20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20426

OFFICE OF ENERGY PROJECTS

In Reply Refer To: OEP/DG2E/Gas Branch 3 Texas Eastern Transmission, LP and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC Docket No. CP11-56-000 375.308(x) December 2, 2011 Berk Donaldson, Director Rates and Certificates NE Spectra Energy Corporation 5400 Westheimer Court Houston, TX 77056 Re: Environmental Information Request for the NJ-NY Expansion Project

Dear Mr. Donaldson: Please provide the information described in the enclosure to assist in our analysis of the above-referenced Certificate application. File your response in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commissions (FERC or Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure. In particular, 18 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 385.2010 (Rule 2010) requires that you serve a copy of the response to each person whose name appears on the official service list for this proceeding. Please file a complete response by December 12, 2011. Send your response to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, NE, Room 1A Washington, DC 20426 If certain information cannot be provided within this time frame, please indicate which items will be delayed and provide a projected filing date. You should be aware that the information described in the enclosure is necessary for us to continue preparation of the final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Once we have

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

received your responses and reviewed them for completeness, we will determine if any modification to the current schedule for issuance of the EIS is necessary. When filing documents and maps, be sure to prepare separate volumes, as outlined on the Commissions website at http://www.ferc.gov/help/filing-guide/file-ceii/ceiiguidelines.asp. Any Critical Energy Infrastructure Information material should be filed as non-public and labeled "Contains Critical Energy Infrastructure Information Do Not Release" (18 CFR 388.112). Cultural resources material containing location, character, or ownership information should be marked "Contains Privileged Information - Do Not Release" and should be filed separately from the remaining information, which should be marked "Public." File all responses under oath (18 CFR 385.2005) by an authorized representative of Texas Eastern Transmission, LP and/or Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC and include the name, position, and telephone number of the respondent to each item. In addition to the official filing, please provide two hard copies of the response, including all oversize materials, and an electronic copy of the response, directly to Natural Resource Group, LLC as the third-party EIS preparation contractor. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please contact Kara J. Harris at 202-502-6296. Sincerely,

James Martin, Chief Gas Branch 3 Office of Energy Projects

Enclosure

cc:

Public File, Docket No. CP11-56-000

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

ENCLOSURE TEXAS EASTERN TRANSMISSION, LP (Texas Eastern) and ALGONQUIN GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC (Algonquin) New Jersey-New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project or Project) DOCKET NO. CP11-56-000 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REQUEST General 1. The alignment sheets submitted on November 10, 2011 reference detailed design drawings for the aboveground facilities (e.g., SPE-0124-C2); however, the drawings were not included in the filing. Provide a detailed design drawing for each of the new or modified aboveground facilities. Clarify under what authority Texas Eastern proposes to construct the interconnection with Morris Energy/International Matex Tank Terminals (IMTT) and the related metering and regulating (M&R) station. Indicate the contracted delivery volumes of gas for the interconnect with Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) and the new interconnect with IMTT in Bayonne, New Jersey. Indicate how these volumes would impact the previous agreements and deliveries for Chesapeake Energy Marketing, Inc.; Statoil Natural Gas, LLC; and Consolidated Edison Company (Con Edison) and update the information in Table 1.1-1 of the draft EIS as necessary. Provide an update regarding the Memorandum of Understanding between Texas Eastern and IMTT. Describe the temporary and permanent land requirements for the new M&R station on the IMTT property, and any requirements for temporary or permanent access roads, including length, current road surface condition, and a description of any required upgrades. Also indicate if the construction and siting of the new M&R station and associated piping would result in any change in size or configuration of contractor ware yards 15 and 16, which are on the IMTT property. Describe and provide a figure showing the location of the non-jurisdictional facilities associated with the new IMTT M&R Station site and the new Bayonne M&R Station site.

2.

3.

4. 5.

6.

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

7.

Verify if the information presented in the following draft EIS tables is correct or provide updated information based on the route variations filed on November 10, 2011. a. b. c. d. Table 2.2.1-1. Table 4.2.2-1. Table 4.3.1-1. Table E-1 from Appendix E (the November 10, 2011 supplemental filing only included the additional temporary workspace variance tables from Resource Report 2). Tables 1 and 2 in Appendix I.

e. 8.

