You are on page 1of 800

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST.

LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

1.0

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Applicant, St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC (SLW), has prepared this Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) for the proposed Saint Lawrence Windpower Project (the Project). The Project, as originally proposed, was described in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), which was accepted by the Town of Cape Vincent on January 10, 2007. Since completion of the DEIS, public and agency comments have been received, the Project turbines and layout have been revised, proposed studies have been completed, supplemental or revised studies have been conducted and additional data has been collected. This SDEIS describes the revised Project, presents the results of completed and revised studies, provides supplemental data, and addresses certain issues raised during the public comment period on the DEIS. The SDEIS generally follows the same format as the DEIS to minimize duplication and maintain consistency, and incorporates that document by reference. Only information that has changed or been added since preparation of the DEIS is included in this document. Where information is the same as described in the DEIS, it is noted in the SDEIS. All references to sections, appendices and figures within this document refer to this SDEIS unless noted otherwise. A summary of the changes and supplemental information presented in this SDEIS include: 1. Revised Wind Turbine Locations Wind turbine locations were revised based on wind resource assessment, engineering considerations, environmental constraints, and setback requirements provided by the Cape Vincent Planning Board. Wind turbine locations are shown in Figure 2-1, Revised Project Layout and Boundary. 2. Selection of Acciona AW-82/1500 Turbines Wind Turbines Acciona AW-82/1500 wind turbines have been selected for use in the proposed Project. 3. Revised Underground Electrical Collection Line Configuration The location of underground collection cables was redesigned to maintain connectivity with revised turbine locations. The underground electrical collection system is shown in Figure 2-1, Revised Project Layout and Boundary. 4. Revised Access Road Configuration Access road design was modified to accommodate the construction and maintenance of the revised wind turbine locations and the overhead electrical collection system. In addition, access roads were modified to minimize or avoid potential impacts to wetlands and cultural resources. Access roads are shown in Figure 2-1, Revised Project Layout and Boundary.

1-1

001302

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

5. Revised Substation Locations The collection substation will be located on Swamp Road and will step up power to allow for transmission to an existing National Grid 115 kV electric transmission line located in the Town of Lyme. The transmission owner substation will serve as the point of interconnection with the existing National Grid 115 kV line and will be located on County Route 179 adjacent to an existing National Grid substation. The substations are shown in Figure 2-1, Revised Project Layout and Boundary. 6. Identification and Analysis of Route for 8.9 Miles of Overhead Electrical Collection System Power generated from the wind turbines will be transmitted via an underground and overhead electrical collection system. At the collection substation, the electrical power from the entire Project will run through a step-up transformer and be converted to 115 kV. The overhead collection system, consisting of 8.9 miles of poles and lineS routed from the collection substation to the 115 kV interconnection substation in Lyme. The route for the overhead electrical collection system was not identified in the DEIS, but is identified, and its impacts analyzed, in this SDEIS. The proposed route is shown in Figure 2-1, Revised Project Layout and Boundary. 7. Five Meteorological Towers Five meteorological towers will exist during the construction and operations phases of the Project. Two meteorological towers are currently in place. One will be decommissioned prior to construction. Four more meteorological towers will be installed during construction. 8. Additional Wetlands Delineation Data Additional activities were undertaken to complete the assessment of wetlands based on the current Project layout. These activities included avoidance and minimization of impacts through Project reduction, design and layout modifications, delineation and documentation of existing wetlands resources, an assessment of wetlands functions and values, calculation of proposed impacts and development of a wetland mitigation plan. The revised wetland delineation report may be referenced in Appendix C. 9. Additional Avian and Bat Impact Data Additional avian and bat data have been included to provide a comprehensive analysis of Project impacts. These data include: nocturnal marine radar and Anabat surveys; raptor migration, breeding bird, and winter waterfowl and raptor surveys; and mist-netting surveys,

1-2

001303

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

bat roost tree and emergence counts, and radio telemetry data. These data and studies may be referenced in Section 3.3 and Appendix E. 10. Additional Rare Species Impact Data Additional investigation and evaluation of potential Blanding’s Turtle habitat data has been included to provide a comprehensive analysis of Project impacts on this species and may be referenced in Section 3.3.3.7 and Appendix E. 11. Additional Cultural Resources Studies A Phase IB archeological resource survey was conducted in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Office Guidelines for Wind Farm Development Cultural Resources Survey Work (the SHPO Guidelines) to evaluate the potential effects of the Project. A supplemental historical architectural resources survey was also completed to identify and document historically significant structures that may be located in the Project viewshed within the revised five-mile limit of the Project site. The additional cultural resource studies may be referenced in Appendix H. 12. Supplemental Visual Assessments and Shadow Flicker Study To address potential impacts to historic sites; address agency concerns; and evaluate the potential impacts of the overhead electrical collection system, and modified wind turbine and substation locations, SLW conducted the following studies: Prepared supplemental visual simulations for current turbine layout referenced in Appendix I; Performed a supplemental visual impact assessment for the current turbine layout described in Section 3.8; Performed a Supplemental Shadow Flicker Analysis referenced in Appendix J; and Performed a Transmission Infrastructure Visibility Study in Appendix K. 13. Noise Studies Baseline environmental sound level survey, revised noise modeling and impact assessment was performed to characterize the impacts of the modified wind turbine and substation locations. The updated noise modeling results may be referenced in Appendix L. 14. Revised Construction Schedule The Applicant plans to construct the Project in the spring/summer of 2010 and to complete construction by the end of 2010.

1-3

001304

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

1.1

Project Description

SLW is proposing to develop a wind-powered electrical-generating facility with up to 53 turbine locations, and a total capacity of approximately 79.5 megawatts (MW). The proposed Project will be located in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme in Jefferson County, New York. All 53 turbines, temporary construction laydown area(s), access roads, underground collection lines, operations and maintenance building, meteorological towers, an electrical collector substation and other components will be located in the Town of Cape Vincent; most of the overhead electrical transmission line and a transmission owner interconnection substation will be located in the Town of Lyme where an existing transmission grid substation is located. Turbines used for the Project will be 1.5 MW Acciona AW-82/1500 turbines manufactured by Acciona Windpower, S.A. The maximum blade-tip height will be approximately 390.5 feet and the rotor width (diameter) is estimated to be 269 feet (82 meters). Each turbine will ultimately consist of a 262 foot (80 meter) tall steel tower; a rotor consisting of three composite blades; and a nacelle, which houses the generator, gearbox, and power train. A pad mount transformer will be located adjacent to the base of the tower, to raise the voltage of the electricity produced by the turbine generator to the voltage level of the underground collection system. The steel towers used for this Project will be manufactured in multiple sections. The towers will have a base diameter of approximately 20 feet. Each tower will have a locked access door and an internal safety ladder to access the nacelle, and will be painted (off-white) to make the structure less visually obtrusive. The Project also will result in the construction of approximately 14.4 miles of gravel access roads, 37.1 miles of underground interconnect cables, of which 9.8 will be co-located adjacent to constructed access roads, a co-located electrical substation and operations and maintenance building, and interconnection substation adjacent to an existing substation in the Town of Lyme. An approximately 9 mile long (115 kV) overhead transmission line will be constructed to connect the Project with the existing transmission grid and electrical substation in the Town of Lyme. The Project facilities will be developed on leased private land. SLW plans to begin construction in the spring of 2010 and to complete construction by the end of 2010. SLW will begin site work as early as possible after all required permits and approvals are received, in 2009. This will enable SLW to commence construction as early as possible after the 2010 spring thaw. The geotechnical investigation and other engineering studies to support the civil design will be conducted prior to construction. Once the Project is in operation, the wind turbines and associated components operate in an almost completely automated fashion. SLW intends to

1-4

001305

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

permanently employ from 4 to 6 full-time workers for operation and maintenance of the wind energy facility. Throughout this document, the term Project Area is used to mean the total area of all of the leased parcels regardless of the portion of that area actually occupied by the Project. The Project Area is equal to approximately 7,900 acres. The term Project facilities is defined as the permanent footprint of disturbance occupied by turbine foundations, crane pads, meteorological towers, gravel access roads, underground electrical cables, the operations and maintenance building, the 115 kV overhead transmission line, and the two electrical substations. The term Project Site is defined as the area required for construction of the Project which includes both the permanent and temporary footprint of disturbance. Temporary expanded work areas are needed for the construction of turbine foundations, gravel access roads, underground electrical cables, and the 115 kV overhead transmission line. Additional temporary construction-related facilities include staging areas (equipment laydown, construction management trailer, and parking) and a potential concrete patch plant.
1.2 Project Applicant

SLW is the Applicant for the Project. The Project name is the St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project. The Project's mailing address is: St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC 122 South Point Street P.O. Box 660 Cape Vincent, New York 13618
1.3 Summary of Project Purpose and Need

The purpose of the proposed Project is to develop a wind powered electrical-generating facility at the proposed Project location. This Project will be a significant source of renewable energy to the New York power grid. The Project will facilitate compliance with the New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) Order 03-E-0188, issued on September 24, 2004, which created the New York State Retail Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). The purpose of the RPS is to increase the proportion of electricity from renewable energy sources in New York State to 25 percent by the end of 2013. The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) is responsible for implementing the RPS as an agent for the New York State Department of Public Service. The Project also supports several objectives identified in the 2002 State Energy Plan (New York State Energy Planning Board, 2002). These objectives include stimulating economic growth, increasing energy diversity, and promoting a cleaner and healthier

1-5

001306

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

environment. The benefits of the proposed Project also include significant positive impacts on socioeconomics and air quality. By eliminating pollutants and greenhouse gases during the production of electricity, the Project will benefit ecological and water resources, as well as human health.
1.4 Summary of Environmental Effects and Proposed Mitigation

In accordance with the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), potential impacts arising from the proposed Project were evaluated with respect to a comprehensive list of environmental and cultural resources. The Project will result in positive, long-term impacts on agriculture, socioeconomics, ecology, and air quality within the Project Area and surrounding region. The Project may result in potential environmental impacts on soils, geology, terrestrial and aquatic ecology including threatened and endangered species, storm water management, land use and zoning, visual resources, socioeconomic issues, traffic and transportation, air quality, and noise proposed; however, proposed mitigation measures minimize or avoid significant environmental impact to the maximum extent possible. In addition a largescale wind power-generating project will result in significant environmental and economic benefits to the area. Mitigation is proposed for potential impacts associated with the Project. A discussion of mitigation measures is included by resource type in Section 3.0. Table 1-1 is a summary of potential impacts and related proposed mitigation.
1.5 Summary of Alternatives Analysis

The following alternatives to the proposed action are described and evaluated in this SDEIS: no action, alternate Project locations, alternate electric generation technologies, alternate turbine technologies, alternative Project design and layout, and alternate Project scale and magnitude. In addition, alternates for the routing of the electric transmission interconnectrion are also described and evaluated. Analyses of these alternatives indicate that the Preferred Alternative (the Project) as currently proposed is necessary to produce a commercially feasible Project that reduces environmental impacts to the greatest extent practicable. A detailed discussion of alternatives is included in Section 7.0.
1.6 List of Required Permits and Approvals

Development of the proposed Project will require certain permits and/or approvals from local, state, and federal agencies. The permits and approvals that are expected to be required are listed in Table 1-2.

1-6

001307

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 1-1 (Sheet 1 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Physiography, Geology, and Soils Potential Impact Erosion and sedimentation construction. Proposed Mitigation A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be developed and implemented for the construction period. A Dust Control Plan will be developed and implemented. A SWPPP will be developed and implemented for the operational period. SLW will follow NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets Guidelines for Siting and Constructing Wind Farms. Applicable soil protection, erosion control and soil restoration measures will be included in the final construction documentation and plans for the contractor(s) and subcontractor(s). Geotechnical studies will be conducted prior to final engineering design. A Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan (SPCCP) will be developed and implemented. A SWPPP will be developed and implemented for the construction period. Appropriate best management procedures will be used to prevent spills, limit quantities of hazardous materials used on site, and the implementation of the Emergency Response Plan. Impacts will be avoided through pre-construction surveys and studies and re-location of turbines, if necessary. Clearing near surface waters will be kept to a minimum to prevent significant disturbance to the habitats associated with surface waters; A SWPPP will be developed and implemented for the construction period. The installation of environmentally friendly culvert types (i.e., bottomless or arched culverts with a gravel base). Crossings of the Chaumont River and other streams and tributaries will be accomplished by overhead spanning. Poles will be located greater than 50 feet from both sides of the Chaumont River and other streams and tributaries. Cable between these utility poles will be strung in a manner that will not require construction equipment to drive through shallow surface water bodies. Wetland areas and open waters temporarily affected during the construction will be restored to pre-construction contours and re-vegetated with native (non-invasive) plant material or seeds immediately following the completion of regulated activities at each site. SLW will develop a Wetland Mitigation Plan to compensate for unavoidable permanent impacts to wetlands and proposes to compensate for the unavoidable permanent fill of wetlands using a 2:1 mitigation ratio.

during

Construction traffic could also create airborne dust. The proposed Project, once built, could potentially cause a minor alteration to existing drainage patterns. Impacts to agricultural soils during construction and operation

Shallow bedrock and other geologic challenges (e.g., karst and problematic soils) could be encountered during construction. Release of hazardous substances associated with construction or operation. Water Resources Soil erosion during construction could impact ground water. Spills associated with operation of construction equipment (i.e. diesel and gasoline fuels, lubricating oils, and cooling fluids). Potential water table reduction or pathway alteration due to dewatering. Potential temporary impacts during construction could result from clearing and grading near stream banks. Construction and operation of the Project will result in two surface water body crossings by Access Roads and Interconnects Construction and operation of the Project will result in seven surface water body crossings by the Overhead transmission line.

Streams, Rivers, and Lakes

Construction and operation of the Project will temporarily affect 1.67 acres of wetlands; and result in the placement of 0.33 acres of fill in wetlands and the conversion of 0.34 acres of forested wetlands to non-forested wetland cover.

1-7

001308

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 1-1 (Sheet 2 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Vegetation Potential Impact Clearing for construction may temporarily impact abundant vegetation communities. Proposed Mitigation Clearing of vegetation will be minimized in areas that are ecologically sensitive, such as forested uplands, forested wetlands and the banks of creeks crossed by the overhead transmission line. All temporary disturbances will be restored. SLW has prepared an Invasive Species Management Plan to ensure that all disturbed areas will be returned to a native vegetative state once construction is complete. The Project was designed to avoid significant impact to wildlife. Project infrastructure is sited away from high quality wildlife habitat and forested clearing has been minimized.

Potential for the introduction of invasive species into areas disturbed during construction activities. Non-bat Mammals Minor, temporary displacement of individuals and disturbance of wildlife habitat will be limited to the construction right-of-way and adjacent areas. Forested habitat will be cleared within portions of the laydown areas at 6 turbines sites and along limited portions of the overhead transmission line right-ofway. Bat collision with wind turbines is a potential impact.

Bats

Migrating Birds

During operation of the Project, there is the potential that migratory birds could collide with wind turbines.

Breeding Birds

Construction and operation of the proposed Project will likely result in minor, temporary impacts to breeding birds. During construction, clearing and work activities in open habitats will temporarily displace nesting and foraging individuals from the work area and suitable adjacent habitats. Approximately 17 acres of second growth deciduous forest will be cleared for Project components, which could result in temporary and permanent minor habitat loss for some forest-nesting avian species.

Post-construction monitoring studies will be implemented to estimate the mortality and habitat displacement experienced by bats as a result of the Project, to verify the environmental impacts estimated by pre-construction studies, and to provide supporting value to the overall conservation measures that will ultimately benefit the species or population. Conservation measures including Project design, seasonal restrictions on tree clearing and formal consultation with the USFWS, USACE, and NYSDEC will be implemented before or during construction to avoid and minimize potential Indiana bat mortality during construction and operation of the Project. SLW has selected the proposed Project layout to minimize impacts to sensitive Potential impacts associated with migratory bird collision with wind turbines have been mitigated by maximum turbine spacing, placing electrical collection lines between turbines and the collector substation underground rather than above ground, and implementing the minimum FAA safety lighting requirements. SLW will also implement a post-construction avian fatality monitoring program. The proposed Project will encourage continued farming activities in the area by supplementing area farmers’ income. This will also result in the maintenance of open grassland habitats since the regional climate favors traditional late season harvest which is beneficial for grassland birds. Areas associated with grassland species nesting will be avoided until after the breeding season. Mitigation is not necessary because conversion of forest habitat in the Project Area will benefit birds that nest and forage in open habitats which are relatively more important in the region. Mitigation for habitat loss has been performed by sighting Project components to minimize disturbance and restoring all temporarily disturbed areas.

1-8

001309

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 1-1 (Sheet 3 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Potential Impact There is a low potential risk that local breeding birds could collide with the wind turbines. Impacts at the St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project will be similar to other wind projects; therefore, avian mortality is likely to range between 122 to 509 birds/year Impacts to wintering birds, in particular waterfowl, are likely to be minimal. Proposed Mitigation SLW is studying potential avian impact at the Project site. The Project site is anticipated to pose a low risk to breeding birds. SLW will fund an operational (post-construction) monitoring program to estimate direct and indirect impacts of the wind farm on breeding grassland birds SLW has selected the proposed Project layout to minimize impacts to sensitive receptors including wintering roosting and foraging birds. Any necessary above ground power lines will follow the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee suggested practices for protecting avian species. SLW, working with the USACE, USFWS, and NYSDEC, is in the process of preparing a Biological Assessment (BA) to evaluate in greater detail the possible impacts to Indiana Bat populations due to construction and operation of the Project. The BA will be used to initiate formal consultation with the USFWS under the Endangered Species Act in connection with SLW’s application for permits from the USACE. Results of the consultation process will determine whether conservation measures in addition to those outlined herein are necessary to avoid, minimize, or mitigate potential impacts from the Project on Indiana bats. The Project site is anticipated to pose a low risk to threatened or endangered raptor species. SLW will consult with the USFWS to address the potential impacts and if any mitigation measures are warranted. To mitigate temporary impacts to breeding listed species, clearing activities will occur prior to the breeding season where appropriate. Impacts to listed plant species will be avoided through avoidance of sensitive ecological communities, such as wetlands, and minimizing permanent impacts to vegetation to the greatest extent practicable. Barriers and culverts will be installed to either prevent or to facilitate movement across Project components. Silt fence will be installed to isolate potential Blanding’s turtle wetlands habitat from construction activity. In addition, barriers (silt fence) will be installed to direct the movements of nesting turtles in a manner that limits the potential for road mortality. SLW will obtain all necessary permits from NYSDOT and local highway department(s) in order to make necessary road improvements and to operate oversized vehicles on the roads. Construction related wear and tear to County and local roads will be discussed with the entities that manage the transportation system and an appropriate strategy for road restoration will be developed.

Over wintering Birds

Threatened and Endangered Species

Individual bats or bat colonies for the Indiana bat and the small-footed myotis have been documented in Jefferson County, within approximately 15 to 40 miles of the proposed Project. No impacts are anticipated.

There is a slight risk of collision for migrating raptors.

There is a slight risk of collision for breeding birds. Potential impacts to State listed plants, Michigan lily and autumnal water-starwort.

Potential impacts to State listed Reptiles and amphibians, Blanding’s turtle

Transportation

The potential need for the Project to improve transportation infrastructure to accommodate construction equipment and oversize vehicles delivering or repair damage to roads caused by construction traffic.

1-9

001310

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 1-1 (Sheet 4 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Potential Impact The need for the Project to temporarily relocate overhead lines, traffic lights, cable and phone lines to accommodate oversize vehicles. Traffic delays and road closures due to transportation improvements or construction traffic; potential disruption of tourism in the Thousand Islands; and increased traffic over local roads during construction Increased traffic generally over local roads during construction. Proposed Mitigation A Transportation and Traffic Plan will be created for the Project and will address this issue. SLW will assess work areas two weeks ahead of construction and will provide schools (during the school-year), police, fire, and emergency service agencies with advance notice of lane or road closures. A Transportation and Traffic Plan will be created for the Project and will address this issue. The proposed Project transportation routes have been selected to minimize impacts to roads and surrounding communities. The number of roads used for material and equipment transportation has been limited to the minimum needed for construction. Aside from the oversized vehicles delivering turbine and tower components, construction vehicles will be similar in nature to vehicles currently traveling over the road network and therefore will likely not require special mitigation measures. Construction equipment and the personal vehicles of construction workers will not be parked along public roadways, but rather in designated parking areas, so as to preserve safety along local roadways (unless exceptions are requested and granted by the appropriate authorities). In consultation with appropriate local officials, a Project speed limit will be established. A Dust Control Plan will be developed and implemented for the construction period. If construction is concurrent, coordination between the projects may be required to ensure that responsibilities for road impacts and remediation are properly recognized and assigned. To the extent there is any overlap in project construction schedules, SLW will coordinate road construction or improvements and transportation activity with the other projects and will seek to modify its traffic management plan, if necessary, to mitigate local transportation cumulative effects. The Project is designed to meet or exceed all of the requirements in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme land use and zoning ordinances; and is compliant with current local zoning and land use regulations in Cape Vincent and Lyme.

Project construction fugitive dust. Transportation - Cumulative

traffic

may

create

If the SLW Project and BP projects are built during the same construction season, it is possible that similar construction transportation routes may be chosen.

Land Use and Zoning

The Project will have temporary, construction-related impacts and permanent, long-term impacts on land use. The Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme have no specific requirements for development of wind projects in their jurisdictions, but have general zoning and land use regulations established for development. Construction of the Project will result in the temporary disturbance of approximately 425 acres of agricultural land and permanent conversion of 41 acres of agricultural land to wind turbine structures, a substation and pervious access roads.

SLW will follow NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets Guidelines for Agricultural Mitigation for Wind Power Projects.

1-10

001311

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 1-1 (Sheet 5 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Utilities and Community Services Potential Impact The Project will result in minor short- and long-term increases in energy usage associated with construction and operation of the Project. There is a remote possibility that some overhead electrical distribution lines will have to be temporarily relocated to accommodate crane routes. During construction, large vehicles and temporary roads closures could block emergency vehicle access to area farms and homes. Proposed Mitigation Mitigation is not necessary as neither of these represents significant impacts on energy resources. SLW will collaborate with the utility owners to reduce impacts to their facilities to the maximum extent practicable. SLW will assess work areas two weeks ahead of construction and will provide schools (during the school-year), police, fire, and emergency service agencies with advance notice of lane or road closures. SLW will issue press releases to local newspapers and radio stations regarding lane or road closures. SLW in collaboration with the Cape Vincent Fire Department (CVFD), has developed an Emergency Response Plan to define prevention and emergency response measures for hazardous materials spills, medical/fire/law enforcement, weather emergencies, and evacuation. SLW will maintain an appropriate level of preparedness and equipment for emergency rescue operations involving the nacelle and tower. SLW Project personnel will meet with the local emergency service personnel (police, fire, ambulance, and health care) to review and discuss the planned construction process. Compliance with setbacks and measures to control public access, such as fences and warning signs, will minimize public safety risks associated with ice shedding. Archeologically sensitive areas to be avoided during project construction will be clearly identified as “No Access” on Project construction maps. Prior to the start of construction, an Unanticipated Discoveries Plan will be developed, describing actions to be taken in the event that archeological sites, including possible human remains, are accidentally discovered during Project construction. SLW will continue drafting a Memorandum of Agreement for Visual Impact Mitigation, to be approved by the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme and by SHPO. Although the visual mitigation options are limited given the nature of the Project and its siting criteria, the following mitigation measures are proposed for the Project: Turbines will be painted white or light grey with non-specular material and not be used for commercial advertising. The turbine areas and facilities will be kept orderly and maintained on a regular basis. Turbines will not be allowed to rust.

Local fire department concerns regarding inexperience with the components of the new wind facility, during construction and operation of the wind power facility,

Impacts from Ice shedding

Cultural Resources

The Project will not affect archeological resources that are potentially eligible for the NRHP. In the event of future archeological discoveries in the archeological APE, SLW intends to avoid impacts to archeological resources that may be potentially eligible to the NRHP. The proposed project will have an adverse visual effect on historic architectural resources.

