I I 242
,. .]. 1 73, . 735. 3'6" s,d 1q / '1 120
! � zta \ 279 Baa
1 r.Ga$, ns sion
The second phase ("Phase 2") occurred from late December 2004 through early March 2005. The Phase
2 route surveys involved the collection of detailed geophysical, archaeological, engineering, and
biological information along the preferred pipeline route to support physical and biological
characterization and to allow further assessment of engineering criteria. A summary of the surveys
performed is provided in Table 2-1.
Table 2-1: Pipeline Lateral Phase 2 Field Survey Summary
Survey Type Survey Locations Objectives
Side Scan Construction corridor(200 feet wide),anchor Determine seabed geomorphology,assist with
Sonar corridor(6,000 feet wide),entire length of surficial sediment type identification,identify
centerline surface obstructions
I Multibeam Construction corridor(200 feet wide),entire Generate seafloor contours
Sonar length of centerline
Boomer Construction corridor(200 feet wide),entire Develop a stratigraphic profile,map bedrock
Subbottom length of centerline basement
Profilin
Chirp Construction corridor(200 feet wide),entire Identify rock within trench depth
Subbottom length of centerline
Profilin
Vibracoring %4 mile intervals along preferred centerline, Confirm subbottom profiling data,collect
54 stations to date sediments,obtain geotechnical soil information
Magnetometer Construction corridor(200 feet wide),anchor Identify potential Cultural sites and manmade
corridor(6,000 feet wide),entire length of hazards
centerline
ROV Video Entire length of centerline,generally 3 feet Obtain video record of seafloor conditions
wide swath of seafloor along centerline,investigate hard substrate
areas,investigate potential hazards
Benthic Grab 29 stations, 19 centerline and 5 paired 100' Characterization of sediment benthos
Satopling offsets
SPI Survey 69 stations, 19 centerline+100-foot offsets Characterization of sediment benthos and
and 5 paired 200-foot offsets and 1 paired chemical/physical attributes of near surface
400-foot offset sediments
2.2 Alternative Routes Evaluated
As information was collected within the pipeline study corridor and the siting and routing criteria applied
I to regions within the study corridor, four possible pipeline routes evolved (see Figure 2-2). Table 2-2
provides a preliminary list of siting and routing criteria used in identifying a preferred route and route
alternatives. This section discusses the preliminary analysis that was performed in an iterative fashion in
order to select a preferred route. Data collected during the field surveys are still being analyzed by
Algonquin's engineers and scientists and, as a result, more detailed information on the geophysical and
biological survey results will be incorporated into Algonquin's FERC application that is anticipated to be
' filed in May 2005.
i
1
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 2-3
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
1
92 ill. . • ,4 I6
5, 61R♦_B0 102 99 + y1IT
ANCA STE B. i a. r 12d�'r 2i' '"'� 96 io 92 I2 ya9,..-. zoo
BBYHRLY B y �ry�a 5] J� / 102 M'ddgo G. e! I 145 \\� `\ m.
r..I. I n i! 92 69 99 '49' B6 105 \\ )/
a �4 :BE,VERLY [aRU Ni9ery1 }$ `A5 ;S:Gbl.e etl 105 94. �.vC�-167 5 \
FtBl(t a 11tc r. - oc�r6s t9 I� •- r 1°.GLOUCESTER) 253
' !• •__. �QY ` R^ {,1-I w`YI S 9]90 d4 W j139
.i., � "'+++99Y1R^^^•b^^^ IO2 96 29 PREFERRED PIPELI
__'_'_ 0
.
36 r 69 Rg ,yfi• 12 1, _�- �4
P°�6 eea ert ' 25 i0 My Ili M'..kWlB11B rf d \\ LATERAL ROUT 7B
4
S l4ri6Dirj i0 8B a7 rr- 5 153••.� -�NEG.60R-
Gar,W75) Bak I uMR. It 11d �4' MANCHES!TER _ 141 ur•h mRk0. 131 191 2W
' V 0 c7M I°0 GCT ItORN 96 oe"/` sr i® alit, r 129 128 /14 I .r.� 1 \EXIBlBGI n
`GS MAIARCA NaN LNE.:25141
Sfa(ufFY nb'!�•X.,•�f`•N i60I � Or •• • -.A✓ t
°j• • 21D
inla ADs� zaai RTH1 RE
S 129 ae rol -. 4' 6 ARpuil
234
ily
�27 z sz IW
J6 ; 5a ail
Q, zi 135
/,•••••• .J. •• .i 217
SABEMI rvzsa�PO �$ -> 1 z �+-•. 22 35 52 las �. SOUTH,ESSEX Isi' 192
�� n99tiHx '4 9 cau ALTERNATE 7(13 4 Mlles) zJ •.• } e - 2ze
yp n y '". g 31, .1 °s tg wry iio 1 1 OCEAN SANi:TUARY 2
�-j1 N lR�3Q sa NT 41. I N.Y• � • 65
/C 3]
S SiaRDFlPF I is c + 3.P' '.4' : n2 �, a•9I•a ma STELLWAGEN BANK
c in Pt no '79 ` - ^ •• 16 + 215 NATIONAL MARINE
5l 36 6
a/.IABtENEe1D Fc
�, a RD 4Rma¢t i9 d� _______ __ na o ti 6i SANCTUARYI:.
iBZS ,t/ }iellval-Bk 12
a' 2d- 2.6 8� X93`P 5 114 2 255
IIIA'74 �7. t3fq•"M .. aC�'1nn 6 Ji Psmud .« ,
Ft.O OWE 1!1 i.eadNe¢k90 /r {24i' Iil .9 Cif 120A' • \ i\ 192 1
S •� S •
IT 6q PREFERRED PIPELINE LATERAL ROUTE(76.4 Miles) S '
°] J y9�P 1[s'Ai:Y ]9R 69 2a° ,2 r2', La gs ! ,./•••••• 1�4 249 2e4 21..4 \, 6
31 MA�`RBIfEHEAD ?J, 9D I 9 �`•i• C .�
8.:34 5 lfi Y� FO 4 99
1P 2' I 22I 179
5 25 $ 199 \
••• 5
2 1d `26 2TR A". G8 a -J7 _6§ III
' 52 • •• r P 1 Miles)
il -
r° : ,6. 9y��kiP RI � 7�y z9� wo`(°f i;s�SI 1a9 toe/A°4 ` � I _ .2 MII
000 �s]f 07 �1'a� •••••• a / I4BN6 �9 7 / A )3
P 2z,• G Lk ;ef� \s - 0V _ _,!_ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _- /J 45 L 5 LEGEND
z TERNATEr3(13 'es)
_ 22 19
die .5] �csi ,iso,• I01 `/ J EXISTING HIBERNIA-CABLE a l —
AP' �• 15 240 k
I'. 15 4fi5 a9 IT 5:G {06 Roc_le '�: /` \�1G / 1 .36 19i li Preferred Pipeline Lateral Route
} 3J 4 '20 8��'a �K` N a op•• a 1 " .thy^ ••/ -04 �' Northeast Gateway Deepwater Pon
1, 251 z $ 3Dfi 167 En„r. O
a1 . 40314rq,�i. •SI 1 ,�"r' 132 lea (NEG Pan)
' I 16 ..y �•. , 1 •• / / 1\} NEG Port Flow a(e
na
/{
at r 31- � I� .. / ., 150 159 150 2 D I61 HubLine Pipeline(existing)
o / iA
i6 62 $WAMPSCOTL•'•/ 100 ! - 192.p Ownpny Gauns - .v 193 _ •••^ Hibernia Cable(exisling)
'••••..,•„• _ / / IDs . a;�,n.•..e ALTERNATE 7 (77:1 Miles) rso O
••• ••••• IO 26 i32 r 1 I /..\ L 1 211 21 ."� //'�� lam\ Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site
• ••i 9a IDB / 26 54 . h01j r •1• 212 / 1Y6 Q Town Boundary
`S6 1` / y 21s 21B
99 ' / \ i 124 .L.J �'I. . r tJl \`.. f \
1 Marine/Ocean Sanctuaries
£XPLFOULOS]Y 27B r 1
' 1 _ • / ~ ^� / , 144 I I i ` ® NORTH SHORE
al !a I' 123./l SOUTH ESSEX
66 130 �. 11 0' I6 a DU SRE 3M )
'- 61 62 aYNN 1 4; �j -. Y 150 \\\ 4 1 267 5 ® STELLWAGEN BANK
[[7O
104LTDeaft
y s ° CA O - /Ioi Ise a 2t 226 MASSACHUSETTS BA^l/ til Miles
' „g. 9B E 4 �o �I2 �``Unerp/pd rspOrreol 'ua, el fi 24ZQQ DISPOSAL SITE /// 0 0.5 t 2
iy�91 7” P BU 92 -a 112 A4 _ fa - o la4 S -Z284 Base map consists or 1:80,000'Massadwsetts
r" ']m 0 aD X15 150 6 c I p ' 2RI'v Bay'NOAA chart. Sounding are in feet at
mean lower/uw,water. FedereVStatelunsdic6'onal
h 26 P rvie S)
boundary and Marne/Ocean sanctuary cean Resources
�'1jg TT (b Ry •r iB6 25^ obtained horn Massachusetts Ocean Resources
�/ (./ lJ ll$ •..5 a a 174 � Lck u,>mo
_ Q 2a �5 35 l0 2 Information
Coa al Zone Management
Massachusetts Office o/
::'e6 wa 105 OG 772 3 YJi /,ry�! 11+, nut 1n ni1)r1: In,
i $ I48 116 - \ / ,5 •'`' '/.,, Map Prepared by: TDC
aq a i D9 ` t3fi '.._.» _ NORTHEAST GATEWAY 226 zoo . !
he 3 us O DEEPUVATER1PORT
� a2 _ 't 139 _� � /0 443 '' �.� �' NORTHEAST GATEWAY PIPELINE LATERAL
WINTHROP Ta n 138 ll, ? �n.rbm 2Y6 j
90 , ' + 1 �4 I,�anhllt 1 rn(m;/,!t� ALGONOUINGAS TRANSMISSION,LLC
90
Za
W �ons. 49n5 R _ a Ra i Fsa l' 1 5 h f eta `.t \ P NEiIC 290 !, FIGURE 2-2
JBDA Pemr_..•' ROUTE ALTERNATIVES ON NOAA CHART
' 1 a 6 NX 61 rbi2 JyOSTON rta- 03a HORN w ( •A 14a I80 IB y `` 232 % 2a4 _... •. [W
I •», �S.r 4 : brd m1 P;2113 TO 120 IClaoeaan E jaws
Tf 2 ti
PDuke Energx
.Gas 1Yansm�ssion
Table 2-2: Pipeline Siting and Routing Criteria
' Criteria Category Criteria
Environmental
Minimize crossing of hard substrates
Minimize conflicts with other marine users
Minimize extent of seafloor disturbance
Minimize construction duration
Minimize pernianent changes to seafloor conditions
Avoid uncertainty in route location and construction approach
Avoid cultural resource sites
Minimize crossing of ocean sanctuaries
Minimize potential to affect ruespecies
En ineerin
Minimize complexity of design and pipeline installation methods
Minimize crossing of hard substrates and glacial till
Avoid navigation features such as federal channels and designated anchoring areas
Avoid rough too a h
' Avoid uncertainty in route location and construction approach
Maximize routing in fine-granular sediments
Minimize construction duration
Preferred Route - The preferred Pipeline Lateral route follows a longer path than any of the other
alternatives in order to be sited along a broad area of granular sediments with uniform low gradient slope
from water depths at the HubLine connection of about 130 feet to the NEG Port in water over 250 feet
' deep. This area is evident when viewed on the seafloor reflectivity mapping produced by the USGS (see
Figure 2-3). The route is approximately 16.4 miles long and is located partially within the offshore
waters of four coastal municipalities. While this is the longest route, it traverses relatively uniform
' substrate/habitat conditions, and would entail the simplest, least sediment disturbing construction
methods. Geophysical survey data indicate no surficial rock, largely silt/sand/clay within the trench
depth, and low probability of rock requiring blasting, dredging or surface armoring. Due to the relative
' simplicity of construction, it is estimated to require the shortest duration of construction activities, result
in the least amount of sediment resuspension and transport, and entail the narrowest direct disturbance
width along the trenched pipe. In addition, the preliminary geological data showing relatively uniform
' conditions provides greater confidence in the successful installation of the pipeline using the chosen
methods and equipment.