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Port Authority) noted in its October 28, 2011 comment letter that the draft EIS permit table (Table 1.5-1) should include an entry for tenant permitting and consultation regarding the Port Authoritys Tenant Construction and Alteration Process (TCAP) Manual. Texas Eastern responded on November 15, 2011 saying it does not envision a relationship with the Port Authority that would require tenant permitting and that certain requirements in the TCAP will need to be negotiated. Describe how Texas Eastern intends to acquire the necessary authorization from the Port Authority and identify which requirements included in the TCAP Texas Eastern will seek to modify. Provide the anticipated starting and ending dates for all of the activities associated with the 18th Street/Long Slip and Hudson River horizontal directional drills (HDD). Include all of the activities listed in Attachment 24 of the Applicants October 14, 2011 response to the draft EIS and any activities associated with the Hudson River HDD not listed in Attachment 24. In addition, provide specific responses to the questions related to the timing of the HDD and dredging activities listed on page 16 of Newport Associates Development Companys (Newport Development) November 21, 2011 comments on the draft EIS. Provide responses to the Newport Developments concerns identified in its October 28, 2011 comment letter, and other filings, related to compliance with the Newport Remedial Plan, interference with its development plans, and indemnity from any remediation cost or other impacts resulting from the Applicants use of Newport Developments property. Respond to comments on pages 9 and 10 of Jersey Citys October 28, 2011 comments on the draft EIS that the revised and compressed work schedule (proposed just before the draft EIS was issued) would result in additional impacts, including an increase in noise impacts, work hours, air emissions and dust, construction oversight, and safety concerns.

9.

10.

11.

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

Alternatives 1. Provide a comparative analysis including a detailed comparison table of the alternative identified by Chevron Land and Development Company (Chevron) to the proposed route, and comment on the comparative cost estimate of the alternative versus the proposed route that was included in Chevrons October 31, 2011 letter. The comparison should include all relevant environmental resources. See Table 3.5.3-2 of the draft EIS for a list of the minimum resources to include in the comparison. Provide a comparative analysis of the alternative pipe yards recommended in 380 Development, LLCs (380 Development) October 31, 2011 comment letter to the proposed contractor ware yards 6 and 7. Indicate if Texas Eastern intends to adopt these alternative yards in lieu of the proposed yards. If not, explain why the proposed yards would be preferable. The comparison should include all relevant environmental resources. See Table 3.5.3-2 of the draft EIS for a list of the minimum resources to include in the comparison. Provide a map, comparative assessment, and detailed comparison table of the route alternative described in 380 Developments October 31, 2011 comments on the draft EIS. This alternative, which is south of the proposed route on 380 Developments property, begins around MP 2.60 and ends around MP 4.07R. Indicate the name of any new landowners that would be affected by the alternative and indicate the crossing length on each property. The comparison should include all relevant environmental resources. See Table 3.5.3-2 of the draft EIS for a list of the minimum resources to include in the comparison. Provide a map and comparative assessment of the three options referenced on page 6 in the Port Authoritys October 28, 2011 letter for crossing the Howland Hook/Port Ivory Site (i.e., an HDD under the southeast corner of the property and under Mariners Marsh, a route that follows an existing Texas Eastern right-ofway under the west side of Mariners Marsh, and a route near the Port Ivory property line that crosses the Howland Hook/Port Ivory site on a straight line). Given the uncertainties about the Port Authoritys expansion plans, explain why the proposed route adjacent to Western Avenue is preferable to these three options. The comparison should include all relevant environmental resources. See Table 3.5.3-2 of the draft EIS for a list of the minimum resources to include in the comparison. Also, provide a response to the Port Authoritys request for a more definitive list of permitted uses of the pipeline easement. Specify, for example, if an intermodial railroad track over or across the pipeline would be permitted. Indicate the impact (approximate acres) of the Project on the 110 Hoboken Avenue Development Urban Renewal Company, LLC property. Specify both 3

2.

3.

4.

5.