Visual Resources

The Project will be visible from a variety of locations within 5 miles of the proposed Project Area.

1-11

001312

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 1-1 (Sheet 6 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Potential Impact Proposed Mitigation To the extent practicable, the electrical interconnect between turbines will be installed underground. Overhead electrical transmission from the turbines to the 115 kV transmission line, to the greatest extent practicable, will be sited away from where such infrastructure can be viewed from roads. The developer will also minimize clearing necessary for the installation of the electrical interconnect. The proposed turbines will maintain appropriate buffers from property lines, nearby residences, roads and other nearby visually sensitive areas. Perimeter screen plantings will be used to minimize visibility of the proposed substations and Operations and Maintenance Building. Appropriate plantings will be assessed after construction. The proposed turbines will maintain appropriate buffers to minimize visual impact and extended shadow flicker. Settlement agreements could be used to purchase landscape screening (trees, shrubs), or exclusionary treatments such as curtains or blinds. Aviation warning lighting will be limited to the minimum required by the FAA. The Project will purchase aviation warning lights that are shielded or otherwise directed so that they are the least visible from the ground. Due to the height of the proposed turbines, the FAA requires red flashing aviation obstruction lighting to be placed atop the nacelle on 34 turbines to assure safe flight navigation in the vicinity of the Project. The proposed mitigation described above will be employed.

Some residences located within 10 turbine diameters will experience some degree (less than 30 hours per year) of shadow flicker in the Town of Cape Vincent.

The United States Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires aviation warning lights on the turbines, which could present a potential adverse visual impact from some viewing locations.

Visual - Cumulative

Construction of the SLW Project and the BP projects in relatively close proximity to one another may have the potential to create cumulative visual impacts. There may be locations where turbines from projects will be visible, either at the same time or in rapid succession while traveling on area roadways. In most locations within the study area, only small portions of either project will be visible. However, in some open elevated settings, it is possible that large portions of projects will be visible. During construction there may be short-term localized air quality impacts. Temporary minor adverse impacts to air quality may result from the operation of construction equipment and vehicles.

Air Quality

Standard mitigation control measures to maintain air quality will include: Vehicles used during construction will comply with applicable Federal and State air quality regulations; Limiting engine idling time and equipment shut down when not in use;

1-12

001313

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 1-1 (Sheet 7 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Potential Impact Proposed Mitigation Dust suppression on unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas, and using water or DOT approved dust suppression materials in compliance with State and local regulations; Traffic speeds on access roads will be kept to 25 mph to minimize generation of dust; Car-pooling among construction workers will be encouraged to minimize constructionrelated traffic and associated emissions; Disturbed areas will be re-planted or graveled to reduce wind-blown dust; and Erosion control measures will limit deposition of silt to roadways. The following mitigation measures will be applied to Project construction, as necessary and practicable: Adhering to regular construction work hours Mondays through Saturdays, and typically not working on Sundays or after dark; All construction equipment will be maintained in good working condition in order to reduce general noise emissions; When practical, heavy equipment will be shut down when not active, to minimize idling noise; All internal combustion engines will be fitted with appropriate muffler systems; and Adjacent landowners will be advised in advance of any significant noise-causing activities and these will be scheduled to create the least disruption to residents. It is not expected that mitigative measures will be required during Project operations; however, if needed, a complaint resolution program will be implemented whereby neighboring residents can contact SLW with their concerns. Complaints will be promptly investigated to resolve any verifiable issue or exceedance condition, and mitigation may be taken on a case-by-case basis. FCC's mandate to transition all off-air television broadcasts from analog signals to digital signals by February 2009 will eliminate turbine-related interference problems as digital signals are not subject to interference from intervening structures. Should the NTIA identify any Project-related concerns related to signal blockage following their 30-day review of the Project, SLW will mitigate impacts as required. The use of buffers from roads and property lines and public control measures will minimize already low public safety risk of ice shed. All turbines will have automatic braking and shutdown. Ice detectors will be installed at previously determined locations to notify maintenance personnel of icing conditions, which will allow the operator to take the appropriate actions.

Noise

The proposed Project will generate noise during construction.

The Project will not have significant noise impacts during operation.

Telecommunications

It is unlikely that there will be a significant impact to television signal coverage during Project operation. It is unlikely that the Project will impact government communications. There is a remote possibility that ice shed from turbines could cause personal or property injury.

1-13

001314

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 1-1 (Sheet 8 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Safety and Security Potential Impact There is a remote possibility that tower collapse or turbine failure could cause personal or property injury. Proposed Mitigation The use of buffers from roads and property lines and public control measures will minimize the already low public safety risk associated with tower collapse or blade failure. The standard engineering design and protection systems incorporated into modern wind turbines will prevent and minimize problems that could lead to tower collapse or blade failure. Stray voltage concerns will be addressed through proper electrical engineering design and installation of all Project electrical components. An Emergency Response Plan has been developed for the Project to ensure the safety of company employees and local residents, visitors, and their property. Prior to the commencement of construction SLW will present, review and revise of necessary the Emergency Response Plan in cooperation with local fire departments. The standard lightning protection system installed within the rotor blades will be used to prevent and minimize problems associated with lightning strikes. SLW will design all facilities in accordance with guidance and regulations of the Department of Homeland Security.

Wind power facilities have the potential to create stray voltage only if the electrical system is both poorly grounded and located near underground or poorly grounded metal objects. Due to their height, physical dimensions, and complexity, wind turbines may present response difficulties to local emergency responders should a fire occur within or near the structures. Storage and use of diesel fuels, lubricating oils, and hydraulic fluids within the Project boundary also create the potential for fire or medical emergencies. Due the height and materials used to construct, the wind turbines are susceptible to lightning strikes. It is not anticipated that the proposed Project will be a target for any homeland security concerns.

1-14

001315

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 1-2 (Sheet 1 of 2) Permits and Approvals for the St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project Agency Towns Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board Town of Cape Vincent Code Enforcement Officer Town of Cape Vincent Departments Town of Lyme Planning Board Town of Lyme Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Lyme Departments Jefferson County Planning Department Highway Department New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Department of State Division of Coastal Resources Department of Transportation Department of Agriculture & Markets Public Service Commission NYSOPRHP (SHPO) Federal Agencies FAA Notice of Construction and Aviation Lighting Plan. Administration of SEQRA Process, and issuance of findings (as Lead Agency under SEQRA). Site Plan Approval for construction of wind energy project and transmission line to Town boundary Zoning Permit Issuance of building permits/certificates of compliance. Review and approval of highway work permits/road agreements. Participation in SEQRA Process as an involved agency Special Use Permit (Zoning Board of Appeals) and other land use considerations for construction of transmission line to substation Issuance of building permits. Review and approval of highway work permits/road agreements. Completion of a NYS General Municipal Law Section 239-m review and issuance of recommendations. County road work permits. ECL Article 17 SPDES General Permit for stormwater discharges including creation of SWPPP and SPCC/Oil Contingency Plans (6NYCRR Part 750).] Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification (6NYCRR Part 608). Issuance of SEQRA Findings as an involved agency. Coastal Zone Management Act Consistency Determination Special Use Permit for oversize/overweight vehicles. Highway work permits. Participation in SEQRA Process as an interested agency. Agricultural District Law Article 25AA, Section 305-a Coordination of local planning and land use decision-making with the agricultural districts program Participation in SEQRA Process as an interested agency. Cultural Resources Consultation. Description of Permit or Approval Required

1-15

001316

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 1-2 (Sheet 2 of 2) Permits and Approvals for the St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project Agency Description of Permit or Approval Required Federal Agencies USACE Nationwide Section 10 Permit for aerial crossing of the Chaumont River. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USACE Section 404 Nationwide Permit for placement of fill in federal jurisdictional wetlands/waters of the U.S. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service OSHA Consultation regarding special status species. 29 CFR 1910 regulations (standard conditions for safe work practices during construction).

1-16

001317

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

2.0

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION

The following discussion describes the proposed Project in terms of purpose, need and benefit, Project location, and layout. This Project description also describes construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning. In addition, a list of regulatory approvals is provided.
2.1 Introduction

This SDEIS assesses the environmental effects of constructing and operating the proposed Project. Provided below are descriptions of the Project, the Project Applicant, the Project's purpose, need, and benefit; the Project’s potential environmental impacts and related proposed mitigation measures; the alternatives analyzed in this SDEIS; and the regulatory approvals necessary for the Project to be constructed and operated. The Applicant, SLW, is proposing to develop a wind-powered electrical-generating facility of up to 53 turbine locations with a total capacity of approximately 79.5 MW. The proposed Project would be located in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme in Jefferson County, New York. All 53 turbines, temporary construction laydown areas, access roads, underground interconnect lines, operations and maintenance building, meteorological towers, an electrical substation and other components would be located in the Town of Cape Vincent; most of the overhead electrical transmission line and the interconnection to the existing transmission grid would be located in the Town of Lyme. The wind turbines proposed for the project are 1.5 MW Acciona AW-82/1500 turbines manufactured by Acciona Windpower, S.A. The blade-tip height is approximately 390.5 feet, and the rotor width (diameter) is approximately 269 feet (82 meters). Each turbine will consist of a 262-foot (80-meter) tall steel tower; a rotor consisting of three composite blades; and a nacelle, which houses the generator, gearbox, and power train. A transformer will be located adjacent to the base of the tower, to raise the voltage of the electricity produced by the turbine generator to the voltage level of the underground collection system. The steel towers used for this Project will be manufactured in multiple sections. The towers will have a base diameter of approximately 20 feet. Each tower will have a locked access door and an internal safety ladder to access the nacelle, and will be painted (off-white) to make the structure less visually obtrusive. The Project also would result in the construction of approximately 14.4 miles of gravel access roads, 37.1 miles of underground electric cables (of which approximately 9.8 miles will be colocated adjacent to gravel access roads), two electrical substations, and an operations and maintenance building (the collector substation will be co-located with the operations and maintenance building). An approximately 9 mile long (115 kV) overhead transmission line will

2-1

001318

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

be constructed to connect the Project with the existing transmission grid and electrical substation in the Town of Lyme. The Project facilities will be developed on leased private land. SLW plans to begin construction in the spring/summer of 2010 and to complete construction by the end of 2010. However, SLW may initiate site clearing and tree removal during winter 2009-2010. SLW will begin site work as early as possible after all required permits and approvals are received. This will enable SLW to commence construction as early as possible after the 2010 spring thaw. The geotechnical investigation and other detailed engineering studies to support the civil design will be conducted prior to construction. Once the Project is in operation, the wind turbines and associated components operate in an almost completely automated fashion. SLW intends to permanently employ approximately four to six full-time workers for operation and maintenance of the wind energy facility.
2.2 Purpose and Scope of Environmental Impact Statement

The proposed Project is subject to review under New York’s SEQRA because it requires the issuance of discretionary permits by state and local agencies (see Section 2.9, Regulatory Approvals). SLW submitted a Full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to the Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board on November 8, 2006, addressing the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project. The submittal of the EAF initiated the SEQRA process for the proposed action. SLW voluntarily agreed to prepare a DEIS. SLW retained a team of experienced environmental consultants to study the proposed Project and develop a SEQRA DEIS which was submitted to the Town of Cape Vincent, as Lead Agency, on January 10, 2007. The following steps in the SEQRA process for the Project have been completed: The DEIS was accepted as complete by Lead Agency (i.e., Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board) on January 24, 2007; The Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board filed a notice of completion of the DEIS and notice of public hearing and comment period on February 7, 2007; The Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board held a public hearing on the DEIS on March 24, 2007; and The public comment period on the DEIS ended on June 15, 2007.

2-2

001319

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

After the public comment period on the DEIS, the Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board requested preparation of a SDEIS. SLW agreed and retained a team of experienced environmental consultants to prepare the SDEIS. The next steps in the SEQRA process for this Project include the following: A public hearing to be held on the SDEIS 30 days after its submission date. A public comment period of 60 days, starting from the acceptance of the SDEIS. After the public comment period on the SDEIS, two alternative procedural pathways would be available to the Lead Agency. The Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board could require preparation of a Final EIS (FEIS). If that alternative pathway is chosen, the following steps would be taken: SLW prepares the Final EIS (FEIS); Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board reviews the FEIS, and determines whether to accept the FEIS as complete; Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board files notice of completion of the FEIS; 10-day public consideration period; The Planning Board, as Lead agency, issues its SEQRA Findings Statement; and Involved agencies consider the FEIS and issue their SEQRA Findings Statements as necessary to implement their permitting jurisdiction.
2.3 Project Purpose, Public Need and Benefits

The purpose of the Project is to develop a wind-powered electrical-generating facility at the proposed Project location. This Project will be a significant source of renewable energy to the New York electrical power grid, with the ability to annually power approximately 26,500 homes. The Project will assist New York State in complying with the objectives of New York State PSC Order 03-E-0188, which was issued on September 24, 2004. This order established the New York State RPS to increase the proportion of electricity from renewable energy sources used in New York State to 25 percent by the end of 2013. The RPS helps to ensure that New York State's growing need for electricity will be satisfied in an efficient and environmentally sound manner. Wind generated electricity provides increased stability to the price volatility of fossilfuel electricity generation in New York. In addition, the Project also assists in fulfilling objectives identified in the 2002 State Energy Plan (New York State Energy Planning Board, 2002), such as stimulating economic growth, increasing energy diversity, and promoting a cleaner and healthier environment. 2-3

001320

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

The Project will generate a number of other benefits to the host communities and to New York State in general. The Project will result in increased tax revenues to local governments, annual income to participating landowners, and direct job creation during the development and construction of the Project, as well as indirect job creation during operation of the wind energy project. For a lengthier discussion of potential socioeconomic benefits, see Section 3.11 (Socioeconomics). Wind energy benefits local ambient air quality and long-term health of the atmosphere because it produces electricity without emitting pollutants. Unlike conventional fossil fuel-fired electric power plants, no pollutant emissions are associated with wind power generation. To the extent that electricity produced by wind energy displaces electricity produced by fossil-fired power plants, pollutant emissions are reduced and air quality is improved. Pollutants that may be reduced from this energy displacement include “criteria pollutants” regulated by the Clean Air Act, such as nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds, as well as “non-criteria pollutants,” such as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) including metals and other toxic compounds. The Project is estimated to result in annual reductions of approximately 138 tons of nitrogen oxides, 391 tons of sulfur dioxide, and substantial quantities of other pollutants including particulate matter (PM), carbon monoxide (CO), and volatile organic compounds. In addition, unlike fossil fuel-fired energy generation, wind power does not result in greenhouse gas emissions (such as carbon dioxide), which generally are considered the major factor in global warming. The Project will offset approximately 92,697 tons of carbon dioxide annually. By offsetting air pollutants and greenhouse gases, the Project will provide a benefit to environmental resources and human health. The Project will also support the long-term economic viability of agricultural areas in the host communities, enabling the primarily agricultural landowners to augment their farm incomes by realizing the full potential of the wind asset on their lands.
2.4 Project Description and Location

The Project will be located in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme in Jefferson County, New York. Figure 2-1 illustrates the proposed location of the Project. The Project facilities will have a permanent footprint of disturbance equal to approximately 60 acres. Nearly all Project facilities would be located on individual leased land parcels located within a larger area of approximately 7,900 acres (Project Area). However, SLW is seeking an easement from the NYSDEC for a portion of the overhead transmission line, (approximately 1.6 miles), that would

2-4

001321

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

traverse the Ashland Wildlife Management Area. The Project Area will be located southeast of the St. Lawrence River and New York State Route 12E, which generally parallels the riverbank. As proposed, the Project and associated turbines will be located within the Agricultural Residential District of Cape Vincent and part of the electric overhead transmission line will be located within the Agricultural and Rural Residence District in Lyme. The Project Area extends from approximately one-half mile from the river bank to about two and one-half miles inland and extends from one mile south of the Village of Cape Vincent northeasterly about 10 miles southeast of Route 12E. The overhead transmission line will extend several miles in an easterly direction from the Project Area to an existing transmission grid substation within the Town of Lyme. Land use in the Project Area is mostly agricultural, with farms and single family rural residences occurring along road frontage. The general Project Area will be served by a network of state, county and local highways and roads that vary from two-lane highways to gravel roads. The New York State (NYS) Highway system in and adjacent to the Project Area includes Interstate Route 81, NYS Route 12E, State Route 12, NYS Route 180, and several County roads. The extensive road network provides excellent site access for construction vehicles and delivery of Project equipment.
2.5 Proposed Facility Layout and Design

The following section describes the proposed Project layout as shown on Figure 2-1, and provides a description of the major components of the Project. The St. Lawrence Windpower Project will consist of up to 53 wind turbines, each with a nameplate capacity of 1.5 MW and a rotor diameter of 82 meters (269 feet). All installed turbines will be the same make and model. The Project’s installed capacity will be 79.5 MW. The Project will also require the construction of approximately 14.4 miles of permanent gravel access roads, 37.1 miles of underground interconnect (of which approximately 9.8 miles will be co-located adjacent to permanent access roads), an electrical substation, and an operations and maintenance building. An approximately 9 mile long (115 kV) overhead transmission line would be constructed to connect the Project with the existing transmission grid and electrical substation in the Town of Lyme. The turbines will have a maximum height of approximately 395.5 feet from the tip of the rotor blade at the uppermost position to ground level, and the rotor diameter would be 269 feet. There is one temporary meteorological tower with guy wires currently on the site that will be removed when Project construction is complete. There will be up to three permanent meteorological towers located on site, the location of which will be determined after a final construction layout is completed. Existing roads will be used to the extent feasible to bring equipment and material to the site (see Section 3.4).

2-5

001322

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

The proposed location and spacing of the wind turbines and support facilities were determined using results of a wind resource assessment, selection of a turbine model, a review of the site's land use constraints (see Section 3.5, Land Use and Zoning), landowner preferences, and the locations of currently existing sensitive environmental and cultural resources. The Project will also require two substations: a collector substation, located on Swamp (Wilson) Road approximately 0.1 miles south of its intersection with Favret Road, for low-voltage step-up to transmission voltage; and a transmission owner interconnection facility, located south of the Chaumont River and north of County Route 179, opposite the National Grid Lyme Substation in the Town of Lyme. The collector substation will consolidate power from the 1500-kW wind turbine generators, and increase the voltage level from 34.5 kV to 115 kV. The collector system substation will receive power from feeders, through the underground collector system connected to the 53 wind turbine generators. The collector substation will be connected to the transmission owner interconnection substation by an approximately 9-mile 115 kV transmission line. The main function of the interconnection substation is to mechanically connect the Project to the utility grid and to provide fault protection.
2.5.1 Wind Turbines

Turbines used for the Project will be 1.5 MW Acciona AW-82/1500 turbines manufactured by Acciona Windpower, S.A. Each turbine will consist of a 262-foot (80-meter) conical, tubular steel tower; a 269-foot (82-meter) rotor consisting of three Exhibit 2.5.1- Turbine Dimensions composite blades; and a nacelle, which houses the generator, gearbox, and power train as shown in Exhibit 2.5.1. The towers are slightly tapered, with diameter of approximately 20 feet at ground level. A service platform at the top of each section allows for access to the nacelle for routine inspection. The nacelle houses the main mechanical components of the WTG, which include the drive train, a gearbox and the generator. The nacelle sits atop the tower. A large flange protrudes from the front of the nacelle to which the hub is bolted. The rotor blades are all bolted to this central hub. Exhibit 2.5.2 provides a detail of the nacelle, hub and rotor assembly. A transformer will be located near the tower base, to raise the voltage of the electricity produced by the turbine generator to the voltage level of the collection system. The steel towers used for this Project will be manufactured in

2-6

001323

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

multiple sections. Each tower will have a locked access door and an internal safety ladder to access the nacelle, and will be painted (off-white) to make the structure less visually obtrusive. Specifications for the turbines are presented in Table 2-1.
Exhibit 2.5.2 - Nacelle Main Components

Table 2-1 Turbine Specifications Type: Manufacturer: Rated power: Rotor manufacturer: Rotor blade type: Rotor diameter: Rotor swept area: Number of rotor blades: Rotor rated speed: Hub height above ground: Measurement distance R0: Acciona AW 82/1500 IEC IIIb T80A LM40.3P Acciona Windpower, S.A. 1500 kW (1.5 MW) LM 40.3P 82.026 m (269.114 feet) 5281 m2 3 18.25 min-1 80 m (~262 ft) 113 m (~371 ft)

2.5.2

Turbine Spacing

Development of the Project layout has been an iterative process. The first step in siting the wind turbines for this Project was to assess the wind resource and place conceptual turbine locations where wind would appear to be the strongest and steadiest. Appropriate buffers (see Figure 2-2) from roads, property lines, residences, and sensitive environmental resources were taken into account in developing the first conceptual layout. Once the conceptual layout was set, land rights

2-7

001324

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

specialists, environmental consultants, and engineers reviewed the possible turbine locations in the field. Adjustments were made to the proposed turbine locations based upon land use, environmental, and engineering considerations. Each suggested change in turbine locations based upon field conditions must then be reviewed by a meteorologist, who ensures the adjustments in turbine positioning will not unreasonably impact the efficiency of the layout. This review process has been repeated multiple times over the course of Project development as additional information has become available. Factors considered when siting the turbines include: Wind resource assessment: In order to find the most efficient turbine sites for generating electricity, SLW uses computer models that combined wind resource data from meteorological towers in the Project Area with long-term weather data, topography, and environmental factors. Sufficient spacing: Wind turbines create turbulence, or wake, immediately downstream of the rotor. Wake can interfere with the operation of neighboring wind turbines, creating extra wear and tear, and decreasing the efficiency of producing electricity. Using computer models, SLW ensured that turbines were spaced correctly to avoid wake losses and turbulence. Distance from residences: In conformance with setback comments issued by the Town of Cape Vincent in July 2007, the turbine locations were selected to maintain a buffer of 750 feet from the nearest outer wall of an existing occupied participating residence to the center of the tower foundation and 1,250 feet from that of an existing occupied non-participating residence. The turbine buffer minimizes the visual and sound effects of the turbines on local residences. Distance from roads: The turbine locations were also selected to maintain a buffer from existing road rights-of-way of 615 feet or 1.5 times the turbine tip height, whichever is greater. Distance from adjacent property lines: The turbine locations were also selected to maintain a buffer of 1,000 feet from adjacent non-participating property lines in conformance with setback comments issued by the Town of Cape Vincent in July 2007. Sensitive Environmental and Cultural Resources: In addition to the above the following factors were taken in to consideration during the planning process for the facility layout: implementation of siting guidelines developed by the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets (Ag & Markets), minimization of impacts to sensitive biological and cultural resources, consideration of unusual landforms, avoidance and minimization of impacts to wetlands and surface water bodies, and minimization of visual and noise impacts. These factors involved evaluation of setback distances from such resources as the St. Lawrence River and Lake

2-8

001325

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Ontario, the Seaway Trail Scenic Byway, historic properties listed or eligible for the State and National Register of Historic Places, designated Coastal Zone areas including Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats and Local Waterfront Revitalization areas, and designated Wildlife Management Areas.
2.5.3 Access Roads

As described in Section 3.4, most of the transportation infrastructure needed for the Project is already in place. However, because turbine sites must be located a distance from existing roads, it will be necessary to create access roads from the existing roadways to the turbines. Approximately 14.4 miles of permanent access roads will be constructed. An additional 1.5 miles of temporary access roads will also be constructed to allow for construction equipment turnaround. Turbine sites have been selected to optimize efficiency and avoid environmental impacts. Similarly, the locations of access roads have been selected to minimize impacts to agricultural land uses and environmental resources, and to account for engineering and constructability concerns. SLW is currently developing the Project construction plan, which would include transportation considerations. Existing roads and intersections will need to be improved to accommodate construction traffic, as described in Section 3.4. The proposed access road system is shown on Figure 2-1. SLW would be responsible for the maintenance of new private roads.
2.5.4 Underground Interconnect Line