' Alternative 1 -The original route developed by Algonquin during the project concept development stage
has been designated as Alternative 1. This route commences at the furthest east portion of the HubLine
and extends in an east/southeast direction to the initial concept location for the NEG Port while avoiding
the Precautionary Area. The route was approximately 9.1 miles long and crossed the offshore waters of
' two coastal municipalities. With the current NEG Port location, Alternative 1 increased in length to 11.1
miles. This route is the shortest, and at first glance, would suggest a straight line pipe lay and bury
process. However, review of the seafloor topography and substrate conditions (see Figure 2-3) indicates
' that pipeline construction along this route is infeasible given that a very large portion of the route
traverses unplowable seabed topography of exposed bedrock and other hard bottom conditions as well as
significant changes in relief. The length of these conditions as well as the water depths along the route
' where these hard bottom locations occur either prohibit or severely limit the use of blasting techniques to
facilitate the lowering of the pipeline below the seabed. The presence of these conditions would also limit
or prohibit the surface lay of the pipeline due to the increased stresses they would impose on the pipeline.
As such,no field studies occurred along this alternative alignment.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 2-5
' Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
_- _ j.. V.O. Y t �'ar" ams ,^A ^ .>, -c:'"i " i ��^•. - K' ''c^$-'� 5a r =E 7-1
rF �! 'Y' • `N " by i '" # +lel ,, — '4 '41• HC j
d.i 1�'�.,_,7j/• �. �, • � , ,�„ ��` ry �r� ,a*'z�'�'.n �,� $ r Arc's• . tJ f��,�-�r ' -,r ..w` .a'.�,'. � i
' 5 YYY
• _ �i �' ` ,�'.. � r'' y`. • �• � ''.�r r��' f ;*'xF � ge,� [` :, k -nG�y' y • 3, -�A• �� x'�` �•fi�:}, r�'-,
`,Jj ate ° rrt .es e r ,u:•rY.�w .k' ' `? `k}`N .'�" /'-
•
' e'•s } x A ��r14
fo � jya•. '}Y♦ 1 .i$ a y5 F �b "" IF I
_North Shore < ,+w ` ': � � �,.� �.� ♦" f.. �'
Oc;eari SanctuaryY ow,
¢ %6.
Stellwagen Bank
Soufh�Essex?• r
Na
TiV'� ��_� `.. '� tlOnal��larine�3Y ` r •,
.. s ,Ocean��Sanctuary " Sancua
try. . 4A = <
Ile
• � ai
�.. �, .-� rr'"�♦ r ".! Y � 4 yid twrijn � t p ���e `. ( �' �1..
J .�� I
EACKSCATTER INTENSITY
r
t cY� aa�a�c� gyk
-'T:�" •�.i"Q°• F�Jr fA.=r,L +A%4 Z kf •� f _
Low I'me-grained
LEGEND
l
Preferred Pipeline Lateral Route
low
0 Northeast Gateway
LL \ per{ y ry S
� P� �'-��u _ �5jA4� '3 .'•taw � �a�,�"R�AN�r '"'S`+6 Y V✓ 3!�.�` Z' � .s, y �"7,_ �� � Deepwatera� (NEG Port)
v ,
--- NEG Port Flow Line
Hibernia Cable(existing)
n HubLine Pipeline(existing)
C3 Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site
i. 5:¢ - i y �!, x, .. 'ms' s"pY },��a'y�, '' "' 2 ir'. p'✓.
{
" •,.. 'R s * "�. wy _ .mac ,� • .. kx vn.
Marine/Ocean Sanctuaries
• SHORE
C
♦v4'+,.� `4 .r ".� �"ty"a���'/Y .: �it, }l�•N''a� � � y� � 1��t ��3 t k'•7 '-'T.4 < i$i �. �Sy�� y� � SOUTH
''•w ✓- s�� 3- C3 STELLWAGEN BANK
�''� '<r•7Rs, s�Gi � � ��Y � t rl '( *����_ t. b� ��yy��t-} a',c H fy�`q'�.
/r}y�� q?� '� Y:" 1r/+f'a �yg�.a ^bH-..Ou I)" M"' _?y ? d ♦ 'w gig, •. ii
LYIINU r�•� yy.. ,(.a, 4 , 3"/(� 8�-G �R a f# 4. r`^ �aa S•`.(f £tb
<
,P a9 'tip +, ' u d,1�`A' M 3 Y� t. - i5's' • v PR 4� r e $Y`. '
Muffibearn
R� • a.
winevoce.sanctuary data obtained ftm
a .e'" S '` �'"- Y '- ice s[ + P tl z * ♦ '" a £ ' Massachusetts Oman Resources information
IN, System,Massachusetts Office of Coastal ZoneManagement.
wrap rrepareutly: ERC
ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION,LLC
.�._z. ,.." at �tf,_,. S° Xd. r' 9• +.♦,; ¢ F� +,,a;�.' . - •.
U,j +}. ,�' may- Tb may Il�il�}'y� Q1arvl y�� I r
5 3�... y °,V�5` ; n. S ` •. LaAS7YLLL.II^1�i3lrl.lilu 1
- 'tom+ }'r �� !p^a � '��r'fi 'ar sc.` t:� � �� • �w„,e +"'++a * z '•
0 0 " ` .f•'�.. A '=Ya 'a+y Bi+y y'"' <b > +
r
• � iaw,,,r�� +,my�Y s ��� + t2' ���'¢,�'is`cy ,... 'mac •' �. �.. + � -
,.
SII ' �-Duke Eno
X
MFGas Transmission
AI.(+WNFpN W$iMN5MIS4IXl.LLG '
olMiwr]Nr(Y.4xwuv.v.¢isr
Alternative 2. In an attempt to avoid the variable topography and extensive hard substrates of the
Alternative 1 route,Algonquin selected the Alternative 2 route for evaluation. This route connects finther
north and slightly more inshore on the HubLine. The route continues slightly north of east and then bends
southeasterly to fit through a narrow corridor of smoother topography with primarily granular surficial
sediments. The route is approximately 13.4 miles long and is located within the coastal waters of three
municipalities. However, geophysical surveys consisting of side-scan sonar, multi-beam sonar, and sub-
bottom profiling revealed considerable surface boulders, glacial till, and potential bedrock within the
I,I anticipated trench depth. The more northerly interconnection with the HubLine proved to have worse
geophysical characteristics than a more southerly interconnection location. In addition,the narrowness of
the corridor along the bottom greatly hampered opportunities for slight adjustments to the route to
improve installation success.
It was determined that a variety of construction methods would be required and the resulting construction
duration would be excessive. In addition, a greater variety of benthic habitats and resources would be
subject to alteration due to the construction methods and equipment compared to a route sited in an area
of more extensive soft sediments. In general, the more complex the construction process(often involving
a greater sequence of consecutive activities), the longer the duration of construction and the potential for
increased impacts.
Alternative 3. This alternative, thought to have a substrate comprised of primarily granular sediments
with flat seafloor relief, was also identified for evaluation by Algonquin. The preferred route and
Alternative 3 share a common interconnect location and an initial 2.3 miles of pipeline route. At UT 2.3,
Alternate 3 deviates from the preferred route taking a large diameter radius bend from a northeasterly
orientation to a southeasterly orientation and joins the Alternative 2 route through the narrow passageway
between rocky substrates and more steeply varying terrain. Alternative 3 is approximately 13.2 miles
long and is located within four municipalities. Alternative 3 was not considered favorable because of the
' presence of surface boulders, glacial till, and potential bedrock within the anticipated trench depth. Like
Alternative 2, this route would necessitate more complex construction procedures, would take longer to
construct, and would result in direct impacts to a greater number of benthic habitats and resources when
compared to the preferred route.
1
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 2-7
' Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
hDuke EnergX
CIGas Transmission
ALG6N]IHN GIS RUNSWSSIPV.LLC
tlsww.aY Bh Mxvsau mqi
3.0 PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION
3.1 Preliminary Construction Procedures
Construction of the Pipeline Lateral includes the installation of the hot tap on the existing HubLine
Pipeline and the lay, burial, and commissioning of the Pipeline Lateral commencing at the hot tap and
extending to a location near the NEG Port. Installation of the NEG Port buoys, risers, pipeline end
manifolds ("PLEMs,") and flowlines are to be performed by Northeast Gateway. Construction of the
' Pipeline Lateral will require offshore construction techniques and methods as describe herein. These
include the proposed use of marine pipeline laying; plowing to lower the pipeline below the seabed,
backfill plowing to cover the pipeline,and tie-in of the Pipeline Lateral to the existing HubLine Pipeline.
In general, Algonquin will utilize traditional marine pipeline construction vessels and equipment to
construct the Pipeline Lateral. Regarding burial of the Pipeline Lateral,Algonquin will lower the pipeline
utilizing one pass of a post-lay plow. A review of the geotechnical data collected during the above-
mentioned survey activities indicates one pass of the plow will lower the pipeline below the seabed. The
depth of burial will not only satisfy USDOT code requirements that the top of the pipeline be below
natural sea bottom but will also provide sufficient depth to minimize the potential to impact bottom
' fishing activities such as trawling,dragging, or lobstering(Johnson 2002). In areas where one pass of the
plow does not lower the pipeline at least 1.5 feet below the seabed,remedial burial measures as described
below will be utilized. In limited areas, primarily at the crossing of the Hibernia communications cable
and at any sites not feasible to plow due to unforeseen subsurface geologic conditions,the pipeline will be
laid on the surface and armored with rock. This type of installation will also satisfy USDOT
requirements. Algonquin is continuing to analyze and interpret the geophysical and geotechnical data
collected during the field surveys to further refine the proposed construction techniques described herein.
In addition, the described equipment is subject to change based upon its availability at the time of
construction.
' To minimize the potential for impacts to natural resources, Algonquin will utilize its Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasures Plan ("SPCC") during construction. All necessary personnel involved in
construction will have appropriate training in environmental control measures. In addition, Algonquin
will use environmental inspectors and trade inspectors throughout the construction phase to ensure that
the Pipeline Lateral is constructed safely and in the least environmentally damaging way possible.
3.1.1 Construction Anchor Spread
In order to position and move the various barges during construction, a series of anchors are deployed.
The anchors are moved by anchor handling tugs. Anchor positioning is coordinated between the barge
and tug and positions determined by a Global Positioning System ("GPS"). Barge movement occurs by
pulling in on anchor cables forward of the barge and letting out on anchor cables aft of the barge (See
Figure 3-1). The exact number and locations of anchors are determined in the field in consideration of the
weather,water depth,obstacles, and sensitive underwater resources.