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

temporary and permanent impacts associated with the pipeline and the Jersey City M&R Station. Describe the development plans for the 100 Hoboken Avenue property and discuss any potential conflicts between the NJ-NY Project and the development plans for 110 Hoboken Avenue. 6. Provide a map and an analysis of the Hackensack River and Bergen Arches Alternative referred to by Mayor Healy in his comments at the public comment meeting in Jersey City on October 19, 2011. Provide a comparison with the proposed route. The comparison should include all relevant environmental resources. See Table 3.5.4-1 of the draft EIS for a list of the minimum resources to include in the comparison.

Horizontal Directional Drills 1. Update the April 21, 2011 Geotechnical Feasibility Study by providing a Final Geotechnical Engineering Analysis, based on the geotechnical work completed for each crossing, that evaluates and discusses the feasibility of successfully completing the HDD at each of the nine proposed crossings. The engineering analysis should include: a. an assessment and discussion of the potential for successful completion of each horizontal directional bore based on conditions encountered in the geotechnical borings and the literature search conducted; an analysis of the geological conditions in terms of the potential for fluid losses and inadvertent release of drilling fluids during each HDD bore; and the potential for flowing artesian conditions at each entry and exit locations and the methods that would be employed if flowing artesian conditions are encountered.

b. c.

The Final Geotechnical Engineering Analysis should discuss the proposed design of each drill path, including drilling depth, pilot and finished hole diameters, and casing lengths and diameters. 2. Provide updated drawings of the Construction Stage Details in Appendix A of the sediment modeling report that was prepared by Applied Sciences Associates, Inc. The updated drawings should be consistent with the revised construction schedule for the Hudson River and 18th Street/Long Slip HDDs.

Water Resources 1. Address Chevrons October 31, 2011 letter regarding concerns with the proposed alignments proximity to the slurry wall, the crossing of the benzene-contaminated area, the specific measures that would be implemented to monitor and prevent impacts on the integrity of the slurry wall, and the risk of unintended migration of

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

benzene on and off the site and into the Kill Van Kull. Also address Chevrons concerns regarding the excavated trench creating a preferential pathway for contaminants, the mixing of remediated surface soil with underlying contaminated soil and groundwater, the timing of construction, and impacts on future development and remediation efforts. 2. Response 17 of the Applicants October 14, 2011 submittal to the FERC provides additional information about correspondence with the municipalities related to water permitting requirements, but does not provide information related to the specific municipality sources and discharge locations that would be used for each pipeline hydrostatic test segment and the water to be used during HDD operations. For each test segment and HDD operation, provide the volume of water that would be used from each municipality. Also provide mapping that shows the approximate discharge locations for all hydrostatic test water used. Response 17 of the Applicants October 14, 2011 submittal to the FERC states that Texas Eastern contacted the Jersey City Municipal Utility Authority (JCMUA) and that 12,000 gallons of municipal water per week would be available for purchase in Jersey City. However, page 18 of Jersey Citys October 28, 2011 comment letter states that the JCMUA would not be able to provide water for testing or drilling. Clarify this discrepancy and identify specific sources of water that would be used in place of, or to supplement, municipal water in Jersey City. Explain why Texas Eastern is not planning to withdraw and discharge hydrostatic test water from and to the Hudson River, similar to the Kill Van Kull. Provide information for the new waterbody crossed by Route Variation 78 as necessary to update Table N-1 in Appendix N of the draft EIS.

3.

4. 5.

Aquatic Resources 1. The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) recommends several timing restrictions to protect aquatic resources, including: a. b. prohibiting work from January 1 to May 31 in areas with winter flounder (primarily the Hudson River); and avoiding sediment-generating activities and/or major in-water disturbance in estuarial streams with unobstructed access to the ocean or known anadromous migration corridors from March 1 to June 30.

Provide a discussion regarding Texas Easterns intentions to comply with these recommendations or describe other measures that would be implemented to address the NJDEPs concerns.

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

Vegetation and Wildlife 1. Discuss Algonquins intentions to comply with the NJDEPs recommendation that tree clearing necessary at the Mahwah M&R Station should be conducted between November 1 and March 31, or describe other measures that would be implemented to address the NJDEPs concerns. Provide copies of timber rattlesnake survey reports and correspondence with the NJDEP regarding the surveys or specify when the Applicants anticipate conducting these surveys.