Electricity from the wind turbines will be generated at a specific voltage and transported through underground cables that will connect groups of turbines together electrically. Approximately 37.1 miles of underground electrical lines will be constructed to interconnect the Project to the collector system substation. Approximately 9.8 miles (26 percent) of these lines would be colocated adjacent to permanent access roads. These gathering lines will feed to the collector substation within the Project Site. At the collector substation, the electrical power from the entire wind energy project will run through a transformer and be converted to a higher voltage (increased from 34.5 kV to 115 kV) to allow for transmission to the proposed transmission owner interconnection substation in Lyme and the existing system transmission grid.
2.5.5 Overhead Interconnect Line

Interconnection to the transmission grid will be accomplished through an approximately 9-mile overhead line. The line will consist of a single circuit 115 kV line to accommodate the Project. SLW proposes to locate the overhead line primarily following an abandoned railroad bed and existing water line (see Figure 2-1). The transmission line will be supported by mostly wooden

2-9

001326

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

poles approximately 80 feet tall. The location of the poles will be determined through detailed engineering and design. Pole locations will be designed to avoid impacts to the operation of the water line. The overhead interconnection line will connect to an existing substation in the Town of Lyme, owned and operated by National Grid. The Chaumont River will be crossed by an overhead wire (conductor) crossing.
2.5.6 Substation and Interconnection Facilities

The collector substation located on Swamp Road will step up the voltage of the electricity so that it can be reliably transmitted through the 9-mile overhead line to the transmission owner interconnection substation located on County Route 179 and interconnected with the 115 kV transmission line at the existing National Grid substation in Lyme. At the transmission owner interconnection substation, electricity delivered will be metered and a protection system put into place to ensure reliability and integrity of the infrastructure. SLW anticipates that structural elements at both substations will be installed on concrete foundations. In addition, SLW anticipates that both substations will consist of a graveled footprint area, a chain link perimeter fence, and an outdoor lighting system. The design of the transmission owner interconnection facilities to the 115 kV line will be finalized based on a facility study conducted by the transmission line owner and the Exhibit 2.5.3 Electrical and Central Control System New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) in accordance with the NYISO’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission-approved Open Access Transmission Tariff. The Proposed Revised Project Layout in Figure 2-1 shows the general routing paths of the underground and overhead electrical lines as well as the proposed substation locations. Exhibit 2.5.3 illustrates the overall electrical collection system schematically.
2.5.7 Meteorological Towers

A maximum of five meteorological towers will be installed during the construction and operations phases of the Project to monitor wind resources. Towers will be permitted according

2-10

001327

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

to local and state requirements. Three 80-meter lattice towers will remain for the life of the Project to collect data on wind speed and direction, and ambient temperature. They will be supported by three to four guy wires and rest on concrete footings. In addition, two temporary 80-meter guyed lattice towers will be installed during construction to calibrate the site for power performance testing. Two meteorological towers are currently in place: a 60-meter tubular guided tower and an 80-meter guyed lattice tower. The 60-meter tower will be decommissioned prior to construction.
2.6 Construction

The following section describes the various activities that will occur as part of Project construction. Project construction will be performed in several stages and will include the following main elements and activities: Clearing and grading of the temporary field construction office, substation, access roads, crane pads, turnaround areas and turbine locations; Construction of access roads; Construction of turbine tower foundations and, if necessary, transformer pads; Installation of the underground interconnect lines; Construction of the approximately 9 miles of overhead transmission line; Assembly and erection of the wind turbines; Construction and installation of the substation; Plant commissioning and energizing; Final grading and drainage; and Site restoration. Project construction will likely occur over one construction season (April through mid-December 2010) and will require the involvement of approximately 200 construction-related personnel depending on the stage of construction. However, tree clearing and site preparation work, and hazard tree clearing for the transmission line may occur from November 2009-April 2010.
2.6.1 Geotechnical Investigation

Prior to construction, a detailed final geotechnical investigation will be performed to identify subsurface conditions necessary for final design and engineering of the Project. The geotechnical investigation will include drilling test borings at designated locations to evaluate subsurface geology and groundwater conditions, and performing field tests and geotechnical laboratory tests on recovered samples to evaluate the physical and engineering properties of the strata encountered. SLW will also perform engineering analyses to develop design and construction 2-11

001328

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

specifications for foundations, site subgrade, and fill preparation. Soil borings, or test pits as necessary, are required at each wind turbine location, the substation, and at certain intervals along access roads. Borings will be performed in accordance with local requirements, such as filling boreholes with grout after testing is complete.
2.6.2 Design and Construction Specifications

The design and construction specifications are based on proven and established sets of construction standards set forth by standard industry practice and are used to generate the impact assumptions provided in Table 2-2. However, during detailed engineering design additional needs and constraints may be identified, requiring that site specific plans be developed. Under those circumstances, qualified engineers would tailor the design and construction specifications for site-specific conditions and the area of impact required may deviate from the assumptions in Table 2-2. For the remainder of this SDEIS, the Project Site is defined as the total area, temporarily and permanently disturbed for the construction and operation of the Project facilities.
2.6.3 Access Road Installation

The Project will include approximately 14.4 miles of gravel access road construction. To the greatest extent possible, SLW will use and upgrade existing roads and farm drives for use as Project access roads in order to minimize agricultural and environmental impacts. New gravel access roads will also be constructed. Road construction will typically involve clearing and grubbing of the right-of-way and topsoil stripping in active agricultural areas, as necessary. Stripped topsoil will be stockpiled along the road corridor for use in site restoration. Agricultural protection measures will be followed so that topsoil is not mixed with subsoils or gravel. The topsoil, when replaced, will retain its unique characteristics. These agricultural protection measures were developed during the construction of past wind energy projects in New York and are suggested for use by the NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets. For evaluation purposes, it is assumed that access road construction will disturb, at most, a temporary 39-foot wide area. In certain locations, vegetation clearing activities might extend slightly beyond the footprint of anticipated ground disturbance. Cleared vegetation will be chipped and properly spread on-site or hauled to an off-site location for disposal or reuse. Topsoil will then be stripped and segregated. Subsoil will then be graded, compacted, and surfaced with gravel or crushed stone in accordance with the requirements of the wind turbine supplier and recommendations from the geotechnical engineer. Any excess topsoil will be stockpiled on the landowner’s property in an agreed upon location for landowner use, or be hauled to an off-site location for disposal or reuse. Geotextile fabric or grid may be installed

2-12

001329

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 2-2 Construction and Operations Impact Assumptions Project Components Wind Turbines and Workspaces (radius) Crane Pads (length x width) Crane Paths (width) Access Roads (width) Access Roads Temporary “T” Turnaround Areas Buried Electrical Interconnects Buried Electrical Interconnect Work Area Overhead Electrical Interconnect (width) Meteorological Towers Collection Substation/ Operations and Maintenance Building Transmission Owner Substation Staging Areas Concrete Batch Plant
1

Area of Total Disturbance (temporary and permanent) 150 ft per turbine Included in 150 ft workspace for each turbine 35 ft (in non-public road or access road areas only) 39 ft 16 ft x 200 ft 2 ft wide trench per cable plus 10 ft separation between additional circuits Single Cable: 100 ft Multiple Cables: 150 ft 100 ft 1 acre per tower 11.5 acres 0.6 acres 12.25 acres 10 acres

Area of Permanent Disturbance 10 ft per turbine 100 ft x 50 ft None 17 ft -

None 17 ft1 0.10 acre per tower 11.5 acres 0.6 acres None None

This represents the permanent right-of-way width to be periodically maintained where required. No permanent access road will be created.

beneath the road surface to provide additional support, if engineering studies indicate it is necessary. Permanent access roads will generally be 17 feet wide, including side slopes. Crosssections at turning radii and pull-offs to accommodate passing vehicles will be slightly wider, as necessary for safety. Where needed to facilitate cross drainage, culverts will be placed in wetland/stream crossings in accordance with state and federal permits. Appropriate sediment and erosion control measures will be installed prior to construction of the Project and maintained throughout the construction phase with specific measures addressing access road construction near sensitive environmental resources. These measures will be described in the Project SWPPP in the FEIS.

2-13

001330

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

2.6.4

Foundation Construction

Turbine foundation construction would begin only after access roads to turbine locations are constructed. Foundation construction includes drilling, hole excavation, outer form setting, rebar and bolt cage assembly, casting and finishing of the concrete, removal of the forms, backfilling and compacting, if required, and foundation site area restoration. A construction work area consisting of a temporary 150-foot radius around each turbine foundation is necessary for wind turbine assembly and erection. This will typically involve clearing and stripping/stockpiling topsoil. Backhoes will then excavate a foundation hole. In agricultural areas excavated subsoil and rock will be segregated from stockpiled topsoil. If bedrock is encountered it is anticipated it will be excavated with a backhoe. If this is not possible, drilling, pneumatic jacking, hydraulic fracturing or blasting, as a last resort, would excavate the bedrock. The Project geotechnical/civil engineer will specify the foundation type. Typical wind turbine foundations are approximately 7 to 10 feet deep and approximately 50 to 60 feet across, such as the one Exhibit 2.6.1 – Typical Turbine Foundation shown in Exhibit 2.6.1. Foundations typically require approximately 320 cubic yards (cy) of concrete. After the concrete is cured, it is backfilled with the excavated on-site material. Permanent loss of usable land will be restricted to the tower diameter, which for the Project is 20 feet. To provide adequate foundation for the erection cranes, a gravel crane pad (approximately 100 feet by 50 feet) will be constructed at the base of each tower. Excess subsoil or other excavated material generated from foundation work will be used to backfill or fine grade roads and wind turbine erection areas. Any excess topsoil, subsoil or gravel will be stockpiled on the landowner’s property in an agreed upon location for landowner use, or be hauled to an off-site location for disposal or reuse. Large quantities of concrete necessary for foundations and constraints imposed by the need for continuous pour will require either a nearby source of concrete or an on-site cement batch plant. The Applicant’s first preference is to contract with a local supplier to provide the concrete for

2-14

001331

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

turbine foundations. In the event that a local source is not available, a temporary concrete batch plant will be installed on an approximately 10 acre parcel located in the northeast portion of the Project. The plant would occupy only a portion of the parcel and would be surrounded by an earthen berm to contain water runoff. It would operate during Project construction hours (10 hours per day during daylight hours, 5 to 6 days per week) for approximately 8 months. The onsite batch plant would be provided by a local supplier and would require a stand-alone generator that would draw fuel from a self-contained, fail-safe storage tank. The batch plant would be supplied by water dawn from an adjacent onsite water storage tank that would be refilled as required. The batch plant would use stockpiled sand and aggregate stored outdoors. These stockpiles would be placed to minimize exposure to wind and the possibility of airborne dust. Cement would be discharged from a screw conveyor directly into an elevated storage silo. Trucks would be loaded from the silo. Temporary concrete washout facilities will be constructed for rinsing out concrete trucks. Concrete waste solids and liquids will be collected and disposed of properly in accordance with the Project SWPPP and any state permit conditions. This location will be more than 50 feet away from any storm drain, open ditch, surface water or wetland. Construction managers would exercise good housekeeping practices and conduct regular cleanings of the plant, storage and stockpile areas to minimize buildup of fine materials. Upon completion of turbine construction the batch plant will be removed and the area restored.
2.6.5 Underground Interconnect Line Installation

A work area width of approximately 100 feet, centered on the interconnection route, will be cleared prior to installation of the underground lines. The project is designed to minimize the cutting of trees and other vegetation. This 100-foot wide corridor will be accessed by cable installation machinery, which is not anticipated to involve excavation of soil. Electrical interconnects will follow Project access roads whenever practicable (approximately 9.8 miles of the approximate 37.17 miles of interconnect will be co-located adjacent to access roads). In areas where co-location adjacent to access roads is not practical, interconnect design will follow field edges as much as possible and avoid cutting directly across fields. Where the interconnect must cross active agricultural fields, the location of any subsurface drainage (tile) lines will be determined (through consultation with the landowner[s]) to ensure that these sites are not damaged during cable installation, or, if damage is unavoidable, that the tiles are subsequently restored. Cable plow methods using a PLC trencher will be used during the installation of underground interconnect lines. Interconnect installation will disturb an area approximately 24 inches wide in which bundled cable will be placed at a minimum depth of 48 inches where soil conditions allow (or 6 inches beyond the depth of bedrock). Generally, no restoration of the

2-15

001332

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

interconnection line is required, as the opening closes in on itself following installation (see Exhibit 2.6.2). Similarly, surface disturbance associated with the passage of machinery in the 100-foot wide work corridor will be minimal, and should not require restoration. However, should disturbance require surface restoration, it will be carried out shortly after installation, and will be accomplished by a small bulldozer, or equivalent. Any tiles that are cut or damaged during construction of the interconnect will be repaired during restoration.

Exhibit 2.6.2 – PLC Trencher

Installation of interconnect cable via an open trench will be avoided, if possible. Areas where open trench installation may be required include unstable slopes, excessive unconsolidated rock, and standing or flowing water. Open trench installation would be performed with a backhoe and would result in a disturbed trench approximately 36 inches wide and a minimum of 48 inches deep. Excavated material would be sidecast immediately adjacent to the trench. In active agricultural areas, agricultural protection measures in accordance with the guidelines of the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets will Exhibit 2.6.3 – Typical Underground Interconnect Installation be followed (Appendix A); and the cable will be placed at a minimum depth of 48 inches or 6 inches beyond the depth of bedrock (Exhibit 2.6.3). Replacement of excavated material will occur immediately after installation of the underground interconnect. Any damaged tiles will be repaired, and all areas adjacent to the open trench would be restored to original grades and surface condition. Although not currently anticipated, portions of the interconnect could be installed aboveground. Aboveground installation would be indicated when burial would not be economically feasible or could result in significant environmental impacts. If that occurs, the interconnect would be installed aboveground on treated wood utility poles.
2.6.6 Wind Turbine Assembly and Erection

Wind turbines consist of three main components: the tower, the nacelle, and the rotor blades. Turbine components will be delivered to the Project Site on uncovered transport trucks. Turbine

2-16

001333

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

erection is typically performed in six stages: (1) setting of the electrical components in the foundation, (2) erection of the tower, (3) erection of the nacelle, (4) assembly and erection of the rotor, (5) connection and termination of the internal cables, and (6) inspection and testing of the electrical system. Turbine assembly and erection is performed with large track mounted cranes, smaller rough terrain cranes, boom trucks and rough terrain fork-lifts for loading and off-loading materials. The erection crane(s) will move from one tower to another along a designated crane path. This path will generally follow existing public roads and Project access roads, but in a few places may traverse open fields. If this approach is not feasible, topsoil will be stripped and stockpiled in accordance with agricultural protection measures and 39-foot-wide temporary roads will be installed in these areas. In addition, the use of construction mats will be considered during constructability review of the Project. The crane may also be partially disassembled and carried by a flatbed tractor-trailer, but this is inefficient and expensive. After a turbine is erected, site restoration activities will begin. Restoration of crane paths will include removal of temporary fill and gravel materials. In agricultural fields, restoration will also include subsoil de-compaction (as necessary) and rock removal, spreading of stockpiled topsoil, and re-establishing pre-construction contours. Exposed soils at restored tower sites and along roads and crane paths will be stabilized by seeding with native species and/or mulching.
2.6.7 Substations

Construction of two substations will be required for the Project, a collection substation for lowvoltage step-up to transmission voltage located in the southwest portion of the Project and transmission owner interconnection facilities at the National Grid Substation located in the Town of Lyme. The collection substation will be located on an approximately 11.5-acre parcel in the Town of Cape Vincent, and co-located with the facility’s Operations & Maintenance building. This substation will be accessed by Swamp (Wilson) Road. The substation construction area will be cleared, grubbed, and graded. Concrete foundations and gravel surfacing will be placed prior to the installation of the electrical infrastructure. The substation will include a gravel parking area and be enclosed by a chain link fence. The main elements of the collection substation include a control house, a power transformer, outdoor medium-voltage and high-voltage breakers, relaying and protection equipment, high-voltage bus work, steel support structures, overhead lightning suppression conductors, and a sub-surface grounding grid. The transmission owner interconnection substation will be located across the street from the existing Lyme substation on Route 179, in the town of Lyme. The main elements of the

2-17

001334

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

transmission owner interconnection substation include a control house, utility-quality metering, outdoor high-voltage breakers, relaying equipment, 115 kV bus work, dead-end steel support structures, overhead lightning suppression conductors, and a sub-surface grounding grid.
2.6.8 Overhead Transmission Line

The temporary construction right-of-way for the overhead transmission line may be up to 100 feet, as necessary for construction equipment. The construction right-of-way will be cleared and grubbed. The construction right-of-way will serve as access for construction vehicles. Additional access to the work area will include use of existing farm roads and drives. To the extent new access roads are necessary, the siting criteria described in Section 2.6.3 will be employed. Construction vehicles and equipment will then set the Exhibit 2.6.4 – Typical treated wood utility poles and associated transmission infrastructure. Overhead Line Pole Later, stringing crews will install electrical cable on the utility poles (see Exhibit 2.6.4). The system will be tested prior to energizing the wind generating facility. Restoration of the construction right-ofway will be done as required through use of agricultural protection measures. The final overhead transmission line right-of-way will be identified post-construction on as-built drawings which will be filed with the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme. The proposed overhead transmission line will deviate from the old railroad bed approximately 0.1 miles northwest of Old Town Springs Road in the Town of Lyme. At this point it will turn 90 degrees and head in a generally northeast direction for approximately 0.6 miles, at which point it will turn 90 degrees and head in a generally southeast direction crossing the Chaumont River and connecting to the existing National Grid Substation in the Town of Lyme. The Chaumont River will be crossed by an overhead wire (conductor). Existing shrubs and trees will be cleared and chipped, or hauled from the right-of-way corridor. Single trees or small clusters of trees within the proposed rightof-way will be avoided and will not require removal. Tree clearing adjacent to the transmission line will be limited to “danger trees” associated with the electric transmission line conductors. “Danger trees” adjacent to the transmission line that pose a threat to the reliability of the overhead line include trees that could fall or strike the conductors and take the transmission line out of service. These trees will be selectively cut by hand (i.e., non-mechanized clearing) to avoid heavy equipment access and adverse impacts to adjacent wetlands.

2-18

001335

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

2.6.9

Operations and Maintenance Facility

The proposed Operations and Maintenance Facility will be located on an approximately 11.5acre parcel in the Town of Cape Vincent. The facility will be accessed from Swamp Road. The facility construction area will be cleared, grubbed, and graded. Concrete foundations and gravel surfacing will be completed prior to the installation of the infrastructure. The facility will include a gravel parking area.
2.6.10 Environmental Construction Compliance

An environmental construction compliance program will be prepared by SLW and implemented prior to and during construction. At a minimum, this program will consist of the following components: Planning – Compilation of all environmental requirements into a construction environmental management implementation document. Training – All contractors and subcontractors will attend an environmental training program prior to the start of construction. Throughout construction, new crews will also receive Environmental Training. Retraining in specific areas will occur periodically, as needed, during construction. Preconstruction Coordination – The Environmental Inspector, Contractor and any Subcontractors will conduct a site walkover of areas to be affected by construction activities identifying landowner restrictions, sensitive resources (biological, geological, and cultural), limits of clearing, proposed stream crossings, location of drainage features, and layout of sediment and erosion control features. A pre-construction checklist will be completed during the walkover. Wetland and any other sensitive resource features will be flagged in the field prior to construction. The limits of work areas, especially in agricultural areas, will also be defined. Inspection During Construction Operations – The Environmental Inspector will visit each construction work site at least once per day and will be present during construction at environmentally sensitive areas. Reporting and Agency Audits/Inspections – As required, weekly, monthly, or quarterly reports will be prepared for the federal, state, and local agencies that monitor compliance. Restoration – An environmental "punch list" will be created based upon the restoration requirements in the permits to ensure that restoration activities occur as required.
2.7 Operations and Maintenance Plan

The Project will be operated and maintained by SLW. Once operational, the Project will be almost completely automated. SLW will employ a staff of four to six full-time administrative/operations and maintenance personnel. 2-19

001336

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Electrical power generated by the wind turbines will be collected through a network of underground cables. Overhead cables would be used as a last resort, if necessary due to environmental or geological concerns. Turbines will be grouped along individual electrical circuits that terminate at the Project’s collection substation, where the voltage level will be increased from 34.5 kV to 115 kV. The wind turbines will be equipped with sophisticated computer control systems which constantly monitor variables such as wind speed and direction, air and machine temperatures, electrical voltages, currents, vibrations, blade pitch and yaw angles, etc. The main functions of the control system include nacelle and power operations. Nacelle functions monitored include yawing (or rotating) the nacelle into the wind, pitching the blades, and braking. Power operations controlled at the bus cabinet inside the base of each tower include operations of the main breakers to engage the generator with the grid as well as control of ancillary breakers and systems. The control system continually monitors the turbines to assure their efficient and safe operation. In the event of turbine or plant facility outages, the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system would send alarm messages to the on-call technician via pager or cell phone to notify him of the outage (see Exhibit 2.5.3 for a schematic of the electrical and control system). The Project will always have an on-call local technician who can respond quickly in the event of emergency notification or critical outage. Wind turbines will receive scheduled preventative maintenance inspections. In certain circumstances, heavy maintenance equipment such as a lifting crane might be required to effectively repair an exposed turbine problems (such as, in rare instances, nacelle component replacement).
2.8 Decommissioning

The projected life of the project is 20 years. After the end of the Project’s life, the wind turbines may be replaced or repaired for continued operation. Except for the underground collection system, which is provided for under a perpetual easement, SLW’s lease agreements with the landowners provide that all wind Project facilities will be removed to a depth of four feet below grade following the end of the Project’s useful life. The following sections provide descriptions of the decommissioning and restoration processes.
2.8.1 Decommissioning Process Description

All decommissioning and restoration activities will adhere to the requirements of appropriate governing authorities, and will be in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local

2-20

001337

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

permits. The decommissioning process will be carried out and completed within 12 months after the end of the useful life of the Project. The Project will be presumed to be at the end of its useful life if no electricity is generated for a continuous period of 12 months. The decommissioning and restoration process comprises removal of above-ground structures, removal of below-ground structures to a depth of 48 inches or greater, removal of access roads if required by the landowner, restoration of topsoil, re-vegetation and seeding, and a two year monitoring and remediation period. Above-ground structures include the turbines, transformers, overhead collection lines, wind farm owned portions of the substation, maintenance buildings, and access gates. Below-ground structures include turbine foundations, collection system conduits, drainage structures, and access road sub-base material. The process of removing structures involves evaluating and categorizing all components and materials into categories of recondition and reuse, salvage, recycling, and disposal. In the interest of increased efficiency and minimal transportation impacts, components and material may be stored on site in a pre-approved location until the bulk of similar components or materials are ready for transport. The components and material will be transported to the appropriate facilities for reconditioning, salvage, recycling, or disposal. The sequence for removal of the system components would be: turbines, turbine foundations, underground collection cables, substation, and access roadways and construction pads. The remainder of the decommissioning would involve earthwork and topsoil restoration.
2.8.1.1 Turbine Removal

The modular nature of wind turbine towers, blades, and generators allows for relative ease in the removal, reconditioning, and reinstallation. Access roads to turbines will be widened to sufficient width to accommodate movement of appropriate sized cranes or other machinery required for the disassembly and removal of the turbines. Control cabinets, electronic components, and internal cables will be removed. The blades, hub and nacelle will be lowered to grade for disassembly. The tower sections will be lowered to the ground where they will be further disassembled into transportable sections. The blades, hub, nacelle, and tower sections will either be transported whole for reconditioning and reuse or dissembled into salvageable, recyclable, or disposable components.