After review of the proposed route, associated construction vessels and installation techniques, the
maximum anchor spread is approximately 6,000 feet. Since the pipeline route traverses a maximum
water depth of approximately 300 feet, the 6,000-foot length will provide sufficient anchor line length for
proper positioning of the vessel, for acceptable station keeping, and to allow for required barge
repositioning during construction.
r
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 3-1
' Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
" w i " " fieri 1m u on 1■i■
TYPICAL VESSEL ANCHOR SPREAD
SCALE
CONDENSED FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES
BOW ANCHORS
HEAVINGIN
STERN ANCHORS
SLACKING AWAY BOW ANCHORS
HEAVIBARGE 9
CONTROL
ROOM
J
°
CONSTRUCTION VESSEL
ANCHOR HANDLING TUG
o`a0
o� o
U
ANCHOR aouY �� F
Co as�i aslon
STERN ANCHORS
AlponpWn Gq Tan�ebM Company �
SLACKING AWAY avow..,a.aawxo .masa nmaw+mo m
0
TYPICAL VESSEL ANCHOR SPREAD
DRAWN BY: G.J.D. CHK'D. BY:DWG. N0. FIG-3- 1 Rd
M.A.V.
0
Y-24-05DATE: 2-24-OS APPRV. BY: R.P.G. �.
A PRELIMINARY z4-os R.P.c. o
NO. REVISION RATE APPR.
rDuke Energx
IGas' ran=16ion
amaa511E iwxswrssat uc
In an effort to reduce impacts to the extent possible,Algonquin will require the marine contractor to make
use of mid-line buoys to support the anchor cables extending from the construction vessels to their
anchors. These buoys, positioned several hundred feet from the anchor end of the cables,will support the
anchor cables thereby minimizing the length of cable contacting the seabed. As the vessel moves on its
anchor spread during construction, the impact of the anchor cable dragging on the seabed is significantly
reduced.
3.1.2 Lay Barge
A Lay Barge ("LB")will be required to install the Pipeline Lateral. While the exact dimensions vary by
vessel,the barge will be approximately 350 feet in length, 100 feet in width,and 25 feet in depth,and will
draft 12 to 15 feet of water (See Figures 3-2). This vessel provides onboard living quarters and dining
facilities for a 150 to 300-person crew.
The lay vessel will have cranes that are used for transferring pipe joints and other materials or equipment
from transportation barges to a storage area on the deck of the vessel.
The type of pipeline installation process performed by the LB is described as S-Lay. This designation is
derived from the S-shaped profile of the pipeline as it transitions from the stern of the barge to the seabed.
As the water depth increases, the tension required to maintain the proper profile also increases.
Engineering calculations are performed to determine the effective tension ranges for successful
installation. To assist the line pipe in transition from the lay vessel to the sealloor, an adjustable structure
is attached to the stern of the barge. This structure is called a"stinger". Adjustable rollers are positioned
in predetermined locations to develop a specific bending profile. A combination of tension and stinger
positioning ensures the pipeline will not be overstressed during the installation process.
The LB will be positioned along the pipeline route with electronic survey positioning equipment that
utilizes a GPS. This data is continually monitored and updated throughout the installation process. The
' proposed pipeline route, anchor positions, pipeline touch down location, existing structures, and other
pertinent data are displayed on the surveyor's computer monitor for the barge superintendent to utilize
during the installation process.
The LB requires the assistance of one or more anchor handling tugs to assist in the anchor positioning and
movement of the barge, transportation/pipe haul barges (which would include two additional tug boats
dedicated to the haul barges) to supply the vessel with line pipe, and a supply vessel to ferry personnel,
supplies and fuel to and from the barge.
The construction of the pipeline is accomplished in an assembly-line fashion on-board the LB. The LB is
configured as follows:
3.1.3 Line-up station
This station is positioned at the bow of the barge and is the location where each 40-foot joint of pipe is
initially staged for welding. A mechanical apparatus is inserted between two adjoining pieces of line
pipe, or joints, to ensure the joints are properly aligned and ready for welding. This device is commonly
referred to as an "internal line-up clamp". Once the proper alignment is achieved, the first weld passes
are applied and the internal line-up clamp is removed.
I
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 3-3
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
TYPICAL PIPELINE LAY BARGE SPREAD
SCALE
CONDENSED FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES
BOW ANCHORS
HEAVING IN
STERN ANCHORS a
SLACKING AWAY BOW ANCHORS
HEAVING IN
H
BARGE 8
CONTROL
ROOM
® LINE—UP
WELDING
STINGER LAY BARGE /
NOE ANCHOR HANDLING TUGJ
PIPE COATING
s?
0
U
ANCHOR BOUY r
does fh�ni sssion
w
STERN ANCHORS agon°uln Gas Tremansbn G°mpeiy
SLACKING AWAY
TYPICAL OFFSHORE PIPELINE
SUBSEA PIPELINE LAY BARGE SPREAD ^_
DRAWN BY: G.J.D. I CHK'D. BY: M.A.V.
0
SEAFLOOR DATE: 2-24-OS APPRV. BY: R.P.G.
A PREUWNARY 2-24—OS R.P.G REV
N0. REVISION DATE MPR. DWG. NO. FIG-3-2 A o
�eke Ene►gX
CIGas lYansmrssion
a. Welding/X-ray or Ultrasonic Testing Stations
There are usually three to five welding stations positioned approximately 40 feet apart. Each station
performs a number of successive weld passes until the weld is completed. Multiple welding stations
increase the efficiency of the operation and results in a timely installation process.
Once welding is completed, nondestructive testing is performed on the weld, in the form of x-ray,
gamma ray or ultrasonic testing to ensure the validity of the weld. Any unacceptable defects are removed
and/or cut-out,repaired and re-examined.
b. Tensioner
The tensioner is an elongated friction clamp that keeps the pipeline on the LB during the welding process.
The tensioner exerts a lateral pulling force on the pipeline. The tensioner is hydraulically actuated and
applies squeeze pressure to the pipeline. The pressure and resulting force is dependent on the specific
tension required to successfully install the pipeline. This force is continuously recorded throughout the
installation process. The lateral pulling force applied by the tensioner is counteracted by the mooring
system of the lay barge.
c. Corrosion Coating Station
Depending on the installation procedure, the girth weld will be sand blasted and readied for the
application of a corrosion coating at the welded joint. A typical method of coating the field weld is the
field-application of fusion bonded epoxy coating.
d. Foam in-fill Station
Concrete weight coating will have been applied to the pipe joints at the onshore coating yard. This
weight coating is necessary to provide adequate weight to the pipeline to assure negative buoyancy for its
service life. During the application of the concrete weight coating, approximately 6 to 12 inches of the
concrete is removed from the end of each pipe (commonly referred to as the "cut back"). To protect the
corrosion coating applied to the girth weld during the installation process and during the lowering
operations, the area without concrete is wrapped with a thin forming device, secured with fasteners and
filled with two part epoxy foam which fills the void and hardens. The foam provides a uniform surface
that prevents the support rollers on the LB and the burial equipment from damaging the corrosion and
weight coating.
' Once each station completes its required tasks, the barge is moved ahead approximately 40 feet and the
process begins again. This gives the appearance the pipeline is being laid, when in reality the barge is
moving out from under the pipeline.
During the lay of the pipeline side tap assemblies will be installed by the lay barge to facilitate the future
connection of the NEG Port to the Pipeline Lateral and pigging assembly. These pre-fabricated
assemblies are welded into the pipeline at pre-determined locations in similar fashion to typical pipe
joints as described above.
3.1.4 Pipeline Trenching Methods
Algonquin is proposing to utilize post-lay plowing as the primary method of pipe lowering. Post-lay
plowing is planned for all segments of the Pipeline Lateral with the exception of the connection to
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 3-5
Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC
__Duke Ege�g .
40 SIM
TFansm�lssion
a.�wpaxoas raw.swssS I
HubLine, the crossing of the Hibernia cable, connection assemblies for the NEG Port flowlines, and any
unforeseen locations where surface lay is required.. These areas will be covered using one of the other
techniques described herein.
Preliminary survey results show no indication of bedrock, glacial till, or other non-plowable hard
substrate along the centerline of the Pipeline Lateral route. Based on this information,it is likely that one
pass of the commercially available plows will be capable of lowering the pipeline a minimum of 1.5 feet
below the seabed. In the instances where this is not possible, remedial methods will be utilized to bury
the pipeline.
a. Post-day Plow
In the mid 1980s, the development of plows capable of lowering larger diameter pipeline had progressed
to the point where the ability of the plow to attain the desired depth of burial became more certain. A
:. multi-pass plow was developed and successfully tested (See Figure 3-3). Since that time some pipeline
installation contractors have developed and operated new and more sophisticated plows capable of
lowering pipelines to desired depths in a single pass in locations that have suitable sediment conditions.
Although the maximum depth of the ditch is still limited to approximately 8 feet,today's plows give more
assurance of obtaining the required depth of bury. The total effect to the bottom environment is limited to
a width of 80 feet or less,centered on the pipeline.
A work barge with a suitable crane (to lift and position the approximately 100-180 ton plow) will be
utilized to support this operation. At a minimum, an eight-anchor mooring system will be utilized by the
vessel. The towing vessel will be equipped with a survey spread comprising navigation and positioning
equipment. The anchor handling tugs ("AHT") will, likewise have navigational equipment including
GPS.
This method of installation involves set up of the towing vessel on location over the pipeline,positioning
its anchors to maximize the pulling force on the plow while retaining control of the vessel and then setting
' the plow on the ocean bottom over the pipeline. The plow shares are hinged such that they can be
lowered over the pipeline and hydraulically closed to encapsulate the pipe (rollers allow safe movement
along the coated pipeline). A remotely operated vehicle ("ROV") or divers may be used to assist in
positioning the plow on the pipeline.
An umbilical line connecting the plow to the towing vessel control room furnishes monitoring and control
of the plow functions. Hydraulic adjustments can be made to the plow shares, the mold board positions,
and the skids from the control room. The mold boards are components of the plow which move spoil
away from the trench. Video monitors and instrument readouts furnish the plowing operators information
on the status of the plowing functions, such as angle and position of shares, position of mold boards and
pressure exerted on the pipeline.
Once the plow is in place, the towing vessel moves along the pipeline (pulling in the bow anchor lines
and releasing the stern anchor lines) to a pre-determined distance ahead of the plow. This provides an
adequate pulling angle on the towline to eliminate `up-lift' on the plow. The plow towing line is secured
and the towing vessel commences the plowing operations. As the towing vessel moves itself forward by
pulling and releasing anchor lines,the AHTS begin the routine of moving the anchors ahead of the towing
vessel.
The towing speed will depend on the type of sediment, depth of cut and rate of`in-fill' occurring behind
the plow and prior to the pipeline settling in the ditch. The spoil resulting from the plowing operation is
spread onto both sides by the mold boards immediately adjacent to the trench.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 3-6
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
TYPICAL PIPELINE PLOW BARGE SPREAD
SCALE
CONDENSED FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES
BOW ANCHOR
HEAVING IN
STERN ANCHORS <'
SLACKING AWAY
® BOW ANCHORS
B HEAVING IN
o°
BURY BARGE
� o
BARGE CONTROL ROOM
O
PLOW
TOWING � SUBSEA
CABLE o40 PIPELINE
o�
—<Vl
CONTROL
UMBILICAL /
ANCHOR HANDLING TUGJ
ANCHOR BOUY d
-2
TRENCH STERN ANCHORS
SLACKING AWAY
pork ep 51=swon w
' RyloigWn Gaz TAensmksbn CwnWm �
mo n�s�su�oo .r�ru owi°mzwva �
TYPICAL OFFSHORE PIPELINE o
PLOW BARGE SPREAD _
SPOIL MOUND DRAWN BY: G.J.D. CHK'D. BY: M.A.V.