2.

Land Use 1. The justification for Route Variation 76, which was included in the Supplemental Information filed on November 10, 2011, indicates that the New York Container Terminal has accepted the route variation if Texas Eastern agrees to address its future development and operation requirements. In its November 15, 2011 response to comments on the draft EIS, Texas Eastern also indicates that New York City Transit has not objected to the proposed alignment provided the parties can coordinate their respective activities so as not to impede their respective operations and to minimize impacts to future development plans. Describe the specific measures Texas Eastern would implement to address future development and minimize impacts on future activities at the site. The Supplemental Information filed on November 10, 2011 indicates that Route Variation 55 would eliminate the open-cut crossing on New Jersey Turnpike Authoritys Exit 14C exit ramp and open-cut impacts on Jersey City Boulevard. It is not apparent from the alignment sheets how this would be achieved. Explain how the new alignment would avoid open-cut crossings, whereas the previous alignment would not. Also clarify the discrepancy between the text describing the variation, which refers to new temporary access road (TAR) 27 and the alignment sheets, which indicates this road is TAR 28. Route Variation 78 in the Supplemental Information filed on November 10, 2011 adjusts the pipeline and temporary construction right-of-way immediately adjacent to a baseball field within the Cochrane Field Complex. With the proposed placement of the pipeline within the sidewalk and immediately adjacent to the recreational property, describe any potential impacts on the facility and recreational users due to the adjustment and measures that Texas Eastern would implement to minimize those impacts. The discussion of Route Variation 73 in the Supplemental Information filed on November 10, 2011 indicates that no additional landowners would be affected but states that an abutting landowners property that was not previously directly

2.

3.

4.

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

affected would be directly impacted by the variation. Texas Eastern indicated that this variation is acceptable to the property owner (i.e., T.M. Jasme Properties, LLC) provided Texas Eastern works through the property owners potential business interruption concerns. Describe the nature of this landowners concerns regarding business interruptions and how Texas Eastern proposes to address these concerns. 5. Identify any other route variations by milepost that would directly impact landowners that were previously only abutters. For each of these landowners, identify the variation name, location of the affected property, and any concerns the landowner has regarding the pipeline and easement. Describe how Texas Eastern would address these concerns. Discuss the current schedule for obtaining access to the Port Authority properties for the purpose of conducting geotechnical and environmental surveys. Indicate when Texas Eastern anticipates the survey results will be available. Provide a response to the Port Authoritys October 28, 2011 comment regarding the design of the pipeline at the Greenville Yards to accommodate current and future development. The Applicants November 15, 2011 response to the Port Authoritys October 28, 2011 comment letter states that Texas Eastern will continue to address the Port Authoritys specific concerns with respect to the Staten Island Expressway and Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH) Yard and will prepare appropriate reports/plans as it has in other locations. Provide a schedule for when these reports/plans will be completed and filed with the Port Authority and the FERC. Provide an analysis of the potential impacts on marine traffic during in-water work activities associated with the Hudson River and 18th Street/Long Slip HDDs. Describe measures Texas Eastern would implement to reduce any potential conflicts. Provide details of the planned developments identified below. Details should include, as applicable, a map; the specific distance and direction from the proposed pipeline route; planned construction/development timeframes; a description of efforts to minimize any conflicts associated with the proposed Project; and documentation of consultation with the developers. a. b. the future development on the Liquori property (Route Variation 74); the proposed building lot on Harbor Drive II Real Estate, LLCs property (Route Variation 57); and

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

c.

the transit alternatives being considered by the Metropolitan Transit Authority New York City Transit in its North Shore Alternatives Analysis.