2-21

001338

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

2.8.1.2 Turbine Foundation Removal

The decommissioning of the turbine foundations will consist of sufficiently excavating completely around the foundations to provide access to, and a working platform around, the foundation pad. Topsoil will be removed from an area surrounding the foundation and stored for later replacement. Turbine foundations will be excavated to a depth sufficient to remove all anchor bolts, rebar, conduits, cable, and concrete to a depth of 48 inches below grade. Each foundation pad will be removed to a depth of 48 inches and properly disposed of. The remaining excavation will be filled with clean sub-grade material of quality comparable to the immediate surrounding area. The sub-grade material will be compacted to a density similar to surrounding sub-grade material. All unexcavated areas compacted by equipment used in decommissioning will be de-compacted in a manner to restore the topsoil and sub-grade material to the proper density consistent and compatible with the surrounding area. The turbine site will ultimately be revegetated with a seed mix chosen by the landowner.
2.8.1.3 Underground Collection Cables

The cables and conduits contain no materials known to be harmful to the environment and will be cut back to a depth greater than 48 inches. All cable and conduit buried greater than 48 inches will be left in place and abandoned.
2.8.1.4 Overhead Collection Lines

The conductors will be removed and stored in a pre-approved location. The supporting poles will be removed and the holes filled in with compatible sub-grade material. In areas where environmental damage from complete removal may outweigh the benefits, the poles will be sawed flush with the surrounding grade (determined by appropriate governing authority). The poles will be stored in a pre-approved location. Stored conductors and poles will be later removed and transported to appropriate facilities for salvage or disposal.
2.8.1.5 Substations

Disassembly of the substations will include only the areas owned by the Applicant (any System Upgrades made by the Applicant and conveyed to the New York Power Authority or any improvements made to the local National Grid distribution system will remain in place). Steel, conductors, switches, transformers, etc. will be reconditioned and reused, sold as scrap, recycled, or disposed of appropriately depending upon market value. Foundations and underground components will be removed to a depth of 48 inches and the excavation filled, contoured, and revegetated.

2-22

001339

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

2.8.1.6 Access Roads and Construction Pads

Depending on permit requirements and terms of the land lease agreements, the Applicant will coordinate with each landowner to determine whether access roads or construction pads will remain in place. The Applicant will also seek recommendations from the NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets. The applicant will work with the landowner and the NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets to resolve any differences between the agency’s recommendations and a landowner’s preferences with respect to leaving a specific Project component in place. After decommissioning activities at a turbine site are completed, access road and construction pad removal will commence. The decommissioning process for access roadways will involve excavation and transportation of the gravel materials to a nearby quarry or aggregate preparation site for reprocessing. The geotextile fabric will be removed and properly disposed. Gravel will be removed from access roads and construction pads and transported to a pre-approved disposal location. Drainage structures integrated with the access road or construction pad will be removed and backfilled with sub-grade material, the topsoil replaced, and the surface contoured and revegetated. Access gates will remain operational until completion of decommissioning, at which time they will be removed unless requested by the landowner that they remain. Ditch crossings connecting access roads to public roads will be removed unless requested that they remain by the landowner. Improvements to Town and County roads that were not removed after construction at the request of the Town or County will likely remain in place.
2.8.2 Site Restoration Process Description

Topsoil will be removed and stockpiled prior to removal of structures from work areas. Prior to topsoil replacement, rocks 4 inches or greater will be removed from the surface of the subsoil. The topsoil will be de-compacted to match the density and consistency of the immediate surrounding area. The topsoil will be replaced to original depth and original surface contours reestablished where possible. Rocks 4 inches or larger will be removed from the surface of the topsoil. Any topsoil deficiency and trench settling will be mitigated by importing topsoil consistent with the quality of soil at the affected site. In accordance with guidelines provided by New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, topsoil de-compaction and replacement will be avoided after October 1, unless approved by the landowner in consultation with Ag. and Markets because areas restored after October 1st may not obtain sufficient growth to prevent erosion over the winter months. If areas

2-23

001340

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

are restored after October 1st, provision will be made to restore eroded areas in the springtime to establish proper growth. Following decommissioning activities, the sub-grade material and topsoil from affected agricultural areas will be de-compacted and restored to a density and depth consistent with the surrounding fields or to a depth of 18 inches. The affected areas will be inspected, thoroughly cleaned, and debris removed. Disturbed soil surfaces within agricultural fields will be seeded with a seed mix agreed upon with the landowner in order to maintain consistency with the surrounding agricultural uses. Other disturbed areas will be restored to a condition and forage density reasonably similar to original condition. Restoration will include, as reasonably required, leveling, terracing, mulching, and other necessary steps to prevent soil erosion, to ensure establishment of suitable grasses and forbs, and to control noxious weeds and pests. In accordance with the guidelines of the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, a monitoring and remediation period of two years immediately following the completion of any decommissioning and restoration activities will be provided. The two-year period allows for the effects of climatic cycles such as frost action, precipitation and growing seasons to occur from which various monitoring determinations can be made. Remaining agricultural impacts can be identified during this period and follow-up restoration efforts will be implemented. In addition, agricultural protection measures will be implemented in accordance with New York State Agriculture and Market guidelines as included as Appendix A. These mitigation measures will include: Avoiding disturbance of surface and subsurface drainage features (e.g., diversions, ditches, tile lines). Prohibiting vehicular access to turbine sites until topsoil has been stripped and permanent access roads have been constructed. Stockpiling topsoil from work areas separate from all other excavated material (e.g., gravel, subsoil). Removing excess subsoil and gravel and transporting them off-site for disposal or reuse. Temporarily fencing work areas in active pastureland to protect livestock.

2-24

001341

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Removing and disposing of all construction debris offsite at the completion of restoration. Restricting heavy equipment to designated access roads, crane paths, and work pads at the structure sites for all breakdown activities. Restoring agricultural land based on a seasonal schedule. Decompacting all disturbed agricultural areas to a depth of 18 inches after construction. Grading decommissioned access roads to allow for farm equipment crossing and to restore original surface drainage patterns. Stabilizing restored agricultural areas with seed and/or mulch. Repairing all surface or subsurface drainage structures damaged during construction. Providing a monitoring and remediation plan of no less than two years immediately following completion of the final restoration. 2.8.3 Cost of Decommissioning The following discussion describes the estimated cost of decommissioning in current dollars and does not represent an absolute value of decommissioning costs at the end of the project life. Based on recent estimates for similar projects, a reasonable presumption of salvage or resale value of the above ground wind turbine components is between 5 to 10 percent of the new turbine value. The most conservative figure of 5 percent salvage or resale value ($1,650,000/turbine x 0.05 or $82,500/turbine) for the wind turbine components will essentially pay for the removal of all components, including; turbine, foundations, electrical equipment, access roads, and crane pads. As a worst-case scenario, the above ground turbine components may be independently sold and removed with the surface and subsurface components remaining to be decommissioned. Decommissioning turbine foundations was estimated at approximately $2,000 per unit for mobilization and excavation, and $15,000 per unit for transportation. Removal of access roads and crane/construction pads were estimated based on $0.50 per square yard for removing geotextile fabric, and $8.00 per cubic yard for pit-run gravel and crushed gravel. Salvage values for the items removed during access road and crane pad decommissioning were based on an applied recovery value factor of 0 percent for geotextile fabric, 50 percent for pit-run gravel and 75 percent for crushed gravel using a base material value of $8.50 per cubic yard. Earth work

2-25

001342

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

and soil restoration estimates were based on unit costs of $7.50 and $10.00 per cubic yard, respectively. Based on the above assumptions, the estimated cost of decommissioning the wind turbines will be offset by the salvage value of the towers and the turbine components. Table 2.3 provides the estimated decommissioning cost per tower, in current dollars, in comparison to the salvage value of Project turbines. The estimated cost of decommissioning and expected salvage value of wind components will be reassessed and certified by a Professional Engineer at appropriate intervals throughout operation of the project. SLW will pay for any costs of decommissioning that are not covered by the salvage value.
Table 2.3 Decommissioning Costs Summary
Component Salvage Values Turbine Components Salvage Value Decommissioning Costs Turbine Removal Turbine Foundation Removal Access Roadway Removal Crane/Construction Pad Removal Cable Removal Earthwork & Topsoil Subtotal Decommissioning Cost Salvage Value Less Decommissioning Costs Total Salvage Value Per Turbine (53)
a

Total

a

$4,372,500 $0 $901,000 $199,866 $40,977 $0 $114,506 $1,256,349 $3,116,151 $58,795.31

values are based on current costs and do not assume any inflation costs or other fluctuations.

2.9

Regulatory Approvals

Development of the Project would require permits, approvals, and consultations with local, state, and federal agencies. The permits and approvals that are expected to be required are listed in Table 2-4.
2.10 Public and Agency Involvement

Extensive agency interaction and public outreach preceded and followed the formal submittal of the DEIS in January 2007 and preparation of this SDEIS. The Applicant has had numerous informational sessions, meetings, and discussions with the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme regarding the Project. Several formal and informal meetings have been held with the Town

2-26

001343

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 2-4 Permits and Approvals for the St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project
Agency Towns Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board Town of Cape Vincent Code Enforcement Officer Town of Cape Vincent Departments Town of Lyme Planning Board Town of Lyme Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Lyme Departments Jefferson County Planning Department Highway Department New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Department of State Division of Coastal Resources Department of Transportation Administration of SEQRA Process, and issuance of findings (as Lead Agency under SEQRA) Site Plan Approval for construction of wind energy project and transmission line to Town boundary Zoning Permit Issuance of building permits/certificates of compliance Review and approval of highway work permits/road agreements Participation in SEQRA Process as an involved agency Special Use Permit (Zoning Board of Appeals) and other land use considerations for construction of transmission line to substation Issuance of building permits Review and approval of highway work permits/road agreements Completion of a NYS General Municipal Law Section 239-m review and issuance of recommendations County road work permits ECL Article 17 SPDES General Permit for construction stormwater discharges including creation of SWPPP and SPCC/Oil Contingency Plans (6NYCRR Part 750) Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification (6NYCRR Part 608) Issuance of SEQRA Findings as an involved agency Coastal Zone Management Act Consistency Determination Special Use Permit for oversize/overweight vehicles, Highway work permits. Participation in SEQRA Process as an interested agency Agricultural District Law Article 25AA, Section 305-a Coordination of local planning and land use decision-making with the agricultural districts program Participation in SEQRA Process as an interested agency Cultural Resources Consultation. Notice of Construction and Aviation Lighting Plan. USACE Nationwide Section 10 Permit for aerial crossing of the Chaumont River. USACE Section 404 Nationwide Permit for placement of fill in federal jurisdictional wetlands/waters of the U.S. Consultation regarding special status species. 29 CFR 1910 regulations (standard conditions for safe work practices during construction). Description of Permit or Approval Required

Department of Agriculture & Markets Public Service Commission NYSOPRHP (SHPO) Federal Agencies FAA U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service OSHA

2-27

001344

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Boards and Town Planning Boards. In addition, SLW has met with various township, county and regional agencies, and organizations throughout the project development process, including local historians and councilman, the Cape Vincent Fire Department, Thousand Island Central School Superintendent, Save The River, Thousand Islands Land Trust, the Development Authority of North County (DANC), and Region 6 NYSDEC Wildlife Offices in Brownville and Watertown. The Applicant also opened an office in the Town of Cape Vincent in the fall of 2006 that is open 4 days a week, providing the opportunity for the general public to obtain information and ask questions about the Project. To further inform the Public, SLW has also created a website (www.stlawrencewind.com), which provides an additional opportunity for interested parties to learn about the Project and submit comments. Posted on the website are the DEIS, results of studies, a transcript of the first public hearing, and comments received during and after the first public hearing and comment period. The Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board held its first public hearing on the DEIS on March 24, 2007. The public comment period on the DEIS extended through June 15, 2007. The first Open House meeting with local residents was held in June 2007 and an additional public information session regarding the proposed Project was held on August 28, 2008. SLW has also had numerous meetings with participating landowners and project neighbors, and the Project has been covered by articles in local newspapers, as well as stories carried by local radio and TV stations. A further important aspect of the Applicant’s interactions with involved and interested agencies has been the meetings held with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, New York Department of Transportation, New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). These meetings were initiated by the Applicant in order to obtain feedback and additional comments on the Project’s various components.

2-28

001345

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.0 3.1 3.1.1

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Soils, Topography and Geological Resources Existing Conditions

3.1.1.1 Surficial Geology

The surficial geology of the Project Area was mapped by the New York State Geological Survey (Cadwell et al., 1991). Based upon an evaluation of the maps (including Figure 3-1), the surficial geology of the Project Area consists primarily of glaciolacustrine lake, silts, and clays. As glaciers from the last Ice Age melted from south to north, they filled low-lying areas with water, which became inundated with silts and clays. A small portion of the Project Area consists of peat muck (swamp deposits) which are poorly drained areas consisting of organic silts and sands. One proposed wind turbine location (No. 45) lies within the designated peat muck area; however, according to the Soil Survey of Jefferson County, New York (McDowell, 1989), this area does not include hydric soils. Local areas may also consist of mixed glacial and residual soils weathered from the underlying limestone bedrock. The thickness of glacial soils is expected to vary widely across the site from very shallow to very deep (McDowell, 1989).
3.1.1.2 Bedrock Geology

The proposed Project Area is located in the Ontario Lowlands Physiographic Province, which includes sedimentary rocks (Cambrian and Ordovician) of the Lower Paleozoic age. The underlying bedrock (Figure 3-2) is composed of rocks of the Trenton group (Trenton Limestone) and Black River Group (Lowville Limestone and Watertown Limestone) (Ruedemann, 1908). The New York State Geological Survey indicates that the primary mineral resources of Jefferson County include crushed stone, construction gravel, and topsoil. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Mined Land Database (NYSDEC, 2006b) records commercial mining around the proposed Project Area. The mineral resource mined in the vicinity of the Project Area is carbonate rock (limestone), which can be used in the construction industry for concrete or highway paving materials. The Project is not anticipated to impact these resources. A review of United States Geological Survey and New York State Geological publications did not identify any specific geological hazards within the Project Area. Because the Project Area is located mainly on lowlands and consists predominantly of glacial till, there is no possibility of landslides. Review of topographic maps (Figure 2-1) and aerial photographs of the Project Site (Figure 3-3) revealed no evidence of landslides. While no limestone (karst) hazards are mapped, the Trenton and Black River Groups are composed of carbonate rocks that are susceptible to dissolution and sinkhole formation. Caverns have been mapped in the Project Area and mapping
3-1

001346

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

has indicated numerous closed depressions. Due to its particular characteristics, including an irregular bedrock surface, the presence of large voids and rapid underground drainage, karst limestone presents special problems for civil engineering projects such as roads, bridges, tunnels, sewerage pipelines, and mining. Careful preparatory investigations are therefore required with special design measures and provisions for unforeseen problems. As a result, bedrock in the Project Area will be investigated for karst and other dissolution features as part of the geotechnical investigation(s) prior to construction. The Project Area lies in a zone of relatively low seismic risk. The maximum earthquake ground motion is expected to be 0.20 times the acceleration due to gravity (0.20g) for 0.20 second response acceleration and 0.08g to 0.11g for one second response acceleration (Building Code of New York State, 2002). Based upon the soils information and geologic setting, surficial conditions in the Project Area vary from shallow hard rock to deeper organic soils. Soils located in the Project Site include the hydrologic groups B, C, and D. Detailed geotechnical investigations will be conducted to assess the specific conditions for each proposed wind turbine location.
3.1.1.3 Soils Designations

The Soil Survey of Jefferson County, New York (McDowell, 1989) indicates that the Project Area is underlain by 26 soil series, comprising several soil types of similar developmental origin. These soil series consist predominantly of silt loams and loams of glacial origin. The soil survey indicates that the soils in and around the Project Area vary from shallow to very deep and have been formed from glacial till derived from the underlying limestone. The soils identified within the Project Area are presented in Figure 3-4. The soil series listed in the legend of Figure 3-4 are designated by a two letter code, followed by a third letter indicating the degree of slope, and, when data are available, by a number that indicates the degree of erosion. The primary soil types underlying the Project Area include the following: Benson (Bg) The Benson series consist of nearly level to gently sloping, shallow and very shallow, somewhat excessively drained soils. These soils are mainly in broad, undulating areas interspersed with rock outcrops on ridges. Typically, the surface layer is dark brown channery silt loam about 3 inches thick. The subsoil is reddish brown and dark reddish brown, very channery silt loam about 9 inches thick. Bedrock is commonly at a depth of 10 to 20 inches. Most of these soils are used as permanent pasture or cedar woodland, or are reverting to brush. This soil is generally not suited for cultivated crops. The rate of runoff on the Benson soils is medium, and the capacity of

3-2

001347

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

these soils to store water available for plant growth is very low. The primary soils mapped within the areas of the proposed Project are BgB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 0% to 8% in the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos. 10 and 19. Chatfield (Ch) The Chatfield series are moderately deep and well drained soils of hills and ridges. Depth to bedrock is 20 to 40 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 30 inches of loam over un-weathered bedrock. The parent material consists of loamy till derived mainly from granite, gneiss, or schist. Available water capacity is low to moderate and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high. Depth to the seasonal high water table is greater than 60 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include ChB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 0% to 8%. Chaumont (Cl) The Chaumont series consist of level to gently sloping, moderately deep and somewhat poorly drained soils in concave, sloping areas of lowland plains. Typically, the surface layer is dark grayish brown silty clay about 5 inches thick. The subsoil is mottled and about 22 inches thick. It is grayish brown to dark grayish brown clay in the upper part and dark grayish brown silty clay in the lower part. Bedrock is commonly at a depth of 20 to 40 inches. Most areas of this soil type have been cleared and are used for cultivated crops. Some areas are used as pasture and woodland; as a result drainage is needed in extensively cropped areas. The rate of water movement through the soil is slow or very slow, and runoff is slow. The capacity of the soil to store water available for plant growth is moderate to high. The surface layer is moderately acidic to neutral. The soils mapped within the Project Area include ClA and ClB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 0% to 3% and 3% to 8%, respectively. These soil types occur in the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos. 1 through 4, 6, 10, 12, 13, 18, 20, 23, 24 and 25. Claverack (Cm) The Claverack series are very deep and moderately well drained soils of lake plains. Depth to bedrock is from 20 to 40 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 8 inches of loamy fine sand over 13 inches of fine sand over 39 inches of silty clay to silty clay loam. The parent material consists of sandy glaciolacustrine deposits, derived primarily from non-calcareous sandstone or granite, which overlies clayey glaciolacustrine deposits. Available water capacity is very low and water movement in the most restrictive layer is high. Depth to the seasonal high water table is about 18 to 24 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include CmB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 3% to 8%. This soil series occurs within the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos. 46 and 47.

3-3

001348

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Collamer (Cn) The Collamer series are very deep and moderately well drained soils of lake plains. Depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 18 inches of silt loam over 14 inches of silty clay loam over stratified silt loam to very fine sand to clay. The parent material consists of silty and clayey glaciolacustrine deposits. Available water capacity is high and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately low or moderately high. Depth to the seasonal high water table ranges from 18 to 24 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include CnB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 3% to 8%. This soil series occurs within the vicinity of proposed turbine No. 39. Covington (Cp) The Covington series consist of nearly level, very deep, poorly drained soils in smooth, broad, mostly level areas and depressions of the lowland plains. Slopes range from 0 to 3 percent, but are predominantly less than 1 percent. Typically, the surface layer is very dark silty clay about 6 inches thick. The subsoil is mottled, about 26 inches thick, and consists of dark gray to grayish brown clay. The substratum is mottled, gray firm, sticky and plastic silty clay to a depth of 60 inches or more. Most areas of this soil type have been cleared and are used for cultivated crops. The rate of water movement through the soil is slow or very slow in the surface layer and very slow in the subsoil and the substratum; in addition, runoff is slow. The capacity of the soil to store water available for plant growth is moderate to high. The surface layer is moderately acidic to neutral. Bedrock is commonly at a depth of 20 to 40 inches. The prolonged seasonal high water table, the clayey texture, slow rate of water movement through the soil, poor stability, and potential frost action are limitations of this soil for urban uses. This soil series is considered hydric and occurs in the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos. 7, 11, 16, 17, 27 and 28 (see Figure 34). Dumps (Dp) The Dump series represent miscellaneous areas having essentially no soil and supporting little or no vegetation. These areas consist of smoothed or uneven accumulations or piles of waste rock and general refuse typically resulting from human activities. This series is well drained and has slopes of 0% to 15%. This soils series occurs in only one location adjacent to the Project Area: a triangular shaped area bounded by the proposed overhead transmission line to the southwest, the substation/operations and maintenance building to the northwest, and the temporary construction work area to the northeast. This property is currently used as a municipal transfer site for refuse and recycling. It accepts trash, furniture, appliances and construction debris for a fee; and brush, grass clippings, tree limbs and recyclables at no charge. Refuse is separated and

3-4

001349

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

stockpiled on-site prior to transfer to Rodman, New York (trash) or the Jefferson County Recycling Center in Watertown (recyclables). Elmridge (El) The Elmridge series are very deep and moderately well-drained soils of lake plains. Depth to bedrock is between 20 and 40 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 23 inches of fine sandy loam over 37 inches of silty clay. The parent material consists of loamy over clayey glaciolacustrine or marine deposits. Available water capacity is moderate and water movement in the most restrictive layer is high. Depth to the seasonal high water table ranges from 18 to 30 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include ElA and ElB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 0% to 3% and 3% to 8%, respectively. This soil series occurs within the vicinity of proposed turbine No. 42. Farmington (Fa) The Farmington series are shallow and well drained soils of benches, ridges and till plains. Depth to bedrock is between 10 and 20 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 19 inches of loam over four inches of un-weathered bedrock. The parent material consists of loamy till or congeliturbate derived from limestone, dolomite, shale, and sandstone, and in many places mixed with wind and water deposits. Available water capacity is very low and water movement in the most restrictive layer is very low. Depth to the seasonal high water table is greater than 60 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include FaB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 0% to 8%. This soil series occurs within the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos. 4 and 19. Fluvaquents (Fu) The Fluvaquents series are very deep and poorly drained soils of floodplains. Depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 5 inches of mucky silt loam over 67 inches of very gravelly sand. The parent material consists of alluvium with highly variable texture. Available water capacity is moderate and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately low. Depth to the seasonal high water table is 0 inches and annual flooding is frequent. Slopes of this series range from 0% to 3%. This soil series is considered hydric and occurs in the vicinity of proposed turbine No. 14 (see Figure 3-4). Galen (Ga) The Galen series are very deep and moderately well drained soils of deltas on lake plains. Depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 26 inches of fine sandy loam over 14 inches of loamy fine sand over 20 inches of stratified fine sand to very fine sand. The parent material consists of deltaic deposits with a high content of fine and very fine sand.