0
B RESGLE ANCHORS z—ia—os R.P.c. DATE: 2-21-05 APPRV. BY: R.P.G. I
N0. PREUMINARf REVISION ZDA,E°S�A; DING. No. FIG-3-3 B a
rIG�T,. .
ion
TLGryVpIMN OR51IGNfiWSSIPV.Uc
Ot11iv9uLL 84 Ht Wwo,Yi mtli
Plowing operations will be discontinued approximately 300 feet before the ends of the pipeline, at the
Hibernia cable crossing, and the in-line sidetap assemblies. Plowing operations will commence
approximately 300 feet past the obstruction. This is to ensure that no damage occurs to the foreign utility
crossing or the other fittings.
The plow, when initially set and pulled, travels from a level seafloor down the transition. This transition
may be several hundred feet long. The sediment remaining from the transition and the start distance from
the fitting or crossing must later be removed by jetting in order for the pipeline to be lowered to the
desired depth.
The advantage of using a post pipe-lay plow for the majority of the route is the expected minimization of
turbidity compared to jetting. The disadvantage with using the plow is that it cannot cut through rock or
dense glacial till. Encountering unexpected,unplowable rock or other material during construction would
prevent the complete lowering of the pipeline. In such site-specific locations or at locations where the
pipeline has not been lowered at least 1.5 feet, Algonquin will consider alternative measures such as a
second pass of the plow,importing rock,placing of concrete mats,jetting, or placing of sand/cement bags
as a supplement to ensure that the pipeline is covered.
b. Backfill Plow
The backfill plow("BFP") operations will follow the post-lay plow operations by returning the displaced
spoil to the pipe trench (See Figure 34). The BFP is a guided tool designed with reversed mold boards
that pull the displaced spoil back into the trench; it is placed in the pipe ditch on the pipeline much in the
same way as the post-lay plow; and it is pulled along the pipeline by a towing vessel similarly to the post-
lay plow. It will also be removed from the pipeline approximately 300 feet from the Hibernia cable
crossing, the ends of the pipeline, or the in-line sidetap flanges. Resetting on the pipeline will occur
approximately 300 feet past the foreign crossing or fitting.
The backfilling operation will require one pass with the BFP and the towing vessel. An ROV or diver
may be utilized to set the BFP on the pipeline and may periodically monitor the operations. The main
monitoring and control of the BFP will be through the buoyed control umbilical connecting
instrumentation on the BFP with the towing vessel's control room. The control room will contain the
survey and navigation equipment and the monitors for the backfill plow input data, including BFP
television cameras and profilers. Algonquin will work with permitting and resource agency personnel
regarding the approach to seafloor restoration.
Algonquin is planning to fill the pipeline with seawater prior to the backfilling process(approximately 1.5
million gallons). This increases the specific gravity of the pipeline and increases the stability of the
pipeline within the trench. The seawater would be evacuated during the running of the gauging pig prior
to the filling of the pipeline for the hydrotesting process.
C. Post-lay Jetting
At discrete sites along the pipeline route, it will be necessary to excavate sediment that could not be
removed by the plow. These sites include the HubLine in the vicinity of the hot tap, the Pipeline Lateral
ends, the in-line sidetap assemblies, the crossing of the Hibernia cable, and any locations where the plow
is unable to lower the pipeline. A jetting tool will be utilized to perform this excavation. It will typically
be deployed from the diving vessel. The method of operation for jetting is to set the jet on the bottom
over the pipeline. The water jets are activated to open a ditch around the pipe to facilitate the setting of
the jet. An ROV,or divers,will be used to assist in positioning the jet on the pipeline.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 3-8
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
TYPICAL PIPELINE BACKFILL PLOW BARGE SPREAD
SCALE
CONDENSED FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES
EXPOSED SUBSEA
PIPELINE IN OPEN TRENCH
SPOIL MOUND
BOW ANCHOR
HEAVING IN
STERN ANCHORS
SLACKING AWAY
8
BOW ANCHORS
o HEAVING IN
0
Qeo
0
BURY BARGE
l
o
PLOW BARGE CONTROL ROOM
TOWING
CABLE EXPOSED SUBSEA
PIPELINE IN OPEN TRENCH
CONTROL og`�~
UMBILICAL ANCHOR HANDLING TUG
ANCHOR BOUY d
ti
M
STERN ANCHORS
SLACKING AWAY .-
Ai�s�ni salon p
w
AlponpuN bas Trenunksbn Compniry �
/ / wo wow,v�mii.ao w.um Mwowi cmvwrcn ry
/ r
EXPOSE
SNE NGOPEENN TRENCH TYPICAL OFFSHORE PIPELINE
/ BACKFILL PLOW BARGE SPREAD
BACKFILLED PIPELINE DRAWN BY: G.J.D. CHWD. BY: M.A.V. o
/ DATE: 2-21-OS APPRV. BY: R.P.G.
B RESGALE ANCNDRS 2-24-05 R.P.G. a
A PRELIMINARY 2-21-0.5
N0. REVISION DATE MPR. DWG. NO. FIG-3-4 o
�Duske Energl(.
(IGa7Yansmrssion
' Once the jet is in place,the vessel moves the jet along the pipeline, activating the water and air supplies to
the jet to enable the excavation process to begin. Since this process is used in discrete locations,
movement of the support vessel is minimal.
The type of sediment will affect the depth and speed of the jetting operation. Jetting operations will be
discontinued approximately 50 feet before and after the Hibernia cable crossing. This is to ensure that no
damage occurs to the cable.
In certain small areas at the tie-in, the sidetaps, and the Hibernia crossing, a diver operated hand jet may
be used to remove the soil plug to lower the pipeline. In this process, a support vessel provides
pressurized water through a hose with a nozzle that is maneuvered by a diver. The diver works the
sediment under the pipe to create a trench into which the pipe settles. This method would be employed
for short distances.
Upon completion of the construction process at each location, any required additional material needed to
refill the trench will be imported to the site. This material will be transported to the predetermined
locations by barge and deposited into the trench to achieve the desired cover. Methods of filling the
trench include placement of sand bags or concrete mats by divers and placement of sand with a tremie
pipe. Only clean fill material will be used.
3.1.5 Post-lay Protection
As the plowing occurs, it may be found that certain sections of the Pipeline Lateral have been laid on
unforeseen hard bottom areas. Two methods of protecting the Pipeline Lateral with cover are to install
rock to cover the pipe or place two layers of 9-inch thick concrete mats on top of the pipeline. Covering
of the pipeline with rock protection will only be utilized if other methods of lowering and/or protecting
the pipeline are not feasible due to sediment or construction burial limitations.
3.1.6 Hibernia Fiber Optic Cable Crossing
The only known foreign utility crossing is the crossing of the Hibernia communications cable. The
crossing will be completed whereby a minimum of 18-inches of separation are maintained between the
pipeline and the cable. This separation will be accomplished by the installation of concrete mats or other
permanent materials prior to the laying of the pipeline. The depth of the foreign pipeline crossing is
critical to the final configuration of the crossing. Concrete mats will be placed over the Pipeline Lateral
at the crossing location. Algonquin has contacted Hibernia and is working with them to finalize a crossing
agreement.
3.1.7 Hydrostatic Testing
The pipeline will be hydrostatically tested upon completion of the lay, plowing, and backfill plowing
operations. As mentioned above, the pipeline may be filled with seawater prior to the backfill plowing
operation. Prior to hydrotesting,the pipeline will be gauged to verify its geometric integrity by running a
gauging pig. This pig will displace the seawater previously introduced into the pipeline. The water will
be disposed of at the site following any treatment, if needed. Seawater will be used to fill the pipeline
behind the pig and will serve as the hydrostatic testing medium. Upon completion of the hydrotest, the
water will remain in the pipeline until final tie-ins are made to the HubLine Pipeline, as described below.
It is estimated that each fill of the pipeline will represent approximately 1.5 million gallons of water.
Depending upon the duration of the above events, it may be necessary to inject a biocide into the pipeline
during these filling operations in order to inhibit corrosion. If so, the discharge water will be properly
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 3-10
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
_ihrk®F.nergX
CIGas'/�ansmrssian
4GVfpAN WSiIIPMSMl9.Sl'W.LLC
'me w.mt wu.rtu¢vs.
' treated so that the biocide is neutralized. Algonquin will seek the necessary permit under the EPA's
NPDES Program if a biocide is determined to be necessary.
3.1.8 Pipeline Lateral Tie-in to HubLine
The tie-in to the existing HubLine will be a two-stage process. Initially, a hot tap will be performed.
Second, a pre-fabricated assembly consisting of pipe and valves will be utilized to connect the new
pipeline to the hot tap with the use of flanges.
a. Subsea Hot Tap of HubLine
�. This method is specifically associated with the tie-in of a pipeline already in-service and under pressure
from transported natural gas. To accomplish this method, divers, supported by a diving vessel,perform a
series of actions. The existing pipeline is first uncovered utilizing a jetting tool. The diver then removes
the concrete weight coating and the corrosion coating from a segment of the existing pipeline. Once the
coatings have been removed the hot tap fitting is attached to the existing pipeline. This fitting is
comprised of a clamp, a section of line pipe, a valve and a flange. It is equipped with a drilling device.
Once the fitting is attached to the pipeline, the drill is activated to bore out a segment of the existing
pipeline to enable future flow of gas from the new pipeline into the existing pipeline. Upon completion of
the boring and the removal of the pipe wall segment, the drilling device is removed and the valve closed.
The fitting is now ready to receive the pre-fabricated assembly designed to connect the end of the new
pipeline to the existing pipeline.
b. Subsea tie-in with Flanged Connection
Once the pipeline has been installed, the end of the pipeline will be in the approximate vicinity of the
above-described hot tap location. A marine vessel will be positioned over the end of the pipeline.
Utilizing a lifting cable, the pipeline will be raised above the waterline where the welders on the marine
vessel will weld a flange onto the end of the lifted pipe. The weld is x-rayed and corrosion coating is
applied.
Once the pipeline has been lowered back to the seabed, the distance between the pipeline and the hot tap
flange is measured while both segments are laying on natural bottom. This measurement is used to
fabricate the final or"make-up"pipe segment that will connect the two components. The flanged make-
up spool is fabricated in accordance with the measurements taken. All welds are x-rayed and coated prior
to the subsea installation. The spool is then lowered to the seabed. Divers complete the mechanical tie-in
of the two segments by installing the make-up spool between the flanged ends.
1 3.1.9 Pipeline Drying
Following the completion of tie-in activities, the Pipeline Lateral will be dewatered. The pipeline will
then be dried to a specific dew point to prepare the pipeline for the introduction of natural gas. This
operation, as with the hydrostatic testing and pipeline tie-in operations, will be performed from a dive
vessel.
3.1.10 Pipeline Commissioning
Following the completion of drying operations,the Pipeline Lateral will be purged and filled with natural
gas.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 3-11
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
PDuke Energx
eas TYansm�ssion
. .. u�pmwu oasmwswssay.ac
3.1.11 Survey
Prior to the commencement of pipelay activities, a pre-lay survey will be conducted. Any obstructions
identified along the route that impact the pipeline installation process will be repositioned. Upon
completion of all project work, a final as-built survey will be performed documenting the position of the
Pipeline Lateral and final restoration of the seafloor.