Cultural Resources 1. File with the Secretary any correspondence or documentation of consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPO), Native American groups, or other consulting parties not previously filed with the Commission. Provide a table indicating by milepost/station number: identified archaeological sites/structures, National Register of Historic Places eligibility status/recommendation, Project effects, additional work needed, and SHPO comments, if available. Provide a table documenting the status of Native American consultation to date, and include tribes contacted, tribal comments, and any responses. For the Mahwah M&R Station and associated access roads, provide a large scale drawing indicating: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. the location of the proposed Algonquin M&R Station; the location of the proposed meter station for Tennessee Gas Pipeline Companys (Tennessee) Northeast Upgrade Project (CP11-161-000); new proposed access roads by Algonquin and Tennessee; existing access roads to be improved by Algonquin and Tennessee; any existing facilities to be removed by Algonquin and Tennessee; the area surveyed by the Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. for Docket No. CP11-56-000; the area surveyed by Gray & Pape, Inc. for Docket No. CP11-161-000; any sites identified; and any additional work necessary.

2.

3. 4.

Also indicate which company would be responsible for conducting any necessary additional work. File the response to this question in both Docket Nos. CP11-56000 and CP11-161-000. Air Quality and Noise 1. Provide updated construction emissions for criteria emissions for the Project based upon the changes in the route alignments filed on November 10, 2011. Confirm that the emissions would be below the general conformity thresholds for each pollutant within the various nonattainment areas for each construction year. In addition, provide a plan that details how Texas Eastern would ensure that the construction emissions of NOx and CO would not exceed the general conformity 8

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

threshold of 100 tons per year in the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island Air Quality Control Region. 2. Provide updated survey information regarding ambient noise levels, distance and direction to nearest noise-sensitive (NSAs) areas, and an acoustical impact analysis for the new IMTT M&R Station, the revised Bayonne M&R Station, and new mainline valve sites 1 and 2. Include revised numbers to update Tables 4.11.2-4 and 4.11.2-5 of the draft EIS. Provide updated information, as necessary, to revise the noise analysis and Table 4.11.2-3 for the following HDD operations, which have been realigned since the draft EIS was issued: the entry side of the Goethals Bridge HDD; exit side of the 1st Street HDD; and exit side of the Bayonne Inlet HDD. For the Bayonne Inlet HDD, also revise the alignment sheet (DWG LD-A 1050A Rev A 14), which currently shows the HDD exit site being disconnected from the proposed pipeline route. Describe the local noise codes for the State of New Jersey, Hudson County, the City of Hoboken, Jersey City and New York City. Explain what mitigation measures Texas Eastern would need to implement to meet these codes. Provide justification why these measures would be technically infeasible or cost prohibitive. Describe the circumstances where local noise codes would likely be exceeded in New Jersey and New York and estimate the intensity and duration of the noise over that allowed by the noise codes for each state, county, and municipality. Estimate noise impacts from pile and casing driving, HDD activities, and general construction activities for the Hudson River crossing at the NSAs (residential buildings, hotels, hospitals, hospices, schools, libraries, places of worship, etc.) and to the underwater environment. Confirm that in-water noise levels would not exceed the noise thresholds discussed on page 7 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Services November 2, 2011 comments on the draft EIS. In addition, estimate construction noise impact on pedestrians at the nearest point of the Hudson Waterfront Walkway. Detail all mitigation measures that Texas Eastern would implement to reduce noise and vibration impacts.

3.

4.

5.

Reliability and Safety 1. Provide the location of the nearest fire hydrant to the proposed pipeline on Staten Island.

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

2.

In addition to designing the 30-inch-diameter pipeline to Class 4 standards, confirm that Texas Eastern would construct, operate, maintain, and inspect the pipeline to Class 4 standards. In June 2011, Spectra Energy was cited by the U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration for 17 inadequacies in its pipeline safety operations and procedures, including pipeline surveillance, emergency plans, and welding procedures. Discuss the actions Spectra has taken/is taking to improve safety operations and procedures. Respond to the following Manhattan Community Board Number 2 comments and questions regarding valves, which were included in its October 4, 2011 comments on the draft EIS. a. b. Describe the efficacy of and redundancy in remote shut-off valves and their reliability versus automatic valves. Indicate what methods and technology are available for shutting off the pipeline in the event of a failure.

3.

4.

10

20111202-3041 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/02/2011

Document Content(s) CP11-56-000-12211.DOC.................................................1-12