3-5

001350

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Available water capacity is moderate and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high. Depth to the seasonal high water table ranges from 18 to 24 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include GaB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 3% to 8%. Galoo (Gb) The Galoo series consist of very shallow excessively drained and somewhat excessively drained soils. The areas are mainly on undulating ridges and knolls. The Galoo soil is 2 to 10 inches deep over limestone of calcareous sandstone bedrock. Typically, the surface layer consists of dark brown silt loam about 4 inches thick. The subsoil is reddish brown channery silt loam to a depth of 7 inches. Most of the areas used as pasture are reverting to brush, or are poor quality woodlands. This soil is not suited to cultivated crops because of the very shallow depth to bedrock, droughtness and rock outcroppings. The rate of water movement through the soil is moderate, and the runoff rate is slow or medium. The capacity of the soil to store water available for plant growth is very low. The surface layer is moderately acidic to mildly alkaline. Soils mapped within the Project Area include GbB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 0% to 8%. This soil series occurs within the vicinity of proposed turbine No. 3. Galway (Gl) The Galway series are moderately deep and well drained soils of benches, ridges and till plains. Depth to bedrock ranges from 20 to 40 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 9 inches of silt loam over 20 inches of gravelly loam to very gravely loam over un-weathered bedrock. The parent material consists of calcareous loamy till. Available water capacity is moderate and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high. Depth to the seasonal high water table is greater than 60 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include GlB and GmC (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 3% to 8% and 0% to 15% slopes, respectively. Guffin (Gv) The Guffin series are moderately deep and poorly drained soils of depressions. Depth to bedrock ranges from 20 to 40 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 22 inches of clay over unweathered bedrock. The parent material consists of clayey glaciolacustrine deposits or glaciomarine deposits. Available water capacity is low and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately low. Depth to the seasonal high water table is 0 inches and annual ponding is occasional. Slopes of this series range from 0% to 3%. This soil series is considered hydric and occurs in the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 48 (see Figure 3-4). Hudson (Hu) The Hudson series consist of gently sloping to steep, very deep, moderately well drained soils mainly in smooth, irregularly shaped areas and on convex slopes. Typically, the surface layer
3-6

001351

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

consists of brown silt loam about 8 inches thick. The subsurface is mottled brown silt loam about 4 inches thick, and the subsoil is mottled and approximately 47 inches thick. It is brown to dark brown silty clay in the middle part and yellowish brown silt loam in the lower part. Most areas of this soil have been cleared and used for cultivated crops for dairy farming. The rate of water movement through the soil is moderately slow or moderate in the surface layer, and slow or very slow in the subsoil and the substratum; in addition, the runoff is medium. The capacity of the soil to store water available for plant growth is moderate to high. The surface layer is moderately acidic to neutral. Erosion is a serious hazard if the slopes are bare of vegetation. Mapped soils in the Project Area include HuB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 3% to 8%. This soil series occurs within the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos. 32 through 37, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 53. Kingsbury (Kg) The Kingsbury series consist of nearly level, very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils mainly in smooth, broad, irregularly shaped areas on plains. Typically, the surface layer consists of dark grayish brown silty clay about 7 inches thick. The subsurface is mottled, grayish brown silty clay about 5 inches thick, and the subsoil is mottled and about 16 inches thick. It is firm, grayish brown clay in the upper part and olive gray clay in the lower part. Most areas of this soil have been cleared and used for cultivated crops and dairy farming. If properly drained, this soil is moderately suited for cultivated crops. The rate of water movement through the soil is moderately slow in the surface layer and very slow in the subsoil and the substratum. The clayey subsoil somewhat restricts rooting depth, and runoff is slow. The capacity of the soil to store water available for plant growth is high. The surface layer is moderately acidic to mildly alkaline. Soils mapped within the Project Area include KgA and KgB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes in the range of 0% to 3%. This soil series occurs within the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos. 4, 5, 8, 11, 16, 22, 27 through 31, and 33. Livingston (Lc) The Livingston series consist of nearly level, very deep and poorly drained soils mainly in smooth, broad, flat or depressional areas on plains. Typically, the surface layer is black mucky silty clay about 6 inches thick. The subsoil is mottled and about 24 inches thick. It is dark greenish gray to dark gray, very firm, very plastic and very sticky clay. Most areas of this soil are used as pasture or woodland. The rate of water movement through the soil is slow or very slow in the subsoil and the substratum. The runoff is very slow or ponded. The capacity of the soil to store water available for plant growth is high. The surface layer is moderately acidic to neutral. Soils mapped within the Project Area include Lc and Ld (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes in the

3-7

001352

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

range of 0% to 3%. This soil series is considered hydric and occurs in the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos. 7, 15 and 21. Madalin (Ma) The Madalin series are very deep and poorly drained soils of depressions. Depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 14 inches of silt loam over 16 inches of silty clay over 30 inches of stratified silty clay to silt loam. The parent material consists of clayey glaciolacustrine deposits. Available water capacity is moderate and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately low. Depth to the seasonal high water table is 0 inches and annual ponding is frequent. Slopes of this series range from 0% to 3%. This soil series is considered hydric and occurs in the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos. 7, 8, 9, 37, 40 and 42 (see Figure 3-4). Nellis (Nl) The Nellis series are very deep and well drained soils of drumlinoid ridges, hills and till plains. Depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 21 inches of loam over 51 inches of gravelly fine sandy loam. The parent material consists of calcareous loamy till. Available water capacity is high and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high. Depth to the seasonal high water table is greater than 60 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include NlB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 3% to 8%. Newstead (Nn) The Newstead series are moderately deep and somewhat poorly drained soils of benches, ridges and till plains. Depth to bedrock ranges from 20 to 40 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 16 inches of silt loam over 14 inches of gravelly loam over un-weathered bedrock. The parent material consists of loamy till derived from limestone, with varying amounts of sandstone, shale, and granite. Available water capacity is moderate and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high. Depth to the seasonal high water table ranges from 6 to 12 inches. Slopes of this series range from 0% to 3%. Niagara (No) The Niagara series are very deep and somewhat poorly drained soils of lake plains. Depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 75 inches of silt loam. The parent material consists of silty and clayey glaciolacustrine deposits. Available water capacity is high and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high. Depth to the seasonal high water table ranges from 6 to 18 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include NoA (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 0% to 3%.

3-8

001353

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Reinbeck (Rh) The Reinbeck series are barely level to gently sloping very deep, somewhat poorly drained soil mainly in smooth, broad, irregularly shaped areas on lake plains and at the margins of uplands. Typically the surface layer is dark grayish brown silty loam about 8 inches thick. The subsurface layer is mottled, grayish brown silt loam about 4 inches thick. The subsoil is mottled and about 14 inches thick. Most areas of this soil have been cleared and are used for cultivated crops in dairy farming. The rate of water movement through the soil is moderately slow in the surface layer and slow in the subsoil and the substratum; in addition, the runoff is very slow. The capacity of the soil to store water available for plant growth is high. The surface layer is moderately acidic to neutral. Soils mapped within the Project Area include RhA and RhB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes in the range of 0% to 3% and 3% to 8%, respectively. This soil series occurs within the vicinity of proposed turbine Nos.3, 14, 21, 34 through 38, 40 through 44, 47, 49 and 50 through 53. Saprists (Sa) The Saprists series are very deep and very poorly drained soils of swamps and marshes. Depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 7 inches of mucky silt loam over 63 inches of gravelly silty clay loam. The parent material consists of organic material. Available water capacity is high and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high. Depth to the seasonal high water table is 0 inches and annual ponding is frequent. Slopes of this series range from 0% to 1%. This soil series is considered hydric. Vergennes (Ve) The Vergennes series are very deep and moderately well drained soils of lake plains. Depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 8 inches of silty clay loam over 21 inches of clay over 43 inches of stratified clay to silt loam. The parent material consists of clayey calcareous glaciolacustrine, glaciomarine, or estuarine deposits. Available water capacity is moderate and water movement in the most restrictive layer is low. Depth to the seasonal high water table ranges from 12 to 36 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include VeB and VeC (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 3% to 8% and 8% to 15%, respectively. Williamson (Wm) The Williamson series are very deep and moderately well drained soils of lake plains. Depth to bedrock ranges from 15 to 24 inches. The typical profile includes 0 to 42 inches of silt loam over stratified very fine sandy loam to silt loam. The parent material consists of glaciolacustrine or eolian deposits with a high content of silt and very fine sand. Available water capacity is

3-9

001354

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

moderate and water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high. Depth to the seasonal high water table ranges from 13 to 18 inches. The soils mapped within the Project Area include WmB (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes of 3% to 8%. Wilpoint (Wn) The Wilpoint series consist of gently sloping, moderately deep, moderately well drained soil mainly on convex slopes. Typically, the surface layer is dark grayish brown silty clay loam about 6 inches thick. The subsoil is mottled and about 16 inches thick. It is dark brown silty clay in the upper part and dark brown to dark grayish brown clay in the lower part. Bedrock is at a depth of 20 to 40 inches. Most areas of this soil have been cleared and are used for cultivated crops. The rate of water movement through the soil is slow or very slow, and the runoff is medium. The capacity of the soil to store water available for plant growth is moderate. The surface layer is moderately acidic to neutral. Soils mapped within the Project Area include WnB and WnC (see Figure 3-4) and have slopes in the range of 3% to 8% and 8% to 15%, respectively. This soil series occurs within the vicinity of proposed turbine No. 23. The Soil Survey of Jefferson County indicates that ground water is seasonally perched within the upper 0.0 to 6.0 feet during the months of December to May and/or March to May depending on the underlying soils (McDowell, 1989). The soils mapped within the proposed Project Area are described as poorly drained, and groundwater is expected to be shallow in most areas. A summary of soil properties for the various soil series is presented in McDowell (1989), and a summary of the properties listed for the soils mapped within the Project Area is included as Table 3-1.
3.1.1.4 Unusual Landforms or Geologic Formations

The Project Area contains landforms typical of a glacial lacustrine plain, including relatively flat terrain with small lakes and wetland areas. The area also includes surficial peat deposits. Other landforms include a cave near the northern limit of the Project Area, just south of Millen Bay, and numerous closed depressions. The closed depressions are likely remnant glacial features, but may also reflect karst and/or sinkhole activity in the underlying limestone. The Project Area is mapped as part of four United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 Minute Topographic maps: Cape Vincent North, Cape Vincent South, Chaumont and St Lawrence Quadrangles. Based upon the USGS Topographic maps (USGS, 1958a, b, c, d), the proposed Project Area is located in the St. Lawrence River Valley (or the Thousand Island Region). The

3-10

001355

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-1 (Sheet 1 of 2) General Description of Soil Series1 (Taken from Soil Survey of Jefferson County, New York [McDowell, 1989])
Risk of Corrosion Water Table Depth (ft) Permeability ( in/ hr ) pH 5.6-7.3 4.5-6 5.6-7.3 5.1-8.4 5.1-8.4 5.6-7.3 N/A 4.5-7.8 5.1-7.8 4.5-8.4 5.1-7.8 5.6-7.8 5.6-8.4 5.6-8.4 5.1-7.3 5.1-7.8 5.1-7.3 5.1-8.4 5.6-8.4 5.6-8.4 5.1-8.4 5.1-7.3 4.5-8.4 4.5-8.4 4.5-7.3 5.6-7.3 Concrete Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High Low Low Low Low Low Moderate Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Low 0.6-2.0 0.6-6.0 <0.2 6.0-20 0.6-2.0 <0.2 N/A 2.0-6.0 0.6-2.0 N/A 0.6-6.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 <0.2 0.2-2.0 0.06-0.2 0.2-0.6 0.2-0.6 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.2 0.2-0.6 N/A <0.2 0.6-2.0 <0.2 0.02 0.49 0.49 0.24 0.49 0.49 N/A 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.32 0.32 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.37 0.28 0.32 0.49 0.49 N/A 0.49 0.49 0.49 >6 >6 0.5-1.5 1.5-2 1.5-2 0.5-1.0 N/A 1.5-3.0 >6 0 1.5-2 >6 1.5-3.0 0-0.5 1.5-2.0 0.5-1.5 0-1.0 0-0.5 >6 0.5-1.0 0.5-1.5 0.5-1.5 0 1-3 1.1-1.5 1.5-2.0 10-20 20-40 20-40 20-40 >5 >60 N/A 20-40 10-20 >60 >60 2-10 20-40 20-40 >60 >60 >60 >60 >60 20-40 >60 >60 >60 >60 15-24 20-40 Uncoated Steel Low Low High Low Moderate High Moderate Moderate Low High Moderate Low Low High High High High High Low High High High High High Moderate High Bedrock Depth ( in ) Erosion Factors K Unified Soil 3 Classification SM,GM SM,ML,SM-SC,CL-ML MH,CH SM,SW,SW-SM,SP ML,SM,CL-ML,SM-SC CH,MH N/A SM,ML ML,CL,SM,SC N/A SM,ML CL,ML,SM,CL-ML ML,SM MH,CH ML,CL-ML,OL,CL ML,MH CH,MH ML,MH,OL,OH ML,SM ML,SM ML ML,MH N/A MH,CH,CL,ML ML,SM MH,CH Plasticity Index NP-10 1-6 15-50 4 5-30 5-10 10-40 N/A NP 3-15 N/A NP-4 3-15 10-15 15-20 5-19 11-20 10-40 10-25 1-5 2-10 5-15 10-25 N/A 20-40 5-15 15-50

Soil Name Benson Chatfield Chaumont Claverack Collamer Covington Dumps Elmridge Farmington Fluvaquents Galen Galoo Galway Guffin Hudson Kingsbury Livingston Madalin Nellis Newstead Niagara Reinbeck Saprists Vergennes Williamson Wilpoint C/D D D C C D N/A C C D B C/D B D C D D D B C C D D C C D

Hydrologic 2 Group

1

Descriptions apply to the surfical soil layer. Characteristics, while similar, can vary with depth.

3-11

001356

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-1 (Sheet 2 of 2) General Description of Soil Series1 (Taken from Soil Survey of Jefferson County, New York [McDowell, 1989])

a) Definition Hydrologic group is a group of soils having similar runoff potential under similar storm and cover conditions. Soil properties that influence runoff potential are those that influence the minimum rate of infiltration for a bare soil after prolonged wetting and when not frozen. These properties are depth to a seasonally high water table, intake rate and permeability after prolonged wetting, and depth to a very slowly permeable layer. The influence of ground cover is treated independently. (b) Classes The soils in the United States are placed into four groups, A, B, C, and D, and three dual classes, A/D, B/D, and C/D. In the definitions of the classes, infiltration rate is the rate at which water enters the soil at the surface and is controlled by the surface conditions. Transmission rate is the rate at which water moves in the soil and is controlled by soil properties. Definitions of the classes are as follows: A. (Low runoff potential). The soils have a high infiltration rate even when thoroughly wetted. They chiefly consist of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravels. They have a high rate of water transmission. B. The soils have a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted. They chiefly are moderately deep to deep, moderately well drained to well drained soils that have moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. They have a moderate rate of water transmission. C. The soils have a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted. They chiefly have a layer that impedes downward movement of water or have moderately fine to fine texture. They have a slow rate of water transmission. D. (High runoff potential). The soils have a very slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted. They chiefly consist of clay soils that have a high swelling potential, soils that have a permanent high water table, soils that have a clay pan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material. They have a very slow rate of water transmission. (1) Dual hydrologic groups, A/D, B/D, and C/D, are given for certain wet soils that can be adequately drained. The first letter applies to the drained condition, the second to the undrained. Only soils that are rated D in their natural condition are assigned to dual classes. Soils may be assigned to dual groups if drainage is feasible and practical. 3 Unified Soil Classification, see ASTM D2487. 4 Supplemental information from http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/

2

3-12

001357

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

St. Lawrence Valley and the Erie-Ontario plain together are referred to as the “lowlands.” The elevations across the Project Area vary from about 249 feet above mean sea level (msl) to about 370 feet above msl. The proposed Project Area is encompassed by rivers and lakes, which include the St. Lawrence River, the Black River, and Lake Ontario. A majority of the Project Area consists of nearly level agricultural land (row crops). Approximately 80% of the Project Area has slopes within the range of 0 to 10%, approximately 16% of the area is between 10 to 15% and approximately 4% of the Project Area includes slopes greater than 15%. A majority of the area is level and the drainage pattern is generally in the direction of small streams and creeks (e.g., Kents Creek, Fox Creek, Shower Creek, Super Creek, Three Mile Creek), which discharge directly into the St. Lawrence River.
3.1.2 Potential Impacts

3.1.2.1 Potential Short-Term Impacts

Approximately 547 acres of surface soils will be disturbed during the construction of the Project. Once construction activities are complete, approximately 92 percent of the disturbed area, or approximately 503 acres of surface soil, will be restored. Table 3-2 provides the approximate areas of both temporary and permanent soil disturbance.
Table 3-2 Approximate Area of Soil Disturbance
Permanent Impact (acres) 0.4 31.3 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 Temporary Impact (acres) 50.8 38.4 282.9 106.5 0.1 0.0 3.6 12.25 9.9

Component Turbines Access Roads Buried Electrical Interconnect Overhead Electrical Transmission Line Collector Substation/O&M Building Transmission Owner Substation Meteorological Towers Laydown Yard Concrete Batch Plant

Based on the information reviewed and described above, the subsoils within the Project Site consist predominantly of silt loams and loams of glacial origin. The soil survey indicates that the soils in and around the Project Area vary from shallow to very deep and have been formed from glacial till derived from the underlying limestone. The water table associated with mapped soils on the Project Site is shallow. In addition, bedrock depths across the area would vary in areas underlain by karst limestone. As stated above, due to its particular characteristics, including an

3-13

001358

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

irregular bedrock surface, the presence of large voids and rapid underground drainage, karst limestone presents special challenges for civil engineering projects such as wind energy projects. The finer grained soils may have a tendency to soften on exposure to weather and would likely require protection from weather and vehicle traffic to prevent rutting. Slopes are generally slight to moderate in the area of the proposed wind turbines and slope stability is not expected to be an issue for design. The overall seismic risk is low. The mapped Dumps soils series is limited to one location adjacent to proposed project activities. Impacts to this map unit will be avoided as only a small portion, approximately 0.015 acres (654 square feet), is located within the northeastern boundary of the proposed overhead ROW. Construction activities will avoid disturbance of this area. Based upon the topographic features (see Figure 2-1) and drainage characteristics of the proposed Project Site, grading and other construction activities could cause the disruption of soils and the increased potential for erosion during construction without appropriate erosion and sediment controls. In addition, the short-term removal of vegetation, including the root system from portions of the site, would expose soils to erosive factors such as wind, rain and surface runoff. Without appropriate erosion controls, soil transported by surface runoff could potentially migrate to nearby surface waters where it may settle out as sediment. The Project is required to obtain a State Pollution Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) permit to authorize its construction related runoff discharges. To obtain that permit, SLW will be required to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction. As discussed in Section 3.1.3, below, the SWPPP will describe how SLW will avoid and mitigate short-term soil erosion impacts. Construction traffic could also create airborne dust. Dust control measures are addressed in Section 3.9. Blasting in karst areas without proper precautions can cause widespread contamination through underground channels and features. Karst areas may also be subject to sinkholes and collapses, especially when aquifers are altered by blasting and other construction activities. Karst management issues associated with blasting, if necessary during construction, and associated vibration(s) include damage to karst features and disturbance to residents in the local area as well as cave-dwelling fauna. A mapped cave is located just inside the Project Area boundary near Millen Bay (see Figure 21). However, it is outside of the Project footprint of disturbance, located approximately one third of a mile (1,700 feet) from the nearest turbine (WTG 36). Direct impacts to this resource will be avoided. Indirect impacts to this feature will also be avoided based on the distance to the nearest Project component.

3-14

001359

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.1.2.2 Potential Long-Term Impacts

The proposed Project, once built, could potentially cause a minor alteration to existing drainage patterns.
3.1.3 Proposed Mitigation

3.1.3.1 Soil Erosion, Siltation and Runoff

To avoid and mitigate the short-term potential impacts associated with soil erosion, siltation and runoff, and ensure that downstream waterways are not adversely impacted, a sediment and erosion control plan will be developed as part of the Project SWPPP, which is required to obtain a SPDES permit for construction. In addition, Project development and construction may cross karst landscapes. Construction of Project components across such terrains faces environmental and engineering challenges because of potential impacts on water quality from stormwater runoff and concerns of sinkhole collapse under or near areas of development (e.g., turbine foundations, access roads). When runoff drains rapidly into subsurface conduit networks through open sinkholes and/or sinking streams, the impact of the runoff on a karst aquifer can be qualitatively evaluated by various groundwater models (i.e., mixing cell). The formulation of a comprehensive and stringent stormwater runoff management plan (including appropriate silt/stormwater fencing design) prior to construction will minimize the associated adverse impacts to karst features. Common best management practices (BMPs) help manage stormwater runoff effectively in some areas. Site-specific management plans are preferable because of concerns regarding localized flooding and land stability. Proactive measures should be taken to identify areas of the greatest sinkhole collapse risk in proposed construction areas and associated groundwater drainage patterns (W. Zhou and B.F. Beck, 2005). Implementation of effective BMPs will serve as the primary measure to minimize soil impacts. At a minimum, Project BMPs will be developed and implemented as follows: BMPs for erosion control during land clearing, site preparation, and grading including: 1. Limit permanent road widths to a maximum of 17 feet, and where possible, follow hedgerows and field edges to minimize loss of agricultural land and potential drainage impacts. 2. Avoid disturbance of surface and subsurface drainage features where possible (e.g., ditches, diversions, etc.). 3. Prohibit vehicular access to turbine sites until topsoil has been stripped and permanent access roads have been constructed. Prohibit stripping of topsoil or passage of heavy equipment during saturated conditions.

3-15

001360

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

4. Maintain access roads throughout construction in a manner that allows continued access, crossing, and use of access roads for farm machinery and forest practices operations. 5. Use appropriate erosion controls (e.g., silt fence, bio-filter bags, straw bales) to control short-term erosion. BMPs such as diversion berms and conveyance channels for erosion control during trench excavations for underground interconnect. BMPs such as vegetative strips, channel check structures that address erosion impacts during transport of heavy equipment and materials. Using appropriate erosion controls (e.g., silt fence, bio-filter bags, and straw bales) to control short-term erosion impacts can also used to mitigate the erosion. BMPs for short- and long-term storage of construction materials (both equipment and stockpiled soils/gravel). BMPs for handling and disposal of Project-derived waste materials including: 1. Remove all solid waste, hazardous materials, and construction debris from the site and manage disposal in a manner consistent with all applicable state and federal regulations. 2. Dispose excess concrete in a designated area. Under no circumstances shall excess concrete be left on the surface in active agricultural areas. 3. Rinse concrete trucks in designated areas, outside of active agricultural areas. Manage all rinsate in accordance with the requirements of the SWPPP permit. BMPs for operation of on-site borrow areas (if applicable). BMPs for stabilizing and re-vegetating disturbed areas.
3.1.3.2 Soils in Agricultural Areas

In order to prevent the loss or compaction of topsoil, SLW commits to following the NYS agricultural protection measures during construction, as set forth in the NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets Guidelines for Agricultural Mitigation for Wind Power Projects (Appendix A). Soils impacted during construction would also be minimized by inclusion of applicable soil protection, erosion control and soil restoration measures in the final construction documentation and plans for the contractor(s) and subcontractor(s). One or more pre-construction meetings will be held between the construction contractor(s) and a representative of the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets. During construction the environmental inspector would monitor compliance with the soil protection measures (including potential access restrictions) described above and included in Appendix A. 3-16

001361

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.1.3.3 Karst and Geotechnical Conditions

Sinkholes are generally more active and diverse in evaporite karst areas than carbonate karst terrains, but the hazards associated with each are important to evaluate and mitigate in areas of land development and construction. In order to properly manage and mitigate karst hazards, a phased approach is needed for sinkhole and karst identification, investigation, prediction and mitigation. Identification techniques include field surveys and geomorphological mapping combined with accounts from local people and historical sources. Detailed sinkhole maps can be constructed from sequential historical maps, recent topographical maps, and digital elevation models (DEMs) complemented with building-damage surveying, remote sensing, and high resolution geodetic surveys. On a more detailed level, information from exposed paleosubsidence features (paleokarst), speleological explorations, geophysical investigations, trenching, dating techniques, and boreholes (in association with geotechnical investigation discussed below) may help in investigating dissolution and subsidence features. Information on the hydrogeological pathways including caves, springs and swallow holes are particularly important especially when corroborated by tracer tests (F. Gutierrez, A.H. Cooper, and K.S. Johnson, 2008). To date, no significant karst features have been identified at the Project Site from a review of available geologic maps and visible imagery. During initial review, and as noted above, one potentially significant karst feature was identified in the vicinity of the project, a cave located northeast of the Project Site in Millen Bay. To address this issue and the potential impacts associated with subsurface karst, a comprehensive investigation of karst features at the Project Site will be performed in three phases: Phase 1: Geologic resources detailing local and regional surficial and bedrock geologic investigations will be gathered and reviewed. Karst terrain, local geologic conditions, and geologic hazards will be assessed. Bedrock features (e.g. lithologic variations or faults mapped by others, or areas of possible karst visible on imagery or maps) will be interpreted. A field geologist will perform a reconnaissance of the Project Site to inventory visible karst conditions on a Project-wide and regional scale, and prepare for subsequent geophysical investigations. Phase 2: A non-intrusive geophysical investigation will be performed at select turbine locations, and other Project components as necessary (e.g., substation, access roads) to confirm and expand upon the findings from Phase 1. Geophysical methods are likely to include: • Two dimensional (2-D) resistivity imaging; and • Multi-channel analysis of surface waves (MASW).