3.2 Preliminary Construction Schedule
Algonquin is planning to construct the Pipeline Lateral beginning in late summer 2006, with completion
in the spring 2007. The Pipeline Lateral is expected to be put into service in the spring of 2007.
Algonquin is engaged in discussions regarding the specific riming of various construction activities with
various federal and state agencies. The timeframes specified herein are preliminary and are subject to
modification after further consultation. A more detailed discussion of the timing and sequencing of the
construction procedures will be presented in Algonquin's FERC application. The activities will be
performed in the general sequence as follows;
• Hot Tap: The hot tapping of the HubLine Pipeline is slated to be the initial activity and is
planned for a late summer 2006 start.
• Lay Pipeline: The laying of the pipeline will commence in fall 2006.
• Lower/Cover Pipeline: The lowering of the pipeline by plowing and the covering of the
pipeline by backfill plow and sand/rock importation methods will be performed during the
late fall 2006 and winter 2006/2007 periods.
• HydrotesVfie-hi/Dry Pipeline: These activities will be performed during the winter/spring
2007 period.
• Final Backfilling and Preparation of As-builts: This work covers the final discrete tie-in
locations and performance of the final surveying activities in the spring 2007 period.
The construction durations and sequence referenced above will be dependent upon several factors.
i ' Establishment of the final Pipeline Lateral route and engineering design are currently ongoing and may
result in scope changes that would revise the above sequence and/or durations. Additionally, the
availability of the appropriate construction equipment needed to execute the work may impact the start
dates and the sequence of work.
3.3 Ancillary Facilities
In order to accommodate the new gas supplies from the NEG Port, minor modifications must be made to
three existing aboveground facilities in Methuen, Salem and Weymouth (see Table 3-1 below for the
proposed work). The locations of the facilities are shown in Figures 3-5, 3-6 and 3-7. Algonquin does
not anticipate the need to conduct any activities outside the existing fenced-in portions of these facilities.
1 As such, the remaining sections of this report, including Section 4.0 Affected Environment, do not
include any detailed discussion or analysis of the aboveground facilities.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 3-12
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
PSauske EnergX
hansmtssion
- uocwwsxsas ruxvessun icc
Table 3-1: Proposed Modifications to Existing Aboveground Facilities
Facility Proposed Modifications
• Install new 10 foot x 15 foot fiberglass meter building
Methuen Meter Station • Install a gas heater
• Install new ultrasonic meter run in the reverse flow direction
• Install pressure control valve runs
• Install new 10 foot x 15 foot fiberglass meter building
Salem Meter Station • Add 8 foot section to existing concrete building
• Remove and reverse ultrasonic meter and add one new ultrasonic meter run
• Install chromatograph
• Install a 16 foot x 21 foot concrete meter building
• Install a gas heater
Weymouth Meter Station • Install a chromatograph
• Install ultrasonic meters and install scmbber
• Install pressure control valve
3.4 References
Johnson, K.A. 2002. A Review of National and International Literature on the Effects of Fishing
on Benthic Habitats.NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-57, August 2002.
r
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 3-13
Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC
` m
1)F� Pq�
�. .cW..
LA 6a,,.„ o
�, i<... J - �� `ter^�r ♦y� OR
r
^ - rJ ,`, Via.
Pm
&South Groveland'USGS topographic quadrangle
Map Prepared by: TM
i. ` ►�” V ►
PAN
MA X
FA
SO
r °
kDomm
Epkvun 713aw—Em
R ms
TIM Z,
IIIER
'`+-• � rte, 1 �-s•m �01��
a �! , •'
F �r
r
� � r/ �'��
No
Lv
14 % N.-N'
81
gm
mom, Base ap consists of'Salerr'USGS topographic
r
Map Prepared by: TUC
VA
Li
A 0 1,000 2,000
51
<, '. ,
ry
.......... Rag dog/
I + a Island rf
�woer � Dead
M
'Jack
ck
gmfg
LAht i Jackkn fe ;
• � r I � >?u11 � , e r cede
•�' •� Z?,• z `.."71dsd',E1at ... `:. Iero v y.
'd.r ":P,`.P�t�r a rem �✓'y\� ..`,.-•-sa4i;
40/ bI
EXISTING WEYMOUTH METER STATION y ,tir "^�
I l U j 1
FpJ b
.•� � � .rs r �..• '�g� .'��...�\-� \ 2
Z
' 3 x
4
Y
LL v�
Base map consists o/Hull&Weymouth'
USGS topographic quadrangle.
Map Prepared by: TIK
m a h .r'::✓ +t IZJ
U ,' � • \, J � ! 0 1,000 2,00000
$ t •6
n NORTHEAST GATEWAY PIPELINE LATERAL
ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION,LLC
FIGURE 3-7
WEYMOUTH METER STATION
SITE �
• ! ;,tlr LOCATION .(',r.1 `_µVQ+ EIIB M
rz r
' Ph Duke EnergK.
IGas 7Yan�s�mr�ssuion
4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
The marine portions of the Pipeline Lateral are located within the Gulf of Maine, a continental shelf sea
bounded by Cape Cod on the south and Nova Scotia on the north. The Gulf is renowned for its biological
productivity. For centuries, the Gulf has supported a commercial fishery that has been important to the
region's social and economic structure.
The Gulf is part of a large-scale coastal circulation system and has some characteristics of a large estuary.
There are also important influences from tides, topography, and wind. There are annual variations in
1, many features, as well as significant interannual variations and strong variability of tides and atmospheric
conditions. There appears to be strong coupling between the circulation/hydrography of the Gulfs
' interior waters and that of the nearshore water in bays and estuaries. Seasonal runoff is a major factor in
the Gulf s large-scale circulation.
' The following sections provide an overview of the marine resources associated with the Pipeline Lateral.
Field survey data has been or is in the process of being collected to further define these resources along
the pipeline route. Additional detailed descriptions of these resources will be presented in environmental
documentation that will be filed with the FERC and USCG.
4.1 Seafloor Conditions
Algonquin conducted a comprehensive geophysical and geotechnical survey program in Massachusetts
Bay to characterize the seafloor and subbottom conditions for the purpose of establishing the best possible
pipeline route to the NEG Port. Algonquin's preferred route maximizes the amount of soft substrate(mud
and sand) while minimizing or eliminating harder seafloor conditions including coarse glacial till,
cobbles, boulders, and bedrock outcroppings. The results of the surveys indicate that the preferred
pipeline route is located in an area consisting mostly of soft sediments (sand, silt, and clay) to lessen the
possible difficulties of the pipeline construction and minimize impacts to more complex "hard bottom"
' habitats.
The geophysical and geotechnical survey program was conducted in two phases as previously described
in Section 2.0. Phase 1 data collection using side scan sonar, boomer sub-bottom profiler and multibeam
bathymetry targeted centerline data along the primary route and potential alternates. Where warranted,
additional data in the form of confirmatory grab samples to assist in proper characterization of surficial
1 sediment characteristics, and perpendicular track-lines to assess geophysical characteristics laterally off
the centerline and any parallel track-lines was collected to ensure the final route selected was the most
favorable. The intent of the Phase 2 survey was to perform a detailed geophysical, archeological, and
engineering survey of the proposed pipeline route and construction corridor selected from the Phase 1
1 survey operations. The Phase 2 survey operation included the collection sub-bottom data, side scan data,
magnetometer data, and multibeam data of the seafloor (see Figure 4-1). Additional information on the
surveys conducted during the two phases is presented in the following sections.
' 4.1.1 Geophysical Program
• Side Scan Sonar - Side scan imagery was utilized to determine seabed geomorphology, assist
with surficial sediment type identification, and to identify surface obstructions. Particular
attention was given to boulders (larger than 1.5 meter),rock outcroppings or surface obstructions
(shipwrecks).
MNortheast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 4-1
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
" dart Ei275J 11s01� i]y 41INbR H N 93Mc''3' 70 - 114 123 -128 ! 14 .`...''h J+aR � t31
4 206
f1/91 `�•
• 3g FIOIiN gp -ry 61 44 .• .GLOUCESTER cit! '
1iG9. FGS t)EMAACAitOrJL1ME 02514.(: Im 260077 3:S..1o8��{
17,
5 80:w.?d(see+KAs Al 0 , � !4•' F ,26 ''� tae 1 1 .• } 1
' C'8 27 J b 68 87
2-.3.
4- 12MANCHESTERj ` y� �. •NORTH SNORE'. y� I�
27 05 2 2 6. t 62 r-. 83 a 144 , ;v IBPOCEAN,�SANCTUARYI' t76
P•aeJle PI gylr, 3fi F+ *BEVERL+Y 15`. 07 / 135 f •'h �_.. .r \\
J37. $ a .V8 I C•9'! j 174 2.9V1
p .'�+' 1 22 •SALEM \ . r! r b yl 3i 52 1135 ••'• ••�% 2 \\ 212
C9it 1 72 47 ,L 2J± ,SOUTH ESSEX.\: 167 192
ytl 918 a , 931 'e � 144 11..,.0'••••••} IB I ;OCEANSANCTUARY 2 228
849 '6•, u Ne on ZeCrge 3' i
� �• N 2
� ` 73`. ` N 6 �,'36! N2 �` `Ay 2� ® ,•�0'• 85 f
'..E �9 16 pC 1• 7Q �r179 112 ` — / 4 194 986 9B
y295
41R,.less 76 6] i.'',J-• 76 ` 119 . I6 \ ^+^ - _
4� E{alfn•aJ•Rk N
12
87
'
3i 6 207 •8 -STEL'L'WAGEN BAK
`\\1 Z55 NAT/ONAL MARINE I�5
' �, SANCTUARY
93. �7 83..$til•, �`'' 44:o f[r•) E 7/ ild I7� Ifr7�
TOWER. M A eendTlee)18p ''7r4+'Tev Ht 'EL <�/ 1200=PIOia i l
\ �`ta" „ 192
t�7ti4)'... 19: i7 ic`i <Z � J 1969 uarN ,' 7 6 476 X17 $
'IytngDl 'fig 2a 4 J 4 r••o ••• PREFERRED PIPELINE LATERALROUTE'(16.4 Miles) Ar
9 s r"y!•- Ttrtkurail 69 3 ,� J g �n Y�• 174 G .. l $
`:..^)Y J lyd:• 1L 183 `
21
• : 2• 99 .•' 177 l 1 227 ,.... 179 199
q: 27R:j1 48 48' MA BLEHEAD 1 9 \\ 251
@2 ' 5' GONG 1 . •9- 43 P .... .LEGEND
. . ,
1. 76 16a.,3}}-Hy� i4k ^5§% 120 109 /105 j 139 I8 2 �i
✓k �r RX 1401 `'� JN.j 92 14 169 22
C'p a� 3 l 87 I� In ••' 187 180 Preferred Pipeline Lateral Route
!P\ i53 l��a� - e Deepwater Pon
T'
EXISTING HIBERNIA CABLE 4a6
IR E'P'- 153 _. �. — ,,.. .. _ _ _
' 1 \.SI I \ ,U�`��,]." 101 !1 Gale • / ` 50 _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ 45 NEG Pon Flow Line
Northeast Gateway
� (NEG Pal)
150 • •�
`� 216 � • Zd0 �. r
.� 45 �•9R �,9 /� 3 59a. •••• �' r3B 157 204 NORTHEAST GArT Y Northeast Gateway Deepwater
N� Ov J ` " / q8 957 Pon Surve Area
AeaeEu r� 39 $ 0 251 DEEPWA'+VARA RT s] y
D� 102 / _ ///1 � `-SURVEY AREA'. D6 67 HuoLine Pipeline(existing)
"meg-7 / / A8 I4 1 Hibernia Cable(ezisfing)
jJ
•,' 91 , 0. 1 \ i/ \ 150 151 150 !'4 1 J • • I • • 1 Y P
• �•••• l 1 ✓ \\1YY.• I / D MassaUusetts Ba Disposal Site
•.. J 106 / i32.{. Oampsg Vsd 1 1 0
1D8' vvcpngC ISO 163 150 Town Boundary
210_
IRI 132 • • i A, • / �� Field Sumo Sampling Locations
/ I 139 26 I 1 \ SG 211 / /�� Y P 9
108 126 +/ Lao) + 212 ,1 / \ 159 • Sediment Profile Imagery(SPI)
sM S4 1'�
I / 9g a 219 \ • SPI 8 Benmic Grab Sample
SWAMPSCOTT , / 124 :11 ,A�r� _ / !31 j £7r'/r.OSP�• 0 ViMacore
4. 144 f 68!!
1 p 7 .�38.�• / S ( Marine/Ocean Sanctuaries
4' IY .. .f 5•. .." y 114 ,\ 1' 16 /�. 182 , /•7•" PA • • • I y I Q NORTH SHORE
% l.. '4'L9 130 991 7 r.•�.. h Oe 1 2 304 ;flY
e 4 '�,;) •` 160 '01
SITE f4N 267 Q SOUTH ESSEX
R 104 S �A O ""'-'"; I 8 21 2Z6 ? • 2� , 1'• "A" / C= STELLWAGEN BANK
:A LSYNN 0 - DC7 t88 O Doom/ro��dy sb9eel -i t MASSACHUSETTS BAY y '
o 8 ,. _ m !e \ DISPOSAL SITE2
1 4 O2 (� 247y !! Miles
LLi 92 4. �Adep/- lePDrMd w�Q a 144. 6 • • • • \ /.. o o.s il z
66
Z. 8 - ' '1115' �p 150 19 3 t ! 2BI ' Base map consists of 1 80,000 Massachusetts
S 6 Bey'NOAH chart. Sounding are in feet iat
s
r"'0 I s^ 261/1•� mean lowerlow water. Federd!/Statejunsdicfional
boundary and NAHANT ry C,71 [1f112 - ,1 • • „s j•1 1 Ydocit caRso• b 4 90 obtained fiom Massachusetts Oceen an Resources
(� F.] I IIS J _ 1
105. 56 \: 172 2777 24 ` - r!� 7 1�,' r.'�,I \ . „�Ilr1. lllriJ Coasw ZonInformation e management Office of
148 _ 216—y • • —r--„(^—�,�.-;— -n1- \\ /rr Map Prepared by: IRC
NORTHEAST,U&I MWQY 27
A`TiU OMIT h]6
73 139 �.r-3 - - 243 ' l`,t NORTHEAST GATEWAY PIPELINE LATERAL
Po go 77 .1 1082 • • • • Iugln• �nn 2
90 '�^ I � ,` �e,ett'” y 1 • e 11!InJrrlr J ALGONOUIN GAS TRANSMISSION,LLC
"i 72 8 _^r_ � 69
i A % { p I .• \ v£1IC Z00 FIGURE 4-1
u BOSTON' •60 I _ 3 114 ! 15 5s 1 • / FIELD SURVEY SAMPLING LOCATIONS
• O Was __
e 63. 7 ," / mal ORN :4. 4`\ ,N ' 144 I� 16 .~zz7 25z �r�Gmsat!.ann allon
1IDuke EnergX.
/Gas 7Yansm�ssion
• Sub-bottom Profile - The sub-bottom data was collected and utilized to develop a stratigraphic
profile along the route to a depth of 10 feet. Chirp and boomer systems were deployed during the
collection of sub-bottom data to map the bedrock basement.
• Multibeam Survey - Hydrographic data was used to generate depth profiles along the proposed
alignment(s) (essentially similar to topographic contours used on land-based topographic
mapping). The primary object of this data in Phase 1 was to correlate the seafloor shape with
other data collected and to measure abrupt changes in the seafloor slope.
• Ponar Grab Samples-Ponar grab samples were collected during the Phase 1 survey. These Ponar
grabs provided ground-truthing of the side scan imagery, rather than biological or sediment
characterization.
4.1.2 Geotechnical Program
Following the completion of the Phase 1 geophysical survey program, Algonquin initiated a geotechnical
survey program aimed at confirming the nature and engineering characteristics of the subsurface sediment
types along the preferred pipeline alignment. Algonquin obtained actual samples of sediment material
for further laboratory analyses using a vibratory coring device (see Figure 4-1). The laboratory analyses
of sediment characteristics, included grain size, shear strength, and resistivity. Results from the coring
operations are being used to provide confirmatory data supporting the geophysical surveys conducted
along the route for engineering and cultural resource assessment.
4.2 Surface Water Resources
Surface water resources associated with the Pipeline Lateral include the marine waters of coastal
Massachusetts, with the Pipeline Lateral located entirely within Massachusetts Bay. Massachusetts Bay
has been described by Signell (1996) as a semi-enclosed embayment that opens into the Gulf of Maine at
its eastern boundary. It is roughly 62 miles long, 31 miles wide and has an average water depth of 115
feet ("ft"). The Bay is bounded on the east by Stellwagen Bank, which rises to within 70 ft of the sea
surface. The deepest portion of the Bay is Stellwagen Basin, with typical depths of 260 ft. There are no
major rivers entering directly into Massachusetts Bay. The largest is the Charles, with an annual average
discharge rate of about 10 cubic meters per second ("cros"). Boston Harbor empties into western
Massachusetts Bay,providing a significant source of contaminants to the region(Signell 1996)along with
1 the municipal wastewater outfall located 9 miles east of Boston Harbor in Massachusetts Bay.
Circulation in Massachusetts Bay is driven by a combination of local and remote processes that vary with
the seasons. Throughout the year, water flows southward in the western Gulf of Maine. Although most
of this current continues flowing southward over the eastern flank of Stellwagen Bank(largely bypassing
Massachusetts Bay),at times a small branch flows into the Bay and drives a weak counter-clockwise flow
that enters at Cape Ann and exits at Race Point. The mean magnitude of this flow vanes from less than 1
cm per second off Boston to about 313 cm per second along other sections of the western shore of
Massachusetts Bay.
' The water properties in the Bay show a marked seasonal cycle, varying from cold, well-mixed waters
during the winter to strongly stratified conditions during the summer months. The Commonwealth of
Massachusetts has codified water quality standards for inland and coastal and marine waters throughout
' the state (314 CMR 4.00). The standards designate the most sensitive uses for which the various waters
are to be enhanced,maintained and protected, and prescribe the minimum water quality criteria to sustain
the uses. Water quality classification in the vicinity of the Pipeline Lateral includes waters classified as
SA. Class SA waters are designated as an excellent habitat for fish, other aquatic life and wildlife and for
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 4-3
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
'Gas Duke EnergX.
7Fansmrssion
xcwanuws raaaswssur,ik
m .«.sGe v.mwo.,.w eat'
' primary and secondary contact recreation. The Pipeline Lateral area is suitable for shellfish harvesting
without depuration (Open Shellfish Areas). In addition, Class SA waters are designated as having
excellent aesthetic value.
iSediments along the preferred Pipeline Lateral route have been characterized using existing data sources
as well as surveys performed along the preferred route. As previously described, surficial and subsurface
sediments have been collected at various locations along the route with a variety of sampling gear.
Information on the sediment and seafloor investigations performed by Algonquin will be presented in
more detail in the environmental documentation accompanying the FERC and USCG applications. In
I general, the geophysical investigations along the proposed Pipeline Lateral route provided information to
characterize the seabed within the proposed pipeline route and to identify specific features present on the
seabed that might impede installation of the Pipeline Lateral. Habitat attributes of various seafloor
1 substrates were also evaluated. Sediments ranging in size from silty mud to areas of coarse-grained
sediments were identified on the seabed within the pipeline corridor that was investigated. A large
majority of the route contains fine to medium grained sediments.
At its closest point,the preferred pipeline route is located more than 1,295 feet from the boundaries of the
Massachusetts Bay Disposal Area. With no known or potential sources of contaminants along the
pipeline route, sediments are unlikely to contain contaminants. Sediment disturbance during pipeline
installation is therefore unlikely to involve the release of contaminants or the redistribution of sediment
contaminants.
Certain sensitive surface waters have been designated by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as
Outstanding Resource Waters ("ORWs"). The Pipeline Lateral does not cross nor is it likely to impact
any ORWs.
I'll 4.3 Beuthic Resources
Marine benthic communities consist of the flora and fauna that grow in and on substrates of the seafloor.
l , A variety of studies have occurred within Massachusetts Bay, including work by the MWRA as part of
the Massachusetts Bay outfall, studies done in support of the designation of the Massachusetts Bay
Disposal Area, Algonquin's surveys of the HubLine Pipeline, and preliminary studies recently completed
for the Pipeline Lateral. In general, in areas of predominantly fine-grained substrate (representing at least
half of the route) such as silts and fine sands, a variety of invertebrate fauna are common. Cancer crabs,
sand dollars, polychaetes, oligochaetes, solitary hydroids, several shrimp species, and burrowing
anemones are present for much of the route. Hermit crabs, several species of small clams,ocean quahogs,
scallops, mud snails, and lobsters are also present, sometimes occurring patchily based on subtle changes
in sediments. Macroalgae typically do not occur in these substrates nor at the depths present along the
pipeline route.Demersal fish are also present,including flounder, sculpin,skates,ocean pout,and hake.
Areas of medium-grained sediments (representing a relatively small portion of the route) such as sands
and small gravel are likely to provide habitat for several species of polychaetes, oligochaetes, scallops,
cancer crabs,amphipods,sand dollars,sea stars,and burrowing anemones. The most commonly observed
invertebrate species in areas of coarser-grained sediments (representing a relatively small portion of the
route) are scallops, small clams, sand dollars, shrimp, and cancer crabs. Coralline algae may occur
sparsely in the western portion of the route where cobble occurs in waters around 100 feet deep. Isolated
rocks and cobble may have attached organisms such as hydroids, sponges or tunicates; however these
would occur at very low biomass levels. Skates, sculpin, and hake are demersal fish that occur in
medium-and coarse-grained sediment habitats.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 4-4
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
�Duke Energx
CIGas TYansmrssion
Although not present along the centerline of the preferred route, there are areas of coarser cobble and
glacial till located within the potential anchor corridor. These areas are more prevalent in the first 3 miles
of the pipeline route. Typical benthic community components in these types of habitats include cancer
crabs, lobsters, scallops, urchins, and solitary anemones. Encrusting coralline algae may attach to rocks
and cobble in the shallower western portion of the route. Other invertebrates potentially inhabiting this
area include sea stars, brittle stars,horse mussels, encrusting sponges,hydroids, tunicates, and bryozoans.
Herbivorous snails and chitons, epifaunal amphipods, and other mobile epifauna are more diverse and
abundant in these types of substrates compared to sedimentary substrates. Demersal finfish such as
skates, sculpin, cunner, cod, pollock, wolffish, and flounder may also occur in this more heterogeneous
habitat.