3-17

001362

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

2-D resistivity imaging will result in color-shaded resistivity cross-sections of the subsurface. The depth of the investigation will depend on actual resistivity of local soils and bedrock, but should result in an investigation depth of at least 50 feet throughout the central portion of the survey. Intact limestone is likely to produce relatively high resistivity values, whereas weathered and fractured rock and/or dissolution features are likely to exhibit lower resistivity values. The clayey soils that are present at the Project Site will likely enhance electrode contact and possibly result in high resistivity values. Completion of MASW, a recently developed geophysical technique, is intended to estimate shear-wave velocity variations at depths to approximately 100 feet. The results will be depicted on color-shaded diagrams, depicting lateral and vertical variations in estimated shear-wave velocity values beneath each traverse. Typically, low-velocity zones would be indicative of fractures, weathering, solutioning, or softer lithologies. Phase 3: Based upon the results of Phase 2, intrusive borings and/or rock cores will be drilled at locations that suggest karst and/or non-karst features to confirm the findings of the geophysical investigation. Prior to this intrusive, subsurface investigation, a work plan will be prepared that identifies procedures (e.g., drilling procedures, shoring and restoration) for performing a detailed subsurface investigation where borings, and/or other intrusive activities (e.g., rock cores), may interface with karst or other solution features. In addition to the comprehensive karst investigation, a geotechnical investigation will be performed to assess conditions at locations where construction is proposed to determine soil properties for design, specific groundwater depths, and to verify suitability of the native materials for support of the proposed roadways, wind turbine foundations and other Project components. The investigation will also assess areas where shallow groundwater or bedrock might impact proposed underground construction for buried electric lines and foundations. A limited number of deep borings are necessary to evaluate the geotechnical considerations discussed above. The investigation would include at least one boring at each proposed wind turbine location. Additional borings may be added where karst features are identified or suspected. The borings would be drilled to bedrock. Bedrock would be cored if encountered within 20 feet of the ground surface. Where rock is not encountered, borings would extend to depths equal to 1 to 2 times the foundation width below the foundation elevation, depending on the quality of the subsoils encountered. If compressible strata are encountered, the borings would extend through the compressible soil into a competent bearing stratum. Cone Penetration Testing (CPT) would be

3-18

001363

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

considered as a low cost method to evaluate subgrade conditions for proposed roadways. Additional borings would be made at the proposed substation location and where directional borings might be needed. Borings would obtain undisturbed samples of cohesive materials. Geotechnical borings and slope stability analyses may also be necessary. Geophysical investigation, coupled with a limited number of geotechnical borings, would be provided to determine the depth to rock along proposed underground interconnect lines. The geotechnical data will be presented in a geotechnical report that includes boring logs, laboratory test results, recommended foundation types, depths and allowable pressures, seismic site classification, and recommended soil and rock parameters to be used for the design of foundations and roadways. This report and recommendations, if any, will be prepared prior to the final engineering design. Information to be addressed in this report includes the following: requirements for possible further investigation, turbine and/or other component re-location, determination of the effects of blasting, and additional institutional and/or engineering construction controls. Risks associated with karst features will be mitigated through a tiered approach as listed and described below: 1. Perform pre-construction investigations and geotechnical studies to initially identify potentially significant karst features; 2. Adjust turbine locations to avoid identified features; 3. Provide on-site training to construction personnel to increase awareness of potential risks associated with development in karst; 4. Develop a controlled blast program for turbines proximal to potentially significant karst features; 5. Implement spill preventions; and 6. Consider elimination of turbine for unavoidable adverse impacts to karst. Pre-construction karst investigations and geotechnical studies, as described above, will, at a minimum, identify bedrock fractures, caves, and sinkholes within 200 meters of proposed Project activities. Foundation locations will be adjusted if necessary to avoid intersecting potentially significant karst features while taking into account any applicable setback constraints. On-site training will be provided to construction personnel and machine operators to ensure that they are aware of the potential risks associated with karst terrain. This awareness training will be part of the environmental construction compliance program (see Section 2.6.10).

3-19

001364

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

The Applicant will further reduce the potential for blast-induced geological changes to potentially significant karst features by developing a controlled blast program, if required, with appropriate blasthole drill diameter and drilling patterns for areas where karst features are located within 200 meters of a turbine location. In the event that the Applicant will incorporate blasting into construction plans, it will notify the Town of Cape Vincent, the Jefferson County Soil and Water Conservation District, and NYSDEC of the scope of and reason for blasting activities. The Applicant agrees to work with these parties to develop a blasting plan and to follow any additional permitting requirements. At a minimum, any blasting will be designed and performed to keep the impacts localized and fracture the least amount of bedrock necessary to perform the construction. In addition, in the event of a spill or a release, karst features will be further protected through implementation of spill prevention and response procedures with specific guidelines prepared for response to karst features. The Applicant has prepared an ERP (see Appendix B) that addresses such risks. The Applicant will be prepared to mobilize the equipment, manpower, and materials resources that may be required to respond to a range of failures that have a reasonable likelihood of occurrence. Through the advance anticipation and planning of response actions, karst features will be more successfully protected and managed. As a last resort, if impacts to a potentially significant karst feature cannot be avoided through adjustment of turbine location, protection through a blast program or implementation of spill prevention plan, the Applicant will consider eliminating the turbine.
3.1.3.4 Environmental Monitoring for Karst

An environmental monitor, qualified to work in karst environments, will observe and/or review activities related to pre-construction surveys and construction activities that involve excavation to bedrock or are located in proximity to identified karst features. The environmental monitor will provide a mitigation tool that will identify potential karst hazards on a daily basis and assist in preventing construction related impacts to sensitive karst features and sensitive groundwater resources.
3.1.3.5 Management of Oil and Hazardous Materials

Wind turbines, and their associated equipment, use lubricating and insulating oils in a closed system. The Emergency Response Plan is provided as Appendix B.

3-20

001365

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.2 3.2.1

Water Resources Groundwater and Groundwater Quality

3.2.1.1 Affected Environment

Glaciolacustrine lake silts and clays overlie consolidated rocks of sedimentary origin throughout most of the Project Area (Cadwell et al., 1991), although a small portion of the Project Area consists of peat muck (swamp) deposits, which are poorly drained areas and include of organic silts and sands. The glacial till deposits form surficial aquifers, while bedrock consisting of carbonate rocks (primarily limestone) form deep aquifers. These consolidated rocks yield water primarily from bedding planes, fractures, joints, and faults, rather than from intergranular pores. Carbonate rocks generally yield more water than other types of consolidated rocks because carbonate rocks are subject to dissolution by slightly acidic groundwater. Dissolution along bedding planes, fractures, and joints enlarges these openings and increases the permeability of these carbonate rocks (Isachsen et al., 2000). No known sole-source aquifers occur within the Project Area or its vicinity (United States Environmental Protection Agency [EPA], 2006a). In 2000, total freshwater use for Jefferson County was 17.21 million gallons per day (Mgal/d), of which 13.25 Mgal/d (27 percent) was from surface-water sources and 3.96 Mgal/d (73 percent) was from groundwater (USGS, 2006). However, domestic users acquired 100 percent of their water supply from groundwater sources (USGS, 2006). Table 3-3 lists an excerpt from the USGS report of water usage statistics in Jefferson County, New York. Current data (October 2006) from the EPA indicates that drinking water is obtained from groundwater, surface water and purchased groundwater/surface water resources in Jefferson County (EPA, 2006b).
Table 3-3 Year 2000 Water Usage Statistics in Jefferson County 1
Type of Usages Public supply3 Domestic, self-supplied withdrawals
1 2 3

Water Withdrawals2 Groundwater Surface 2.17 8.20 0.45 0.00

Unit Mgal/d Mgal/d

Source: http://water.usgs.gov/watuse/data/2000/index.html 6.39 Mgal/d was industrial use Population (Year 2000) in Jefferson County was approximately 111,740

3.2.1.2 Potential Impact

Construction of the proposed wind energy project will have minimal to no impact to groundwater quality in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme in Jefferson County. Operation of construction equipment and vehicles that require the use of diesel and gasoline fuels, lubricating oils, and cooling fluids may pose a small risk for spills. Spills associated with these sources, should they 3-21

001366

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

occur, will likely be small and confined to work sites, thus limiting the potential for infiltration into groundwater or direct flow of contaminants through fissures in karst areas. While shallow groundwater flow rates and patterns may exhibit some deviation from preconstruction conditions in the immediate area surrounding the foundations of Project facilities, the Project will have minimal impacts on regional groundwater recharge because of the small percentage of added impervious surface. Dewatering of excavated pits for foundations may result in minor and local lowering of the water table, which could affect nearby water wells. Given the minor and highly localized character of these impacts, local water supply wells will not be adversely affected. Each turbine will be located a minimum distance of 1,250 feet from existing residences, and presumably several hundred feet from associated private wells. The routine operation and maintenance of the Project facilities is anticipated to have no significant impacts to groundwater, as most of the Project impacts are attributed to the construction phase.
3.2.1.3 Mitigation Measures

The potential for groundwater contamination resulting from Project construction or operation will be mitigated by: requiring construction contractors to use appropriate best management procedures to prevent spills, limiting quantities of hazardous materials used on site, and the implementation of the Emergency Response Plan (ERP) (see Appendix B) that addresses prevention, containment and removal of spills. The potential for direct flow of contaminants into groundwater through fissures in karst areas will be addressed in the ERP and SWPPP. The Applicant will work with the NYSDEC and the County Soil and Water District prior to construction to develop a plan to survey karst features in the Project Area. The survey will at a minimum identify bedrock fractures and sinkholes within 500 feet of proposed Project activities. Risks of potential water table reduction or pathway alteration due to dewatering will be avoided initially through pre-construction surveys and studies. Depth to water table will be established through evaluation of core borings at every foundation by conducting pre-construction geotechnical studies. Foundations will be relocated, if necessary, to avoid intersecting the water table, which limits the need for foundation de-watering. Construction of foundations presents limited risk to the continued operation of private wells. Mechanical or hydraulic equipment, similar to that planned for excavating foundations, are commonly used in the Project Area to excavate building foundations of equivalent depth and area to those proposed for Project facilities. As previously mentioned, each turbine will be located a minimum distance of 1,250 feet from existing residences, and likely several hundred feet from associated private wells. At such distances, hydraulic or mechanical means of

3-22

001367

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

excavating foundations presents limited risk to the continued operation of private wells. The Applicant will conduct additional pre-construction surveys to locate local water supply wells within 500 feet of proposed wind turbine. For any such wells, the Applicant will conduct preand post-construction hydrological studies to characterize flow rates and water quality. Where the post-construction study indicates that a well’s characteristics have significantly changed, the Applicant will conduct subsequent studies to determine the cause of the change. Should these studies find Project construction responsible for well damage, the Applicant will provide alternative water supply or compensation equivalent to the value of the lost water production.
3.2.2 Streams, Rivers, Lakes, and Floodplains

3.2.2.1 Affected Environment

Thirty-six (36) mapped surface water bodies occur within the Project layout. These include Scotch Brook, Chaumont River, Kents Creek, Shaver Creek, Three Mile Creek, Soper Creek and 30 unnamed tributaries (Figure 3-5). These surface waters are perennial and located within the Saint Lawrence River Basin. The Saint Lawrence River drains a total area of nearly 300,000 square miles. Within New York State, approximately 5,600 square miles are drained by tributaries that enter the Saint Lawrence River between Lake Ontario and Montreal. Land use in the Saint Lawrence River Basin consists of densely forested woodlands and agriculture. The region is economically supported by agriculture, logging, mining, and recreational and tourism activities. In 1996, the Saint Lawrence River Basin population was approximately 192,000 (NYSDEC, 2004). Water bodies within the Project layout are classified by NYSDEC as Class C and D waters. Class C waters are best used for fishing, but are also suitable for fish propagation and survival, and primary and secondary contact recreation. Class D waters are best used for fishing and are also suitable for primary and secondary contact recreation. A list of the mapped NYSDEC surface water bodies located within the Project layout and their NYSDEC classification are provided in Table 3-4. Federal Emergency Management Agency maps (FEMA, 1992, 1993) were reviewed to evaluate the presence of floodplains associated with surface waters within the Project Area (Figure 3-6). Floodplains associated with the five hundred (500)-year flood were not identified within the proposed Project Area. A 100-year floodplain is associated with the following streams and rivers located in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme; however, none of these floodplains are located within the Project layout with the exception of the aerial crossing of the Chaumont River:

3-23

001368

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-4 NYSDEC Streams Crossed by the Project
Stream Name Chaumont River Kents Creek Scotch Brook Shaver Creek Soper Creek Three Mile Creek Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 1 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 2 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 3 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 4 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 5 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 6 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 7 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 8 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 9 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 10 Unnamed Tributary to Shaver Creek 1 Unnamed Tributary to Shaver Creek 2 Unnamed Tributary to Shaver Creek 3 Unnamed Tributary to Wheeler Creek 1 Unnamed Tributary to Wheeler Creek 2 Unnamed Tributary to Wheeler Creek 3 Unnamed Tributary to Wheeler Creek 4 Unnamed Tributary to Wheeler Creek 5 Unnamed Tributary 1 Unnamed Tributary 2 Unnamed Tributary 3 Unnamed Tributary 4 Unnamed Tributary 5 Unnamed Tributary 6 Unnamed Tributary 7 Unnamed Tributary 8 Unnamed Tributary 9 Unnamed Tributary 10 Unnamed Tributary 11 Unnamed Tributary 12 NYSDEC Stream Classification C C D Not Listed C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C D D D D D D D C C C C C C C D D C

St. Lawrence River North of Route 12E; Unnamed tributary to Millen Bay; Kents Creek east of Johnny Cake Road; French Creek Unnamed tributary to and wetlands associated with Wilson Bay; Kents Creek and associated wetland west of abandoned railroad right-of-way; 3-24

001369

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Wetland area along the eastern border of Cape Vincent and Lyme Townships between Route 12E and east of abandoned railroad right-of-way; Shafer, Soper and Three Mile Creeks; and Chaumont River.
3.2.2.2 Potential Impact

Wetland and surface waterbodies located within the proposed Project layout were field delineated by TRC Environmental Corporation (TRC) in July, August and September 2007 and August and October 2008. The results of the delineation effort are described in the Wetland Delineation Report, St. Lawrence Windpower LLC, St. Lawrence Wind Farm (2008) provided as Appendix C. Delineated streams included NYSDEC Class C and Class D streams. NYSDEC “protected streams” as defined in Part 608 § 608.1 (p) were not identified within the proposed Project layout. Nine streams that will be crossed by the Project were delineated and are presented Table 3-5. The locations of less prominent surface water features (i.e., centerlines or banks), within larger wetland complexes, were not delineated separately from the larger wetland complex and were included as a wetland feature. Such surface water features, with intermittent drainage or flow, were included in the delineated boundaries for wetlands W9, W10, W17, W17T, W45, W47, W54 and W60. Two ponds, delineated as part of wetlands OT11 and OT12 and one ditch, delineated as part of wetland W49, did not meet NYSDEC definitions of a Stream or Watercourse.
Table 3-5 Field Delineated Stream Crossings
Wetland ID W26 W26T2 OT13 OT14 OT15 OT16 OT17 OT18 OT21
1

Surface Water Description Intermittent Stream Intermittent Stream Three Mile Creek Unnamed Perennial Stream Unnamed Perennial Stream Intermittent Stream Intermittent Stream Soper Creek Chaumont River

Project Component Turbine 22 Access Road Turbine 22 interconnect Overhead line Overhead line Overhead line Overhead line Overhead line Overhead line Overhead line

Cowardin 1 Classification R4 R4 R3 R3 R3 R4 R4 R3 R2

R2 = Lower Perennial R3 = Upper Perennial R4 = Intermittent

3-25

001370

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-6 (Sheet 1 of 3) Delineated Wetlands and Surface Waterbodies Potential Temporary and Permanent Impacts
Temporary Impact (Cable & Road Disturbance) (square feet) PEM1/PUBH PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PSS1/PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 R4/PEM1 PEM1 R4 PFO PFO1 PEM1 PFO1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 No No No No No No No 800.00 103.36 157.22 650.96 1,825.16 697.30 356.38 No 48.57 No 9,761.75 No 1,360.83 No 361.79 No 215.21 0.005 0.008 0.031 0.224 0.001 0.018 0.002 0.004 0.015 0.042 0.016 0.008 No 589.49 0.014 No 0.00 0.000 No 130.71 0.003 No 42,970.85 0.986 No 224.94 0.005 60.98 5,898.07 137.65 0.00 453.59 91.10 0.00 13612 17078.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3

Permanent Impact (Roads) (square feet) 0.00 771.31 87.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 962.02 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.022 0.001 0.135 0.003 0.000 0.010 0.002 0.000 0.031 0.392 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.018 0.000 40.00 10.00 (acres) Stream Bank Alteration (linear feet)

Wetland ID (acres) 0.013 0.056 0.005 0.015 0.005 0.053 0.090

Cowardin NYS DEC Mapped Classification 1 Wetland

W9 No No No No No No 3,924.95 2,317.81 238.69 661.85 216.38 2,458.92

No

560.20

W10

W11T

W16-T1

W16-T2

W17

W18

W18T2

W22

W24T

W25

W26

W26-T1

W26-T2

W26-T3

W31

W34-T1

W34-T12

W34-T2

W34-T3

W34-T4

W34-T5

W34-T6

W34-T7

3-26

001371

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-6 (Sheet 2 of 3) Delineated Wetlands and Surface Waterbodies Potential Temporary and Permanent Impacts

Wetland ID PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PFO1/PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PSS1/PEM1 PEM1 PSS1 PEM1 PEM1 PUBH/PEM1 R3/PEM1 R3/PSS1 No No No No 208.24 625.00 625.00 625.00 84,968.06 No 180.72 No 725.87 No 158.64 No 258.09 0.006 0.004 0.017 0.004 0.005 0.014 0.014 0.014 1.95 No 357.14 0.008 No 642.13 0.015 No 746.52 0.017 No 0.92 0.000 0.00 299.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 161.33 0.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10,723.81 No 276.96 0.006 92.49 No 251.60 0.006 136.94 No 877.00 0.020 0.00 No 1,731.83 0.040 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.67 No 4,026.79 0.092 999.20 0.023 No 1,220.34 0.028 362.11 0.008 No 228.52 0.005 180.05 0.004 50.00 No 568.43 0.013 0.00 0.000 -

Temporary Impact Permanent Impact (Access Roads) Cowardin NYS DEC Mapped (Cable & Access Road Disturbance) Classification 1 Wetland (square feet) (acres) (square feet) (acres) Proposed Stream Bank Alteration (linear feet)

W34-T8

W34-T9

W34-T10

W34-T11

W35

W41

W42T

W45

W47

W48

W49

W52

W53

W54

W55

W59

W60 OT-12 OT-13 OT-18 Total

1

Covertype Definitions PFO1 – Palustrine forested wetland, broad-leaved deciduous PEM1 – Palustrine emergent wetland, persistent PSS2 – Palustrine scrub-shrub wetland, broad-leaved deciduous PUBH – Palustrine unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded

3-27

001372

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-6 (Sheet 3 of 3) Delineated Wetlands and Surface Waterbodies Potential Temporary and Permanent Impacts

2

R3 - Upper perennial R4 – Riverine, intermittent Includes 1,361 square feet of permanent forested conversion impacts and 0 square feet of permanent fill impacts 3 Includes 13,420 square feet of permanent forested conversion impacts and 3,658.61 square feet of permanent fill impacts

3-28

001373

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Based on the results of the field delineation, only two streams will be affected by the Project, as interpreted from the NYSDEC definitions described in the NY Environmental Conservation Law code Part 608 § 608.1 (t) and (v): surface water bodies W26 and W26T2. Delineated crossing W26 corresponds with a mapped NYSDEC tributary; however, W26T2 does not. Stream crossing W26 is associated with the access road southeast of Turbine 22 and stream crossing W26T2 is associated with the interconnection line northeast of Turbine 20. Proposed stream bank alteration for these features is estimated at 40 and 10 linear feet, respectively. The remaining seven delineated streams identified in Table 3-5, are associated with the overhead transmission line. Project related impacts to these surface waterbodies are not anticipated, as these features are already culverted under the existing railroad right-of-way. Delineated wetlands and surface waterbodies potentially affected by the proposed Project are provided on Figure 3-8. Impacts, by waterbody or wetland, are presented in Table 3-6. SLW proposes to use an overhead crossing of the Chaumont River and floodway for the overhead transmission line. This is the only crossing of a 100-year floodplain within the Project layout. All temporary disturbances and permanent structures associated with the proposed wind farm will be located outside of the 100-year and 500-year floodplains. Potential impacts to surface waters will be minimal and will only occur during the construction of the Project. Potential impacts during construction will result from clearing and grading near stream banks and will be kept to a minimum to prevent significant disturbance to the habitats associated with the creek and its tributaries. Vegetation near the Chaumont River will not be removed to construct the transmission line, as the Chaumont River will be spanned by overhead lines. TheApplicant is in the process of preparing a Joint Wetland Permit Application to the NYSDEC and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for regulated activities located in state jurisdictional waters or waters of the United States.
3.2.2.3 Mitigation Measures

The Project has been designed to avoid and minimize surface water impacts to the greatest extent practicable. Impacts to streams and wetlands will be avoided and minimized through crossing waterbodies in the fewest locations possible and giving preference to existing crossings or narrow crossings when impacts are unavoidable. Since completion of the DEIS Project components were relocated at the following locations to specifically avoid or minimize impacts to wetlands and/or waterbodies: WTG 21 was eliminated; access road between WTGs 27 and 28 was eliminated; access roads to WTGs 20, 22, 23, 28 32, 35, and 44 were moved;

3-29

001374

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

underground cable routing to WTGs 7, 32, and 47 were removed; and underground cable between WTGs 10 to 20 and 14 to 15 were moved. SLW is also committed to the use of Exhibit 3.2.1 – Bottomless Culvert environmentally friendly culvert types (i.e., bottomless or arched culverts with a gravel base) as an alternative to traditional closed culverts to minimize stream impacts (Exhibit 3.2.1). Bottomless culverts use the natural channel bed and maintain the integrity of the aquatic system. They provide sufficient water depth, reduce excessive velocity, and provide adequate space, which collectively promote safe passage of fish and other aquatic organisms under the structure. Soil erosion resulting from construction will be mitigated with sediment and erosion control measures described in the Project SWPPP, which will be provided in the Project’s FEIS. Additional mitigation measures implemented to protect waterbodies and wetlands will include establishing “Restricted Activities Areas.” Designated Restricted Activities Areas will limit the extent of permissible activities within an established buffer zone of 100 feet surrounding essential construction activities within wetlands and waterbodies. Restricted activities in these areas will include the following: No degradation of stream banks; No storage of construction debris within the area; No equipment refueling or washing within the area; Limited use and strict adherence to manufacturer’s instructions for the application of herbicides; No storage of any chemical substances, combustible fuels, or petroleum products within the area; and No deposition of slash within or adjacent to a wetland or waterbody.
3.2.3 Wetlands

3.2.3.1 Affected Environment

Based on a review of the NYSDEC Freshwater Wetland Maps and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps (Figures 3-5 and 3-7, respectively),

3-30

001375

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

there are 70 NYSDEC mapped wetlands and 1,024 NWI mapped palustrine wetland polygons within the towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme. Riverine and lacustrine wetlands were also identified within the two townships. Approximately 4 percent of the total area within the limits of these two towns is mapped by NYSDEC or the NWI as palustrine wetlands. The NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Act (1975) rank wetlands in one of four classes ranging from Class I, which provide the most benefits, to Class IV, which provide the fewest benefits. Table 3-7 provides the number of mapped NYSDEC-regulated wetlands by class within the towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme. The NWI inventory classifies and maps wetlands using a hierarchical system (system, subsystem and class) generally based on hydrologic regime, dominant vegetative life form or composition of the substrate. Table 3-8 provides a summary of the number and acreage, of the palustrine wetlands mapped by the NWI within the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme, by cover class.
Table 3-7 Summary of Mapped NYSDEC Wetlands
Wetland Class I II III IV Total Number of Wetlands 6 42 18 4 70 Acreage 304 3666 470 62 4,501