4.4 Finfish
Finfish species occurring in the Pipeline Lateral area include demersal (those found in association with
the bottom), and pelagic (those usually found in the water column). Results from various trawling
projects were evaluated and the following generalizations are presented on demersal species. The
' American lobster (Homarus americanus), though not a finfish, is a numerically and commercially
important part of the demersal community in Massachusetts Bay. Longfin squid(Loligo pealei), also not
a finfish, and Atlantic butterfish (Peprilus triacanthus) can be considered semi-pelagic organisms that
may be found in abundance, but their occurrence in monitoring programs is sporadic. Winter flounder
(Pleuronectes americanus), skates, Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua), and longhorn sculpin (Myoxocephalus
octodecemspinosus) are demersal species likely to occur year round. The MDMF conducts a survey of
the Massachusetts inshore ground fish resources each spring and fall. Loligo squid, butterfish, winter
flounder,and American lobster accounted for 73 percent of the organisms captured.
Pelagic fishes are usually found in the water column. They are often fast-swimming schooling fish and
can undergo extensive seasonal migrations. Unlike demersal fish, pelagic fish are highly mobile and are
not as closely associated with any particular bottom habitat. Therefore, the occurrence of pelagic fish at a
specific sampling location will also be representative of what might be expected in the general area. Gill
nets are usually used to capture pelagic fish as they are not particularly vulnerable to capture by otter
trawls. Based on gill netting data, Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) and Atlantic mackerel (Scomber
scombrus) are among the dominant pelagic fish while Atlantic mackerel, Atlantic herring, alewife,
Atlantic cod, cunner, and longhorn sculpin are also abundant species sampled in the Pipeline Lateral
Area. The sampling of pelagic fishes in Massachusetts Bay agrees with trends in abundance of pelagic
fishes in the Gulf of Maine as determined by the NMFS.
4.5 Shellfish
The primary species along the Pipeline Lateral route are sea scallops and ocean quahogs. Sea scallops
1 reside on the substrate surface and their distribution is strongly substrate-related. Juvenile scallops are
found mainly on gravel, small rocks, shells, and silt. Adults are found on coarse substrate, especially
gravel, shells, and rock. Routing for the Pipeline Lateral was designed to avoid rocky and hard bottom
' areas to the greatest extent possible. A small fishery for sea scallops exists in Salem Sound.
Ocean quahogs reside just below the sediment surface in medium to fine-grained sands. This range of
sediments is predominant for much of the preferred pipeline route, and preliminary assessment of benthic
conditions indicate that quahogs are present. As evident during the benthic surveys of the HubLine
Pipeline, quahogs are present in varying densities throughout much of Massachusetts Bay. However,
1 either because of challenging fishing conditions or uneconomical abundances, commercial harvesting of
quahogs does not occur in the Pipeline Lateral area.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 4-5
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
' Duko ErgK.
Peas han
neAJ61on
'' ALi#'L'gNV W$lw�4Sw4S.PY LLC
mwe&.0 ab a.vae+.w mtii
' A variety of other shellfish species likely exist along the pipeline route, including horse mussels and
pelagic shellfish(longfin and shortfin squid).
i4.6 Lobster
Lobsters produce free-swimming larvae that occur in the water column. They are phototactic and are
usually found near the surface during the day and at greater depth at night. Older larvae (Stage N or
postlarva) will settle to the bottom and actively select habitat for benthic life. The newly settled larvae,
also known as early benthic phase ("EBP") larvae, appear to prefer complex habitat that provides shelter.
1 The preferred habitat for newly settled lobsters is cobble beds. This habitat may be available in limited
areas along the route classified as coarse glacial till, although much of the pipeline route is in water
depths greater than settlement occurs in because of the establishment of a summer thermocline that
1 settling larvae do not cross. Juvenile and adult lobsters also prefer shelter. Habitat consisting of a sand,
gravel or bedrock base with a rock overlay is a common inshore lobster habitat. Lobsters will also be
found in soft substrates where they can excavate burrows for shelter. Given their variable habitat
requirements and opportunistic foraging behaviors, it can be expected that adult lobsters may occur
' almost anywhere along the proposed pipeline route. Lobsters must molt to grow, and until the new
carapace hardens, the lobster is largely immobile, typically having taken refuge in a natural or created
burrow or space between rocks.
Meetings with local lobstermen indicate that lobstering occurs throughout the preferred pipeline route and
that with the overall east-west orientation of the pipeline route, inshore and offshore fisheries could be
affected by pipeline construction. However, Algonquin has spent considerable effort during the route
selection phase to avoid important habitat areas (e.g. glacial till and rocky substrates) preferred by EBP
and adult lobsters. By avoiding these features, the construction procedures (see Section 3.0) are more
simplified and the need for blasting or surface lay of the pipeline can be avoided. The predominant
sediment type along the preferred pipeline route is fine to medium grained sediments. Benthic
recolonization of these sediment types has been documented to occur more quickly than more complex
habitat types. This issue will be covered in greater detail in the environmental reports that will
' accompany Algonquin's application to the FERC in May 2005.
The American lobster is the most economically important commercial species harvested in
Massachusetts. The proposed route of the pipeline passes through three statistical areas used by the
MDMF to tabulate lobster landings, Areas 2, 3 and 19. However, only a very small area of the southern
portion of Area 2 is crossed by the pipeline route. Areas 2 and 3 were among the most productive
reporting areas within territorial waters,ranking 1 and 3 in 2002. Offshore Area 19 covers a much larger
area than the inshore areas and accounted for a similar level of landings to Area 2 in 2002.
' 4.7 Commercial and Recreational Fishing
4.7.1 Commercial Fishing
' Commercial fishing, including groundfish, pelagic and invertebrate fisheries, is an important economic
human activity within the productive waters of the Gulf of Maine, including the Massachusetts Bay area
(NOAA 1993). The fish species taken commercially are managed by the New England Fishery
Management Council through a number of fisheries management plans. In the first approximately two
miles of the Pipeline Lateral from where it interconnects with the HubLine, the preferred route is in a
MDMF mobile gear regulated area. In addition, the Pipeline Lateral falls within two NOAA Fisheries
' Management rolling closure areas(Block Nos. 125 and 133),where fishing is currently seasonally closed
from April 1 to June 30th. Fishing is further restricted in Block 125 as it is also closed from October 1 to
November 30th.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 4-6
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
' __Duke EnergK.
PIP& Mansmtssion
AtGOpUNEaS IMNSNI5 T LLC
eburvr su.aq W�aw..0 mai
' Commercial fishing in the vicinity of the Pipeline Lateral includes the following activities:
• Lobster Fishery
• Shellfish,primarily scallop
• Finfish,mobile and fixed gear
• Commercial striped bass rod and reel
• Sea Urchin Dragging and Diving
In locating the most feasible pipeline route, Algonquin has consulted with local fishing groups in the area
and with the MDMF and NMFS. Construction of the Pipeline Lateral will result in temporary impacts to
the day to day fishing activity in the immediate vicinity of the construction vessels. Careful marking of
the construction corridor will help commercial fishermen temporarily avoid fishing the areas of active
construction. Public efforts, such as daily Notice to Mariners,will allow fisherman to plan their activities
around the construction and will minimize interruptions to fishing activity. A similar successful program
was employed during the recent HubLine Pipeline construction. Algonquin will coordinate with
' commercial fishermen so that disruption to regular fishing activities is minimized. Informational and
coordination meetings will be held with the interested fishing groups to review and discuss issues of
concern. Once the pipeline is installed,the same fishing activities that currently occur in the pipeline area
' will be able to continue unimpeded.
4.7.2 Recreational Fishing
Recreational fishing is popular in Salem Sound and along the north shore of Massachusetts. A study of
the Marine Resources of Salem Sound conducted by the MDMF in 1997 shows the following species are
caught in the Salem Sound area: striped bass, skate, Atlantic mackerel, winter flounder, bluefish, Atlantic
cod, white perch, Atlantic tomcod, spiny dogfish, and summer flounder. Striped bass was the dominant
species targeted by recreational fishermen.
' In addition,there is a recreational lobster fishery in the area of the Pipeline Lateral. Massachusetts lobster
fishery statistics (Dean et al. 2004) give information on the recreational fishery for the entire state. The
number of licenses issued for the entire state in 2002 was 11,134, although only a fraction of these are
' likely to involve lobstering in the vicinity of the Pipeline Lateral. Recreational lobster landings for 2002
were reported to be 1.6 percent of the commercial landings. The numbers of traps that are fished in this
recreational fishery have decreased about 5 percent from 2001 (Dean et al.2004).
Some temporary loss of available recreational fishing area in the immediate vicinity of the pipeline laying
vessel and associated vessels and tenders is expected to occur, similar to that for commercial fishermen.
However,once the pipeline is installed, the same fishing activities that currently occur in the pipeline area
' will be able to continue unimpeded.
4.8 Wildlife and Listed Species
The waters of Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays are visited by various species of whales, seals,
porpoises, dolphins, and sea turtles. Although Massachusetts Bay has not been designated as critical
habitat areas for these species, its proximity to important habitat for endangered North Atlantic right
whales in Cape Cod Bay and the Great South Channel, and the heavy use of the Stellwagen Bank
National Marine Sanctuary by endangered humpback and fin whales, make it a significant area for these
protected cetaceans.
' The species listed by the state and federal Endangered Species Act that are known or have the potential to
be present in the vicinity of the Pipeline Lateral include six endangered whales (right, humpback, fin, sei,
sperm and blue whales), and five endangered sea turtles (loggerhead, Kemp's ridley, leatherback,
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 4-7
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
iI
' Duke EeBr9Ke
C/Gas iransmrssion
uc8:gwsizwswscw+;uc
' hawksbill, and green turtles). Turtles are rare visitors to the area,more typically occurring in proximity to
Cape Cod.
Initial review of several reports on whales in Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays, including those written
in support of the Massachusetts Waters Resources Authority ("MWRA") Harbor and Outfall Long-term
Monitoring Program, indicates that whales have occasionally been sighted in the vicinity of the proposed
Pipeline Lateral area. Since 1998, about 30 protected whales including humpback, fin, and minke whales
were sighted by MWRA marine mammal observers. Right whales are known to migrate through the area
as they move between feeding areas in Cape Cod Bay and the Bay of Fundy.
Marine avifauna potentially occurring in the larger Pipeline Lateral area include such groups as
shorebirds,waders,egrets,sea ducks,other waterfowl,gulls,terns, and cormorants. However, species that
feed on land or at the shoreline would only be flying over the offshore location of the pipeline route. The
water birds can be divided into three groups based on the period of their residency: summer, winter and
year round. Given the mobility of water birds and the extensive feeding area available outside the
pipeline corridor, and the temporary nature of the presence of construction vessels, use of the Pipeline
Lateral area will remain largely unaffected. Given the water depths over 100 feet, habitat for bottom
feeding birds will not be affected by pipeline construction.
' Typical land birds of urban/suburban settings may occur at the three existing onshore aboveground
facility sites in Salem, Methuen and Weymouth. In addition, the existing Methuen Meter Station is
located in an area mapped as Estimated Habitat for Rare Wetlands Wildlife by the NHESP. However,the
minor modifications proposed for the site will occur entirely within the fenceline of the developed meter
station facility and will not alter any rare species habitat.
Incidental bald eagles may also occur in the Pipeline Lateral area, as could piping plover and roseate tern.
However,bald eagles tend to forage closer to shore and piping plovers forage along beaches and shoreline
habitats, and would most likely remain unaffected by the Pipeline Lateral. Roseate terns forage at sea,but
typically in more shallow water, or if in the Pipeline Lateral area, will be largely avoided due to the
primarily winter construction period.
To address issues related to protected species and the Pipeline Lateral, Algonquin is preparing a Baseline
Assessment which includes a description of the proposed Pipeline Lateral and the site, the natural history
of endangered species known to be in the Pipeline Lateral area, and an analysis of possible impacts of the
Pipeline Lateral on the endangered species. The Baseline Assessment will identify areas of interaction
between the Pipeline Lateral and threatened/endangered species and enable reviewing agencies to make
an informed decision during the NEPA and MEPA review.
Consultation with the NHESP, MDMF, NOAA NMFS, and USFWS was initiated in February 2005.
Informal consultations with these agencies will continue during the preparation of the NEPA/MEPA EIS
in order to prepare the proper level of detail for the state or federally listed species. The Baseline
' Assessment will be included in Algonquin's application to the FERC.
4.9 Navigation
Based on preliminary consultation with the ACOE, Navigation Branch and the USCG, the Pipeline
Lateral does not cross any federal navigation channels, special anchorage areas, or lightering areas.
' 4.10 Historical and Archaeological Resources
A marine archaeological sensitivity assessment, performed in consultation with the Massachusetts Board
of Underwater Archaeological Resources ("MBUAR"), recorded an extensive inventory of historical and
' Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 4-8
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
' DukeergK
En
Peas ►►•ansmrssicn
' archaeological resources spanning the entire pre-and post-contact periods on land,although no previously
documented historic properties are located within the offshore Pipeline Lateral area. The assessment
concluded that little if any of the offshore Pipeline Lateral area had been exposed land when the local sea
level was at an estimated minus 150-foot low-stand during the early pre-contact period. An earlier
archaeological investigation conducted along the HubLine found that much of the pre-inundation land-
surface was destroyed, disturbed, or deeply buried as a result of the post-glacial marine transgression.
While it is theoretically possible that undocumented, pre-contact archaeological deposits from the
Paleolndian Period (ca. 12,500 to 10,000 years ago) and the beginning of the Early Archaic Period (ca.
10,000 to 9000 years ago) are present within the shallower, westernmost portion of the offshore Pipeline
Lateral area, the aforementioned findings indicate that the area has low sensitivity for containing pre-
contact period archaeological resources.
In contrast, the results of the marine archaeological assessment indicate a high sensitivity for post-contact
period resources (i.e., shipwrecks) associated with the early history and extensive development of
maritime commerce in Essex and Suffolk counties. This conclusion is based on the review of available
' information regarding the area's large number of documented vessel losses and its proximity to modern
and historic-period shipping routes between some of the regions oldest and most active ports. There are
26 wrecks/obstructions that appear on current navigation charts within and in close proximity to the
I ' offshore Pipeline Lateral area, and more than 100 others that are listed in federal and state shipwreck
inventory databases, a percentage of which may be located in the Pipeline Lateral area and qualify as
National Register-eligible resources upon identification and evaluation.
' A comprehensive marine archaeological reconnaissance survey protocol utilizing a marine magnetometer,
side scan sonar, sub-bottom profiler, and fathometer, in conjunction with a program of vibratory coring,
was developed for the Pipeline Lateral area in consultation with the MBUAR to locate targets with
moderate to high potential for representing post-contact period shipwrecks or pre-contact period
archaeologically sensitive inundated buried paleosols. The marine archaeological field survey is
presently underway. Completion of the survey is anticipated for April 2005.
' 4.11 References
e Dean, M; Lundy, M;Hoopes, T. 2004. 2002 Massachusetts Lobster Fishery Statistics. Massachusetts
Division of Marine Fisheries. Annisquam River Marine Fisheries Station. Gloucester.
Massachusetts.
Signell, R. 1996. Circulation and Effluent Dilution Modeling in Massachusetts Bay: Model
Implementation,Verification and Results. U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 96-015. U.S.
' Geological Survey, Woods Hole,Massachusetts. 121 pp.
U.S.Department of Commerce,National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA), Sanctuaries
and Reserves Division. 1993. Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary Final Environmental
' Impact Statement/Management Plan. Volumes I and IL. Sanctuaries and Reserves Division,
Silver Spring.
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 4-9
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
' Duke Ene►gg.
iGas Transmission
KGQ'IWNN GrIS i/NNSNISSIXy LLS
mxw au aF ID.xvuglu @p�
' 5.0 WATERWAYS/COASTAL ZONE/WETLANDS
' 5.1 Waterways License
The Commonwealth owns submerged tidelands within Massachusetts territorial waters. Activities such
as construction of piers, pipelines and utilities on or under the tidelands owned by the Commonwealth
' may occur upon receiving a waterways license pursuant to M.G.L c.91 and MDEP regulations at 310
CMR 9. Algonquin expects to seek a waterways license from MDEP during the summer 2005 and to
work closely with MDEP to assure that the Pipeline Lateral meets all of MDEP's requirements.
The goals of waterways licensing requirements include fostering water-dependent uses of marine
resources,such as fishing and marine-based transport,while also protecting environmental quality and the
health of the resources. The Commonwealth's waterways licensing program accordingly favors licensing
of water-dependent uses of tidelands as long as they are protective of marine resources. Other uses that
serve proper public purposes also may receive licenses, and the waterways licensing standards
accommodate the practical need for infrastructure facilities, such as bridges and utilities, to cross marine
resources where they cannot reasonably be located elsewhere than within the Commonwealth's tidal
waters.
The Pipeline Lateral is a water-dependent-industrial project under MDEP's waterways regulations
because it is a facility related to the NEG Port and will serve marine-based transport of bulk materials -
LNG. It also constitutes an infrastructure crossing facility because there in no land-based altemative for
conveying natural gas from the NEG Port into the HubLine and connected interstate natural gas
distribution pipelines.
' Moreover,the Pipeline Lateral and NEG Port will serve the Commonwealth's and the region's needs for a
more competitive, reliable and flexible pipeline system to bring significant quantities of natural gas from
new sources, particularly for purposes of improved air quality and electrical generation. The
infrastructural improvements will support measurably improved air conditions in the region and bring
other benefits. Thus the Pipeline Lateral satisfies the public purpose requirements for obtaining a
waterways license.
5.2 Ocean Sanctuaries
The Pipeline Lateral crosses approximately 9.7 miles of the South Essex Ocean Sanctuary (the "SEOS")
' and approximately 2.8 miles of the North Shore Ocean Sanctuary ("NSOS"). Established under the
Massachusetts Ocean Sanctuaries Act("the Act") Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 132A, §§12A to
16E, the SEOS lies offshore of the coast from the Nahant/Lynn corporate boundary in the south to the
' Town of Manchester-by-the-Sea in the north, while the NSOS lies offshore of the coast from the
southeastern most point of Pickworth Point in the Town of Manchester-by-the-Sea extending northward
up to the Massachusetts/New Hampshire corporate boundary. The purpose of the SEOS and NSOS (and
the three other established ocean sanctuaries not in the Pipeline Lateral area) under § 14 of the Act is to
' protect the ecology or the appearance of the ocean, the seabed and the seafloor (and subsoil) from
activities that would"...significantly alter or endanger..."the resources of the sanctuary.
The SEOS and NSOS are under the care and control of the DCR within the EDEA. There is no separate
permit or authorization required by the Ocean Sanctuaries Act; rather, the provisions of the Act and its
regulations at 302 CMR 5 are implemented through the permitting reviews by other state agencies,
' including by the DEP,and through the federal consistency review by the MCZM.
' Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 5-1
Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC
' �DukeEnergX.
C/Gas Tiansmession
aar�ouxws raaxsuissrox u.c
' The Act prohibits certain activities within a sanctuary,and also sets forth which activities are permissible.
Section 16 of the Act, entitled "Permitted Activities in ocean sanctuaries," and 302 CMR 5 authorize a
number of activities, including projects that are licensed under chapter 91 because they are deemed to be
of public necessity and convenience,as well facilities that are associated with the generation,transmission
and distribution of electrical power, as long as they will not will seriously alter or otherwise endanger the
ecology or appearance of the ocean, the seabed or subsoil thereof including the HubLine and other
' infrastructure projects such as fiber optic cables that have been authorized under that standard. The
Pipeline Lateral serves the public convenience and necessity, as outlined in the prior section, and as
conditioned through the permitting process,will not will seriously alter or otherwise endanger the ecology
or appearance of the ocean,the seabed or subsoil thereof.
5.3 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program and Ocean Management
' The construction and operation of the Pipeline Lateral will be consistent with the applicable Policies and
Management Principles of the MCZM Program. Algonquin will file its application with MCZM in late
May 2005 seeking its concurrence, but MCZM will not issue its determination until completion of this
' review under MEPA and the issuance of the other applicable state permits and licenses.
The most significant MCZM policies pertaining to the Pipeline Lateral concern water quality, habitat,
' ports and energy facilities. Through the permitting processes, the Pipeline Lateral will be conditioned so
that there are no unacceptable impacts on water quality or habitat and no unacceptable interference with
other maritime users. Algonquin will also show that the Pipeline Lateral is a coastally dependent energy
facility because there is no land-based alternative for conveying natural gas from the NEG Port into the
HubLine and connected interstate natural gas distribution pipelines.
Algonquin is aware of the findings and recommendations of the Ocean Management Task Force (March
' 2004). Algonquin is taking those recommendations into consideration in the design and construction of
the Pipeline Lateral.
5.4 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act
The Pipeline Lateral will cross the Land Under the Ocean state wetland resource area as defined by the
Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act("MWPA"),M.G.L.c.131, s.40 and its accompanying regulations
'
(3 10 CMR 10.00). According to 310 CMR 10.25(2), Land Under the Ocean "means land extending from
the mean low water seaward to the boundary of the municipality's jurisdiction and includes land under
estuaries." Land Under the Ocean (beyond the nearshore area) is presumed to be significant to the
' protection of marine fisheries and, where there are shellfish, to protection of land containing shellfish.
The segment of the Pipeline Lateral from MP 0.0 to MP 6.3 is located within Land Under the Ocean but
not within the nearshore area, as defined in 310 CMR 10.25(2). Milepost 6.3 is the approximate point
' where the Pipeline Lateral leaves municipal jurisdiction and enters waters of the Commonwealth.
Land Containing Shellfish("LCS")differs from other resource areas protected under the MWPA in that it
' is both an interest to be protected by the MWPA and a resource area. LCS is an"overlay"resource area
defined in 310 CMR 10.34 as land under the ocean, tidal flats,rocky intertidal shores, salt marshes, and
land under salt ponds when any such land contains shellfish. LCS is significant to the protection of
marine fisheries as well as the protection of the interest of LCS as identified in 310 CMR 10.01(2). LCS
' is considered significant to the protection of the interests of LCS and marine fisheries when it has been
identified and mapped by a Conservation Commission or the MDEP in consultation with MDMF or the
local shellfish constable. Algonquin is not aware of any MDMF-mapped shellfish beds crossed by the
' Pipeline Lateral. Algonquin will continue to consult with NMFS and MDMF on shellfish resources in the
vicinity of the Pipeline Lateral.
' Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 5-2
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
' PDukeEneray..
/Gas 7►ansmission
"e�1�:"... �" `
r5.4.1 Ancillary Facilities
The existing meter station in Weymouth is under the jurisdiction of the MWPA. Wetland resource areas
' at the site include Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage and the 200-foot Riverfront Area of the
Weymouth Fore River. The Salem Meter Station is situated within the 100-foot buffer zone of a
bordering vegetated wetland (310 CMR 10.53). The Meter Station in Methuen is also partially located
within the 100-foot buffer zone of a bordering vegetated wetland (310 CMR 10.53). All three sites
consist of developed, industrial facilities with no on-site wetlands or sensitive resources. Algonquin will
file Notice of Intent applications with the local Conservation Commissions as appropriate.
I
Northeast Gateway Pipeline Lateral Page 5-3
Algonquin Gas Transmission,LLC
TRC
Customer-Focused Solutions