Table 3-8 Summary of Mapped Palustrine NWI Wetlands
Wetland Class
1

PFO PFO/PSS PFO/PEM PFO/PUB PSS PSS/PEM PSS/PUB PEM PEM/PUB PUB PUS Palustrine Farmed Total
1

Number of Wetland Polygons 172 20 31 2 105 69 1 336 10 253 4 21 1,024

Acreage 2396 228 358 31 265 515 2 863 12 181 2 66 4,919

PFO = Palustrine forested PSS = Palustrine scrub shrub PEM = Palustrine emergent PUB = Palustrine unconsolidated bottom PUS = Palustrine unconsolidated shore

3-31

001376

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

NWI wetlands that occur within the town limits of Cape Vincent and Lyme include palustrine emergent (PEM), palustrine forested (PFO), palustrine scrub–shrub (PSS), palustrine unconsolidated bottom (PUB), and palustrine unconsolidated shore (PUS) cover classes. The following summarizes the specific wetland covertypes as defined by Edinger et al (2002) observed at the proposed project. Shallow Emergent Marsh (PEM) - Shallow emergent marshes are permanently saturated and seasonally flooded wetlands that can be dominated by a variety of herbaceous vegetation. Common dominant herbaceous plants within this community include woolgrass (Juncus effusus), cattails (Typha latifolia), reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), sedges (Carex spp.), and meadow-rues (Thalictrum spp.). Other plants characteristic of shallow emergent marshes include, blue flag iris (Iris versicolor), sensitive fern, cinnamon fern, and rushes (Juncus spp.). Shallow emergent marshes commonly have scattered shrub species including speckled alder, dogwoods (Cornus spp.), willows (Salix spp.), and meadow sweet (Spiraea alba). Shrub Swamp (PSS) - Shrub swamps are a broadly defined, highly variable covertype that includes several distinct communities and many intermediates. Shrub swamps may have a single dominant shrub species or be co-dominated by a mixture of species. Speckled alder (Alnus incana sp. rugosa) is a common shrub of this community. Red osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera), silky dogwood (Cornus amomum), and Spirea spp. also occur either as a dominant species or co-dominant with speckled alder. Various other shrub species occasionally occur and include highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), smooth alder (Alnus serrulata), willows (Salix spp.), and viburnums. These wetland communities are frequently associated with stream complexes and may also contain patches of emergent wetland sedges and grasses. Hemlock-hardwood swamp (PFO) - The tree canopy in this wetland is typically dominated by hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), and co-dominated by yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), and red maple (Acer rubrum). Other less frequently occurring trees include white pine (Pinus strobus), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), and green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica). Characteristic shrubs include saplings of canopy trees and highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum). Other less frequently occurring shrubs include various viburnums (Viburnum cassinoides, V. lentago, and V. lanatanoides), winterberry (Ilex verticillata), and mountain holly (Nemopanthus mucronatus). Characteristic herbs are cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea) and sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis). Groundcover may also be fairly sparse. Other less frequently occurring herbs include sedges (Carex trisperma, C. folliculata, and C. bromoides), goldthread (Coptis trifolia), Canada

3-32

001377

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

mayflower (Maianthemum canadense), mountain sorrel (Oxalis montana), foamflower (Tiarella cordifolia), and sarsparilla (Aralia nudicaulis). Farm pond/artificial pond (PUB/PUS) – This aquatic community typically consists of small ponds generally constructed on agricultural or residential property. These ponds are often eutrophic, and may be stocked with panfish such as bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), and yellow perch (Perca flavescens). The biota inhabiting these ponds can be variable but more often display limited diversity and reflect the species that would opportunistically colonize or be artificially seeded, planted, or stocked in the pond. In addition, two rare wetland community types, as identified by the NYSDEC (2006) are located near the Project Area: Silver maple-ash swamp – Four discrete fragments of this rare community type occur within 1.5 miles of the Project. Canopy cover includes silver maple, swamp white oak, and green ash. Sinkhole wetlands – Sinkhole wetlands in and around the Project are a series of small wetlands that lie in the limestone bedrock. They occur in linear groups and are surrounded by either cow pasture or old fields.
3.2.3.2 Potential Impact

Forty-four wetland/surface water body crossings were delineated within the Project layout associated with access roads and underground interconnection lines. The locations of delineated wetlands and surface water bodies are provided on Figure 3-8. None of the affected wetlands were identified as NYSDEC-regulated wetlands. An additional 21 wetlands/surface water bodies were delineated along the proposed overhead line. These wetlands are listed in Table 3-9. Five of these crossings were identified as NYSDEC-regulated wetlands. The overhead line would also span the NYSDEC-regulated adjacent area associated with these wetlands. Construction and operation of the Project will temporarily affect 1.67 acres of wetlands and permanently affect 0.67 acres of wetlands (Table 3-6). These permanent impacts include the placement of 0.33 acres of fill in wetlands and the conversion of 0.34 acres of forested wetlands to nonforested wetland cover. Construction of the overhead transmission line will avoid wetland impacts to the extent practicable as most of the proposed overhead transmission corridor traverses fields, resulting in minimal affects to forested habitat. Approximately 30 square feet of the permanent impact will result from the placement of a maximum of three poles in wetlands. To prevent trees and limbs from contacting or falling on the transmission wires, sapling and trees within the “hazard zone”

3-33

001378

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

of these wires (defined by transmission line design standards – FERC 2007) will have to be removed. These “danger trees” will be selectively removed prior to construction, and maintained during operation of the transmission line. Selective tree, sapling, and limbs removal from forested wetlands is minimal and will be addressed in the Joint Wetlands Permit application of the Project. Crossings of the Chaumont River will be accomplished by overhead spanning, and utility poles will be located a minimum of 50 feet from both sides of the river banks. It is possible to string cable between these utility poles in a manner that will not require construction equipment to drive through the streams. There is the possibility that wetland vegetation in the overhead transmission line corridor crossing the Chaumont River may need to be cleared. If practicable, SLW will avoid such clearing.
Table 3-9 Delineated Wetlands Overhead Transmission Line
Wetland ID OT1 OT2 OT3 OT4 OT5 OT6 OT7 OT8 OT9 OT10 OT11 OT12 OT13 OT14 OT15 OT16 OT17 OT18 OT19 OT20 OT21
1

Cowardin Classification 1 PFO1 PFO1 PSS1 PEM1/PSS1 PFO1 PFO1 PSS1 PSS1 PFO1 PFO1 PUBH PUBH/PEM1 R3/PEM1 R3/PSS1 R3/PSS1 R4/PSS1 R4/PSS1 R3/PSS1 PEM1 PFO1 R2OW

NYS DEC Mapped Wetland ID CV-1 CV-1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A U-4 U-5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A X-5

Location Along railroad bed Along railroad bed Along railroad bed and Kents Creek Along railroad bed and Kents Creek Along railroad bed and Kents Creek Along railroad bed and Kents Creek Along railroad bed northwest of McWayne Road Along railroad bed northwest of McWayne Road Along railroad bed Along railroad bed Railroad bed Golf course Intersection of railroad bed and Three-mile Creek ½ mile southeast of Gibson Road ½ mile southeast of Gibson Road 700 feet northwest of County Route 8 700 feet northwest of County Route 8 Upstream of NY State Hwy 12E Along railroad bed Along railroad bed Chaumont River

Cover Class Definition PFO1 – Palustrine forested wetland, broad-leaved deciduous PEM1 – Palustrine emergent wetland, persistent PSS2 – Palustrine scrub-shrub wetland, broad-leaved deciduous PUBH – Palustrine unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded OW - Open Water R2 - Riverine, lower perennial

3-34

001379

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
R3 – Riverine, upper perennial R4 – Riverine, intermittent

Although wetland impacts will be avoided if practicable, any clearing through forested wetlands could result in a change from tree species to shrub and herbaceous vegetation. Non-forested wetlands within the proposed overhead transmission line right-of-way consist of emergent and scrub-shrub wetlands. Impacts to non-forested wetlands are expected to be short term and vegetation is expected to return to pre-construction conditions in one to two growing seasons. The NYSDEC considers the conversion of forested wetlands to non-forested wetlands a permanent change in wetland vegetation composition. While this conversion from one cover class to another does not constitute a net loss of wetlands, it may alter the structure and function of these wetland habitats. Therefore, impacts to forested wetlands that are converted to either emergent or scrub-shrub wetlands are considered permanent impacts. Construction of the Project will permanently convert 0.34 acres of forested wetlands to non-forested wetland cover classes.
3.2.3.3 Mitigation Measures

The Project has been designed to avoid and minimize wetland impacts to the greatest extent practicable. Reduction of the total number of turbines from 96 to 53 has also reduced total wetland impacts. As previously indicated, since completion of the DEIS, Project components were relocated at the following locations to specifically avoid or minimize impacts to wetlands and/or waterbodies: WTG 21 was eliminated; access road between WTGs 27 and 28 was eliminated; access roads to WTGs 20, 22, 23, 28 32, 35, and 44 were moved; and underground cable routing to WTGs 7, 32, and 47, and between WTGs 10 to 20 and 14 to 15 were moved. Temporary Impacts: Wetland areas and open waters temporarily affected during the construction of the Project will be restored to pre-construction contours and revegetated with native (non-invasive) plant material or seeds immediately following the completion of regulated activities at each site. Permanent Impacts: The Applicant is seeking permit authorization from NYSDEC and USACE for unavoidable impacts to wetlands. As part of the permitting process, and in consultation with NYSDEC and USACE, the Applicant will develop a Wetland Mitigation Plan to compensate for unavoidable permanent impacts to wetlands. SLW proposes to compensate for the unavoidable permanent fill of 0.3 acres of wetlands using a 2:1 mitigation ratio. Most of

3-35

001380

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

the proposed fill is located in narrow wetland drainage corridors consisting of emergent wetland herbaceous and scrub-shrub located contiguous to agricultural fields. The functional value assessment for these wetlands indicates that they primarily function as runoff conveyances, and provide minor flood water attenuation and potential sediment/toxicant retention. A few wetlands in the project corridors have well-developed vegetative structure and diversity, providing wildlife habitat corridors between fields. Due to their small overall area of these wetlands, their proximity to active agricultural fields, and their lack of diverse or dense vegetation, they have limited wildlife habitat value. In consideration of these limited functional values, the goal for compensatory mitigation is to replace and enhance the lost water quality function and wildlife habitat value provided by the proposed wetlands to be filled. SLW proposes to compensate for the loss of these functions by establishing new wetlands at a 2:1 replacement ratio, and to consolidate the replacement in one location contiguous to a more functionally valuable natural wetland, thus increasing the chances of successful re-establishment. This wetland replacement approach also affords practical construction of the replacement and creates a suitable opportunity to enhance the wildlife habitat value of the compensatory wetland by planting trees and dense emergent and herbaceous shrub cover. Five sites have been selected for evaluation as compensatory wetland areas. In accordance with USACE mitigation guidance, these sites were chosen based the following selection criteria: locate in the same sub-watershed as the filled wetlands with similar hydro-geomorphic, ecological landscape features, and functions and values (duplicate features of “reference” wetlands to the extent practicable or enhance connectivity with natural upland landscape elements) (Gwin et al., 1999); locate with natural and adequate variable hydrological sources/conditions (including locating sites near existing wetlands or are “marginal” wet areas that do not meet all three wetland criteria), or where sites were previously wetlands; locate where soils and heterogeneous topographic gradients are available and will require minimal construction grading to achieve appropriate planting elevation, depth, soil type and seasonal timing; and consider the opportunities and constraints concerning equipment access for construction and maintenance, and agreeable landowners, subsurface conditions, and groundwater quantity and quality. Wetland Hydrodynamics/Hydrology – The proposed impacts from the project occur in two different hydrologic unit codes (HUCs): the Upper St. Lawrence watershed HUC number

3-36

001381

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

04150301; and the Chaumont-Perch watershed HUC number 04150102. Approximately 74 percent of the proposed impacts will occur in the Chaumont-Perch watershed. All of the proposed mitigation sites are located in the Chaumont-Perch watershed and are located in the flood zone X (FEMA map panel 361062C). All the sites selected exhibit the potential for utilizing available surface and groundwater hydrology, have the potential to provide sediment removal, flood storage, nutrient uptake, while also contiguous to existing wildlife habitat. Two of the potential sites would expand the riparian zone habitat of Kents Creek, providing stream shading, and increase the buffer zone from the current farming activities occurring on the proposed mitigation sites. Soils and Topography – The Project is located in the physiographic basin of the St. Lawrence River. Based on the Jefferson County Soil Survey and observations in the field in the Project study area, the soil parent material includes both glacial lake and marine sediments (USDA/NRCS, 2006). As a result, the wetlands in the Project Area and associated “reference” wetlands contain similar geomorphic soils formations. The soils in the potential mitigation sites have fairly silty content and the wetlands in the Project area all have surface hydrology driven by these poorly drained soils and relatively level topography. Regional groundwater does not appear to significantly influence the hydrology of reference wetlands, and as such will not be considered available for consideration at the wetland mitigation sites. The relatively large natural wetland complexes that do exist in the Project area are located south of the proposed wind farm (see Figure 3-7), and in two large wetland areas crossed by the proposed electric transmission corridor. These larger wetland complexes are also NYSDEC mapped state wetlands located to the south of the proposed wind farm and have the greatest potential to provide groundwater influenced hydrology. The following potential mitigation sites were evaluated with respect to wetland hydrodynamics (surface and groundwater), soils and topography. Compensatory Wetland Site Evaluations: Five potential compensatory wetland site locations where identified for evaluation for the proposed mitigation plan as shown in Exhibit 3.2.2, Sites A-E. The characteristics of the five wetland mitigation sites evaluated are as follows. Mitigation Site A – Mitigation Site A is located in an open agricultural field contiguous to Wetland W-33, a forested wetland with a “PFO1C” NWI wetland classification. NRCS soils mapping for the site is Kingsbury silty clay. This soils series consists of very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils formed in lacustrine or marine sediments. The site consists of herbaceous vegetation, which changes with the management of the field. This site is located approximately 1,600 linear feet northwest of DEC Wetland V-1, however, and is not directly hydraulically connected to this DEC wetland. The nearest FEMA mapped floodplain area is located in the

3-37

001382

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

DEC Wetland and is approximating 2,000 feet away from the proposed mitigation site. The proposed mitigation would expand the existing NWI Wetland. Mitigation Site B – Mitigation Site B is located in an agricultural field adjacent to the abandoned railroad ballast, south of the proposed substation site, and would be hydrologically connected to Wetland OT-20. NRCS soil series mapping indicates that the area has Kingsbury silty clay, consisting of very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils formed in lacustrine or marine sediments. The site has been periodically farmed, suggesting it may be marginally wet depending on rainfall and weather conditions. The nearest DEC Wetland (DEC Wetland V-1) is located approximately 850 feet south of this proposed mitigation site. The nearest FEMA mapped floodplain area is also located south of the proposed mitigation site and is associated with the DEC Wetland. The nearest NWI Wetland is east of the proposed mitigation site and is classified as mixed forested and scrub/shrub wetland (“PFO/SS1E”). The proposed mitigation would be hydrologically connected to this NWI Wetland.
Exhibit 3.2.2 – Potential Mitigation Locations

Mitigation Site C – Mitigation Site C is also located in an open agricultural field, north of the abandoned railroad ballast and would be hydrologically connected Wetland OT1. Soil mapping

3-38

001383

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

in this area is Covington silty clay, a hydric soil. It has a very deep and poorly drained soils formed in calcareous clayey glacio-lacustrine or glacio-estuarine deposits on glacial lake plains. These soils are found on broad plains, depressions, and drainage ways. The vegetation of the site consists of herbaceous vegetation, which changes with the management of the field. The site is located approximately 600 feet north of DEC Wetland V-1. The nearest FEMA mapped floodplain area is associated with the DEC Wetland and is approximating 550 feet away for the proposed mitigation site. The nearest NWI Wetland is approximately 500 feet northeast of the site and is classified as mixed forested and scrub/shrub wetland (“PFO/SS1E”). This NWI wetland is associated with the project designated Wetland OT-1. Mitigation Site D – This potential site is located in an agricultural field along the west bank of Kents Creek. This portion of Kents Creek is mapped as an NWI “PSS1A” wetland and the proposed mitigation site would be hydrologically connected to this shrub dominated wetland. NRCS soil mapping indicates the series in this area is Rhinebeck silt loam. These are a very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils formed in glacio-lacustrine sediments having a high clay and silt content. The vegetation of the site consists of herbaceous vegetation cover, which changes with the management of the field. The nearest FEMA mapped floodplain area is associated with Kents Creek and is about one mile downstream. The nearest DEC Wetland is “ST-10” and is approximately 2,300 linear feet to the northeast of the mitigation site and is associated with Kents Creek. The proposed mitigation site would expand the riparian, wildlife corridor of Kents Creek. Mitigation Site E – This potential site is also located in an agricultural field along the west bank of Kents Creek. The soil mapping in this area is also Rhinebeck silt loam. The vegetation in this area is currently dominated with herbaceous cover; the area appears to be cleared periodically, or maintained as a field. The nearest FEMA mapped floodplain area is the same FEMA floodplain area associate with Site D and is located about 1.5 miles downstream on Kents Creek. The proposed mitigation site is located approximately 450 feet southwest of DEC Wetland “ST-10”; which is the nearest mapped DEC Wetland. This site is located approximately 500 feet northeast of a scrub/shrub NWI Wetland classified as “PSS1A”; the same wetland associated with Site D. This site would also effectively expand the apparent riparian wildlife corridor of Kents Creek. Summary of Proposed Wetland Compensatory Mitigation: SLW proposes the following compensatory mitigation for the impacts to “aquatic resources” (wetlands): The establishment of 0.7 acres of wetlands (a 2:1 ratio of lost wetlands) from on-site uplands in the Project area adjacent to one existing wetland area; the restoration of 1.95 acres of wetlands; and,

3-39

001384

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

the establishment of a conservation easement of at least one acre of existing forested wetland habitat and associated upland buffer to mitigate the conversion of existing forested wetland habitat to emergent wet meadow habitat resulting from the Project activities. Wetland Construction Plan: Mitigation Site Plans and Profiles - Once the preferred wetland mitigation site has been obtained (i.e. either a Conservation Restriction agreement or purchase from the landowner), the site specific construction grade specifications and details will be submitted for final approval. Construction parameters and requirements include: sub-grade, micro-topographic and final grade specifications; topsoil thickness; surface drainage requirements and planting specifications depicting location, quantities, density, and species necessary to establish palustrine emergent wetlands (PEM). These parameters will be depicted on plans with cross-sections across the wetland replacement areas (see Exhibit 3.2.3).
Exhibit 3.2.3 – Conceptual Wetland Replacement Cross-section

Mitigation Site Construction Sequence – Construction of the replacement wetlands will commence once the Project access roads have been completed and before completion of the wind farm. Prior to commencement of mitigation construction, a pre-construction meeting will be held to familiarize contractors with the design and permitting requirements for the replacement wetlands. The meeting will be convened by a wetland scientist familiar with the requirements of the Project plans and the conditions issued by the USACE. The project wetland scientist will be present onsite during the construction to monitor the work and to ensure compliance with requirements of the wetland replacement plans and permits.

3-40

001385

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Grading, Soils, and Hydrology – The replacement wetland will be excavated and graded appropriately to create sufficient depth and persistent wetland hydrology to accommodate approximately 0.7 acres. This grading will be conducted adjacent to existing “reference” wetlands to facilitate similar hydrologic conditions influenced by soils and topography. The soil drainage class, depth to water table and frequency of inundation of the soils mapped to occur in these locations by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service are indicators of hydrologic conditions suitable for constructing the replacement wetlands. Surface runoff is the primary source of soil saturation for the mitigation site. Proposed grades throughout the created wetland will be designed to capture this surface drainage. Other suitable hydrologic parameters observed in the reference wetland will be considered with respect to establishing grading and soil depths at the wetland replacement site. These include: proximity to existing wetlands, landscape position, evidence of soil saturation or inundation displayed by soil texture and coloration, presence of mottling or redoximorphic features and abundance of hydrophytic vegetation. Wetland Construction – Prior to construction at the wetland replacement area, erosion controls will be installed in appropriate areas to protect adjacent wetlands. A tracked excavator will be used at the replacement wetlands site to create somewhat irregular or small “pit and mound” topography characteristic of natural wetlands. Total relief between the bottom of the pools and the tops of the mounds will be no more than one vertical foot. Sub-grades will be excavated 8 to 12 inches below final grade to accept backfill with a corresponding thickness of wetland topsoil. This thickness of topsoil is representative of the corresponding “A” horizon in other undisturbed wetlands adjoining the replacement wetlands. To the extent feasible, hydric or wetland soil stockpiled from the wetlands to be filled will be salvaged and spread over the surface of the replacement wetlands. As necessary, this will be supplemented with suitable organic-rich topsoil augmented with composted soil obtained locally. After application of the topsoil to sub-grades, the constructed wetland footprint will blend in with contours of adjacent undisturbed slopes. Along the transition area between the upland and replacement wetland boundary, at least a 3:1 upland slope will be maintained Wetland Planting – Native species indigenous to the Project will be purchased from a local nursery and planted in the wetland replacement area to re-establish a diverse emergent (PEM) and scrub/shrub wetland community. In particular, native species tolerant of periodic inundation or saturated soils will be chosen. In addition, a commercially available and acceptable seed mixture of native wetland plants (hydrophytes) will be sown across bare soil in the replacement wetlands to establish an understory of herbaceous wetland vegetation beneath woody shrub species planted along the fringe of the replacement wetland. The seed will be mixed to achieve a mosaic of plant micro-communities and plant diversity that have the potential to encourage wildlife use. Typical application rates of such seed mixes will be 15 pounds per acre (+0.5 3-41

001386

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

pounds per 1,000 square feet). This seed mixture will also be applied to the impacted wetlands associated with the temporary road disturbances. In addition, dead or dying woody debris obtained from logs, limbs and stumps of non-invasive species will be distributed throughout the constructed wetlands. The woody debris is intended to provide structural and temporal diversity and cover, nest sites, and perches for wildlife. Woody debris will be sited to represent dispersed configurations typically observed in reference wetlands including fallen logs, snags, overturned stumps depicting tree-throw and fallen canopy. Based on the proximity of the proposed wetland mitigation site to existing wetlands, it is reasonable to expect other “volunteer” species of woody and herbaceous vegetation will also colonize the replacement wetlands. Wetland Monitoring: Monitoring of the wetland replacement areas will begin once the area has been constructed and will continue for five full growing seasons after completion of construction in accordance with USACE mitigation guidance. Monitoring will take place at several key times throughout construction of the replacement wetland and during the first growing season, and on a routine schedule for the remainder of the five years of monitoring. Monitoring will occur twice a year during the growing season for the first three years and once a year during the growing season for the remaining two years. Monitoring will be conducted by a wetland scientist familiar with the design of the wetland replacement areas and the associated permitting requirements. Monitoring reports will be submitted to the NYSDEC and USACE promptly after the observations. A schedule and discussion of the observations to be made during the monitoring, along with topics that are to be addressed in the annual monitoring reports, are described as follows: Prior to excavation: confirm proper layout of the replacement area, document nearby or in-place occurrence of invasive or problematic species that may require future control or management; Prior to completion of grading: verify hydrology, sub-grades and final grades have been achieved; Onset of planting: verify adherence to planting specifications and identify planting locations; Completion of planting: verify planting placement, evaluate need for irrigation, and identify corrective measures; Weekly after planting:evaluate need for irrigation and implement as necessary; Midway during growing season: evaluate planting success and need for irrigation, inventory occurrence of invasive species and implement, if necessary, remedial measures ranging from physical removal to application of herbicides as appropriate;

3-42

001387

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Early September: inspect success of plantings, implement necessary corrective measures before month end (end of growing season), photograph site from designated monitoring stations, and evaluate achievement of compensatory mitigation goals; Early October: inspect success of plantings, implement necessary corrective measures before month end (end of growing season) photograph site from designated monitoring stations, and evaluate achievement of mitigation goals. In the subsequent three years, monitoring will be conducted as scheduled below for the related purposes; and During the last two years of monitoring, observation will be made only during the month of September. Monitoring Stations – Permanent monitoring stations will be established in the replacement wetlands from which photographs will be taken annually to track development of wetland conditions. Data will also be collected at the monitoring stations during the mid-growing season or early September. Vegetative data to be collected from nested quadrants containing respective stratums at these stations will include species composition, percent dominance, and percent survival of planted species. Soils observations will consist of describing soil profiles at each monitoring station. Hydrologic data will be obtained from test pits excavated to evaluate soil profile development. The above data will be evaluated in accordance with methods presented in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual to determine whether conditions occur that meet criteria representative of a reference wetland community. Conditions throughout the wetland replacement areas such as vegetative cover, occurrence and extent of invasive species, evidence of disturbance, slope stability, and use by wildlife (e.g. tracks, scat, browsing, or nests) will also be recorded during the mid-growing season monitoring. Monitoring Conditions, Reporting, and Success Parameters – Conditions observed at the monitoring stations and throughout the compensation area will be summarized in the monitoring report along with any necessary recommendations for remedial measures such as replanting dead vegetation, re-grading to achieve appropriate hydrology, controlling invasive species, and stabilizing un-vegetated or eroding soil. Data collected during monitoring site visits will be summarized in the report. By the end of the second growing season, the monitoring reports will also address progress towards the following success standards: 100 percent vegetative coverage; More than 85 percent of the replacement wetland will contain a minimum of six planted species or non-exotic volunteer species that are well represented in compensation area; Stable slopes/soils within and adjacent to the wetland replacement area; and,

3-43

001388

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Control of non-native invasive species (e.g. common reed, Russian and autumn olives, buckthorn and/or multiflora rose) within the replacement area. Monitoring Reports – The monitoring reports will contain: Plans showing the location of monitoring stations for planted species; Assessment of planted species survival and sustainability; Species list inventory of dominant (greater than 5 percent cover) volunteer species; Assessment of wetland functions being provided by the replacement wetland; Representative photographs of the created wetlands from monitoring stations; and Recommended remedial measures needed to correct problems or deficiencies.
3.3.1 Vegetation

3.3.1.1 Affected Environment

Vegetative cover in the Project Area consists primarily of agriculture (85 percent), forest stands (8 percent), and scrub-shrub (5 percent) (Figures 3-3 and 3-9) (USGS, 1992). The remaining 2 percent comprises developed and non-forested wetland cover. Agriculture land includes pastureland (69 percent) and row crops (13 percent). Forest stands include deciduous forests (6 percent), and evergreen forests (<1 percent). Dominant species in deciduous forests include American Beech (Fagus americana), White Birch (Betula papyrifera), and White Oak (Quercus alba), while mixed forests can include Red Maple (Acer rubrum), Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum), and Oak (Quercus sp.) interspersed with Eastern Hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) and Spruce (Picea sp.). Forested cover within the Project Area is fragmented and represented by isolated stands, typical of the region. Some edge habitats with shrubby growth occupy the transition between agriculture fields and forested areas; however, an abrupt transition between covertypes is common. Forested, scrub/shrub, and emergent wetlands constitute less than two percent of the Project Area. A unique grassland type, alvars, is found in the St. Lawrence River Basin. Alvars consist of grasslands and shrublands that develop on shallow soils with limestone geology. They typically support rare plant communities. Alvars are unique not only to this Basin, but are unique on a state and global level as well. Most alvars are concentrated in Jefferson County. Examples in the Project Area are Chaumont Barrens and Three-Mile Creek Barrens. No alvars were observed on the Project Site during field surveys conducted in 2007 and 2008. Based on consultation with the New York Natural Heritage Program, two endangered plant species, the Michigan lily and autumnal water-starwort are potentially associated within the wetland habitats found in the Project Area and are discussed separately in Section 3.3.7. However, neither of these species were observed on the Project Site during field surveys conducted in 2007 and 2008.

3-44

001389

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.3.1.2 Potential Impact

No significant impact to vegetation will occur. Alvars at the Chaumont Barrens and Three-Mile Creek Barrens will not be affected by the Project. Impact to plant communities associated with the construction of the Project will include the development of approximately 41 acres of agricultural land (30 acres of pasture/hay and 11 acres of cropland) and 0.6 acres of forest for the construction of the turbines, access roads, and substation. There is potential for the introduction of invasive species into areas disturbed during construction activities. In addition, approximately 17 acres of forested land, mostly associated with the proposed 100-foot overhead transmission line right-of-way, will be converted to herbaceous and open shrub cover. Following the completion of construction activities, natural regeneration of vegetative species will occur; therefore the resulting plant community will likely consist of local early successional low shrubs and young trees. The overhead transmission line right-of-way will be selectively managed periodically so that trees or their branches do not compromise the security of the infrastructure.
3.3.1.3 Mitigation Measures

Clearing of vegetation will be minimized in areas that are ecologically sensitive, such as the banks of creeks crossed by the overhead transmission line. All temporary disturbances will be restored. To facilitate restoration, the subsoil used to create access roads will be pervious, native material. Most access roads will be restored to a permanent width of up to 17 feet, including side slopes. In agricultural fields, access roads will be located along existing farm roads or placed along the edge of fields, to the greatest extent practicable to preserve farmland. To eliminate or mitigate the potential for invasive species introduction to areas disturbed by construction activities, SLW has prepared an Invasive Species Management Plan (Appendix D) to ensure that all disturbed areas will be returned to a native vegetative state once construction is complete.
3.3.2 Mammals Excluding Bats

3.3.2.1 Affected Environment

This discussion addresses mammals, other than bats, that potentially occur in the Project Area. Bats are addressed separately in Section 3.3.3 because of their flight capabilities and the potential environmental consequences associated with this behavior. Most of the mammals associated with the Project Area are species adapted to human activities such as those associated with the largely agricultural land use. Jefferson County supports a large population of white-tailed deer, a sparse localized population of ruffed grouse, and a moderate population of eastern cottontail. Agricultural fields and vegetation cover types within the Project provide habitat for these species of wildlife. Agricultural land such as pastures, hayfields and row crops provide nesting and feeding habitats for eastern cottontail, shrews, mice, and birds. Predatory mammals such as coyote and fox use open areas for hunting. Forested areas provide habitat for other wildlife such

3-45

001390

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

as grey squirrel, chipmunk, and white-tailed deer. Based on evaluation of habitat types present in the Project Area as well as consultation with the New York Natural Heritage Program, no threatened or endangered mammals, or their critical habitat, (excluding bats, which are discussed separately in Section 3.3.3) are known to be located or are found within the Project Area.
3.3.2.2 Potential Impact

Impacts to mammals (bats are discussed separately in Section 3.3.3) during construction or operation of the Project are anticipated to be minor and short-term. Minor, temporary displacement of individuals and disturbance of wildlife habitat associated with construction of the Project will be limited to the construction right-of-way and immediately adjacent areas. Forested habitat will be cleared within portions of the laydown areas for 6 of the 53 turbines and along limited portions of the overhead transmission line right-of-way. Total permanent forest clearing will amount to only 0.6 acres. In addition, approximately 17 acres of forest would temporarily be cleared for construction of the Project. Most wildlife within the Project Area will actively avoid the immediate construction area because of construction related activity and human presence. Displaced individuals will most likely move to adjacent undisturbed areas. However, more sedentary species, such as small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians that lack the mobility needed to avoid construction equipment could be more directly affected during construction and a few individuals could possibly be lost.
3.3.2.3 Mitigation Measures

The Project was designed to avoid significant impact to wildlife. Project infrastructure is sited away from high quality wildlife habitat and forested clearing has been minimized.
3.3.3 Bats

3.3.3.1 Affected Environment

The Project Area is within the geographic range of nine species of bats: big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus), silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans), eastern red bat (Lasiurus borealis), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), small-footed bat (Myotis leibii), little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus), northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis), and eastern bat (Pipistrellus subflavus). The Indiana bat, a State- and Federally-listed endangered species, has been recorded in the Project Area. A documented hibernaculum containing Indiana bats is located in Glen Park approximately 17 miles southeast of the Project Area. Multiple Indiana bat spring/summer roosts have also been documented within ten miles of the Project Area. Indiana bats are discussed in detail in Section 3.3.7. In addition, the eastern small-footed myotis has been documented within 25 miles of the Project Area.

3-46

001391

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

SLWF contracted Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. to conduct surveys for bats within the Project Area (see Appendix E – Avian and Bat Survey). These surveys included: spring and fall AnaBat surveys for migrant bats, summer AnaBat surveys for resident bats, 2007 and 2008 summer mist-net surveys for bats, and habitat focused surveys for the Indiana bat. Three hundred and fifty-three bats of six species were captured during the July and August 2007 mist net survey, including four Indiana bats. Species captured included 178 little brown, 26 northern long-eared, 139 big brown, five eastern red, and one silver-haired bats. One hundred and eightyfive bats of four species were captured during the June 2008 mist net survey; however, no Indiana bats were captured during this sampling event. Species captured included 119 little brown, 22 northern long-eared, 43 big brown, and one eastern red bats. Results of other studies at wind projects indicate that populations of breeding bats nearby are not highly susceptible to turbine collision, and that impacts to summer breeding resident species such as little brown bats, big brown bats, northern Myotis, and Indiana bats found in the Project study area are expected to be low. It has been found that resident bats in and around wind projects do not appear to be affected as greatly as long distance migrant species (see Johnson 2005, Arnett et al. 2008). The studies of bat mortality at wind projects have shown that impacts are unequal across species and season, and that relative abundance of species based on acoustic surveys in not correlated with mortality. New York bat populations have been recently affected by White Nose Syndrome (WNS). WNS is characterized by a white fungus encircling the noses and on the wings of the majority of the affected bats. This fungus is thought to be symptomatic of the problem but may not be the actual cause of death. Affected bats have depleted fat reserves and do not usually survive through winter hibernation. A recent study has identified a new fungus which is a close genetic relative the Geomyces group of fungi, that had colonized the skin of 90 percent of the bats analyzed from all the states affected by white-nose syndrome (Blehert, et. al., 2008). Since the discovery of WNS in New York State in 2006, the numbers of hibernating bats have been drastically declining in New York, Vermont, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. Little brown bats have sustained the largest number of deaths attributed to WNS.
3.3.3.2 Potential Impact

No significant impacts to bat species are likely during construction of the Project. During Project operation, bat collision with wind turbines is a potential impact. Several bat mortality trends have emerged based on post-construction mortality studies at wind projects in the United States and Canada. Risk to bats from wind turbines is unequal across species. Most bat fatalities at North American wind projects have involved species of the genus Lasiurus, typically hoary

3-47

001392

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

bat (Lasiurus cinereus), red bat (L. borealis) and silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans). These are long distance migrants that commonly forage in forest canopy (Johnson, 2005). Eastern pipistrelles (Pipistrellus subflavus) fatalities are also often reported (Johnson, 2005); however, eastern pipistrelles are not commonly found in northern New York and will not be affected by the Project. The least common fatalities are of big brown bats and Myotis species. Numerous studies across the U.S. and Canada have shown this trend (see Johnson, 2005). Risk to bats from wind turbines also is unequal across seasons. Highest mortality to bats at wind turbines generally occurs during the period from late-July to mid-September, which is believed to be the post-breeding dispersal and fall migration period for bats. In addition, results of mortality studies suggest that bat mortality is not related to site-specific features or habitats (Arnett et al., 2005; Baerwald, 2007; Jain et al., 2007). Predicting bat fatality impact is difficult based on available knowledge of bat interactions with wind facilities but it is expected that impacts to bats at the Saint Lawrence Windpower Project would be similar to other regional wind projects. Average fatalities of 3.4 and 46.3 bats per turbine per year have been reported by NWCC (2004) for U.S. national and eastern region wind facilities, respectively. Applying these rates to the number of turbines associated with the Project, the average annual bat fatality is estimated to be between 180 and 2,454 bats. Annual average bat fatality estimates documented at Maple Ridge Wind Farm during first year monitoring efforts ranged between 15 to 24 bats per turbine, with 244 of 326 identified bat fatalities (75 percent) occurring in July and August (Jain et al. 2007). If patterns of bat fatality for the Project are considered consistent with those observed in the Maple Ridge Wind Farm, average annual bat fatality is estimated to be between 795 and 1272 bats. Based on the available information as well as the data during 2006 studies (WEST, 2007) it is expected that bat mortality at the Project Area will be similar to the other studies in the U.S. and New York with the peak of mortality likely occurring in August and September. Spring and summer mortality levels for bats are expected to be lower than the fall. The species expected to be the most common fatalities would include eastern red bat, hoary bat, and silver-haired bat, with fewer numbers of big brown bat, little brown bat, and northern myotis.
3.3.3.3 Mitigation Measures, Compensation and Monitoring

The following conservation measures have been implemented during the design of the project or will be implemented before or during construction to minimize potential bat mortality as a result of the construction and operation of the Project: 1. Project design – the Project has been designed to avoid or minimize cutting deciduous forest habitat to the maximum extent feasible.

3-48

001393

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

2. Project design - the Project has been reduced in scale from 96 turbines to a minimum economically viable size of 53 turbines (79.5 MW). This design effectively minimizes collision risk through fewer turbines, 3. Project design - the Project design was also used to minimize exposure by placing all turbines at appropriate distances from known roost trees. 4. Timing – All tree clearing will occur outside of the highest known usage times for the project area (May – September), 5. SLW is currently in formal consultation with the USFWS, USACE, and NYSDEC for potential impacts to Indiana bats (see Appendix F – between R. Niver, USFWS and B. Gunderman, Acciona, various dates). The Project will be required to comply with conditions and mitigation measures derived through this collaborative process. Post-construction monitoring studies will be implemented to estimate the mortality and habitat displacement experienced by bats as a result of the Project, to verify the environmental impacts estimated by pre-construction studies, and to provide supporting value to the overall package of conservation measures that ultimately benefit the species or population. SLW will engage in a 3year monitoring program to determine the level of impact and circumstances under which impacts to bats occur from the Project (See Appendix E – Post-Construction Monitoring Plan). The monitoring program also will provide information about the risks to Indiana bats from wind turbines that may be useful in developing additional impact reduction strategies.
3.3.4 Migrating Birds

3.3.4.1 Affected Environment

Based on 2006 hawk count data, the annual number of migrating hawks in the region varies from approximately 5,000 to 31,000 birds in 2006 and 6,000, to 52,140 birds in 2007 (Table 3-10). Six species were observed at nearly all three watch sites. The most common species observed were turkey vultures, broad-winged hawks, red-tailed hawks and sharp-shinned hawks. These data are compiled from three hawk watch sites: Derby Hill located appoximately 70 miles south of the Project Area; Braddock Bay located approximately 190 miles southwest; and Franklin Mountain located approximately 195 miles southeast (Hawk Migration Association of North America, 2006). These numbers represent hawk migration in western and northern New York and may not be indicative of hawk movements in the vicinity of the proposed Project. In addition, large open waters associated with the Saint Lawrence River and Lake Ontario, north and west of the Project Area, and sheetwater wetlands in the region are used by migratory waterfowl. The 2040-acre Ashland Flats Wildlife Management Area provides wetland habitat

3-49

001394

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-10 Hawk Observations for the Braddock Bay1, Franklin Mountain2 and Derby Hill3 Bird Observatory: 20064
Braddock Bay Spring Spring 2006 2007 0 4671 1 20 89 49 43 4 187 0 419 37 5 44 0 1 0 3 157.75 5573 0 15097 150 267 1134 4060 889 26 750 24445 4384 278 55 544 46 14 1 0 378 52140 Franklin Mt. Fall Fall 2006 2007 0 393 121 121 70 573 115 8 115 774 2711 4 207 85 39 14 56 847.25 5406 0 483 140 141 109 835 162 25 93 1639 2146 10 164 89 38 25 0 61 516.42 6160 Derby Hill Spring Spring 2006 2007 1 11375 503 363 474 2706 349 29 578 9442 4859 251 41 216 33 11 1 39 485.6 31271 2 8291 365 244 590 2413 413 16 363 8349 3366 254 47 325 39 9 0 21 444.25 25107

Common Name Black Vulture Turkey Vulture Osprey

Scientific Name Coragyps atratus Cathartes aura Pandion haliaeetus

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus Cooper's Hawk Accipiter cooperi Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis Red-shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus Broad-winged Hawk Buteo platypterus Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis Rough-legged Hawk Buteo lagopus Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos American Kestrel Falco sparverius Merlin Falco columbarius Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainsoni Unknown Total Number of Hours Total Number of Individuals Observed
1 2

3 4

Located on the southern shore of Lake Ontario in the town of Greece, just outside of Rochester, NY. Located on the Delaware-Otsego Audubon Society Sanctuary, two miles south of Oneonta, NY, overlooking the Susquehanna River Valley, on the western edge of New York’s Catskill Mountains. Located on the southeastern shore of Lake Ontario in Oswego County. Source: Hawk Migration Association of North America (2006-2007). Hawkcount Results [Online].

used by waterfowl for nesting and feeding cover. Mallards, wood ducks, blue-winged teals, American black ducks, Canada geese and to a lesser extent, ring ducks, green-winged teals,gadwalls, American widgeons, and hooded mergansers use these areas as migratory stopovers (Northern Ecological Associates, 1994; Losito, 1993). Other migratory waterfowl documented in the region, include snow goose, northern pintails, northern shoveler, American coot, bufflehead, common merganser, lesser scaup, canvasback and goldeneye. Surveys for migrating birds within the Project Area were conducted in 2006 and included spring and fall radar surveys for nocturnal avian migrants, and spring and fall surveys for migrant raptors (see Appendix E – Avian and Bat Studies). The objective of these surveys was to record and estimate the use of the site by migrant raptors, other diurnal migrants (i.e. waterfowl), and other large birds possibly utilizing this migration corridor. Point counts, as prescribed by the

3-50

001395

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Hawk Mountain Association of North America (HMANA), were conducted by observers continuously scanning the sky and surrounding areas for raptors in the survey area (see Appendix E Section 3.2.1 – Avian and Bat Studies). The timing of these surveys was determined in consultation with the NYSDEC and based on available raptor migration watch stations in northern and western New York. Three fixed survey points were located within the proposed project area to provide comprehensive east-west coverage of the project area while minimizing the potential double counting of individual birds. Also, these points represented a cross-section of landforms found in the proposed development area. Each survey point was surveyed once each survey day during the hours of 0700-1700, these hours being considered the peak period for observing migrating raptors. Sampling intensity was designed to document raptor migration through the project area. Flight height was used to calculate a relative index of exposure for each species. Survey dates and times were selected to maximize the possible observations for migrating raptors. Therefore, it is likely that if more survey hours were conducted, the average numbers of individuals observed would be reduced. A total of 12 surveys during the spring of 2006 resulted in the observation of 1581 individual birds, of which 91 were raptors representing 9 species. Spring 2006 raptor passage rates were 7.5 birds per observer-hour. The fall 2006 season surveys (30 total) resulted in the observation of 8521 birds, of which 288 were raptors representing 9 species. Fall 2006 raptor passage rates were 9.6 birds per observer-hour. During the spring of 2007, there were 21 surveys resulting in the observation of 2666 individual birds, of which 232 represented 8 species of raptors. Spring 2007 raptor passage rates were 15.4 birds per observer-hour. A total of 12,768 individual large birds, of which 611 individual raptors represented 13 species, were recorded during all surveys. Canada goose and unidentified gull species were the most commonly recorded bird during the surveys. Turkey vultures were the most common recorded raptor species during all spring surveys. During the fall surveys, northern harrier was the most commonly observed species. Other raptor species observed include broad-winged hawk, red-tailed hawk, rough-legged hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, Cooper’s hawk, osprey, American kestrel, merlin, and bald eagle (see Appendix E – Avian and Bat Studies, see Section 3.2.2 Table 1). For raptors, turkey vulture had the highest exposure index due to higher use estimates. Results of the raptor migration studies indicate that the number of migrant raptors passing through the project area is significantly less than established hawk watch sites and similar to other wind sites studied in New York. Fall migrants observed in the vicinity of the Project are slightly higher than the average number of raptors observed at 18 wind facility locations studied throughout New York (Table 3-11). Similarly, birds per hour and number of species are also slightly higher than the average of 4.7 birds/hour and 7.7 species observed at these locations.

3-51

001396

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-11 (Sheet 1 of 2) Raptor Migration Data for Proposed Wind Sites in New York State 1
Dates Sampled Birds/hr Number of Days Number of Hours Sampled Turbine Height 21 12 58 21 60 (21) 2 (21) 2 60 (60) 2 60 52.5 20 (21) 2 21 37 20 35.3 30 63.5 24 60 (21) 2 (21) 2 234.7 65 73 40 288 575 42 217 0 0 629 369 220 131 9.6 9.1 1.6 3.62 0 0 (2.7) 2 5.68 3.01 3.27 10 13 5 15 0 0 12 14 10 10 (89.7%) 89% 31% 69% 0 0 (67%) 2 51% 62% 63%
2

Location

Total Number of Individuals 232 91 700 47 170 0 0 375 314 164 260 50 19 5 119 177 170.2 125 m 150 m 400 ft 120 m n/a n/a 125 m 118 m 125 m 125 m 15.4 7.5 12.1 1.9 2.83 0 0 6.25 5.23 2.73 4.95 (2.5) 2 (0.9) 2 0.1 3.2 9 4.7 8 8 14 12 11 3 1 4 1 12 15 11 11 6 4 3 7 8 8.1 not calc 2 (80.5%) 61% 3% 76% not calc not calc 78% 83% 77% 64% (94.7%) 2,5 not calc not calc not calc (84.5%) 2,5 125 m 125 m 150 m 400 ft 120 m n/a n/a 118 m 125 m 125 m 125 m 125 m n/a n/a n/a 125 m

Number of Species Seen Percent Below Turbine Survey Times

Year

Spring Cape Vincent, Jefferson County Cape Vincent, Jefferson County Clayton, Jefferson County Chateaugay, Franklin County Marble River, Clinton County Altona, Clinton County Clinton/Ellenburg, Clinton County West Hill, Madison County Windfarm Prattsburgh, Steuben Co. Cohocton, Steuben County Howard, Steuben County Dairy Hills, Wyoming County Bliss, Wyoming County Wethersfield, Wyoming County High Sheldon, Wyoming County Alabama, Genesee County Spring Mean Fall Cape Vincent, Jefferson County Clayton, Jefferson County Chateaugay, Franklin County Marble River, Clinton County Altona, Clinton County Clinton/Ellenburg, Clinton County Jordanville, Herkimer County West Hill, Madison County Windfarm Prattsburgh, Steuben Co. Cohocton, Steuben County 3/21-5/1 4/14-5/12 3/30-5/7 4/19-4/28 4/5-5/6 5/4-5/6 4/18-4/20 4/5-5/16 not reported not reported 4/3-5/14 4/15-4/26 4/21-4/28 4/22-4/29 4/2-5/14 4/16-4/29 7 4 10 3 10 3 3 10 10 10 9 5 3 3 7 5 6.4 10 11 4 10 3 3 44 11 13 7 9/23-11/11 9/9-10/16 9/16-10/26 9/6-11/2 9/24-9/30 9/23-9/28 10/13-11/30 9/6-10/31 not reported not reported

9-5 9-5 9-3 9-4 9-3 9-4 9-4 9-3 not reported ~9-3 9-3 9-3 9-4 9-4 9-5 9-3

2007 2006 2005 2006 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005

9-5 9-3 9-4 9-3 9-4 9-4 ~7:30-3 9-3 not reported ~9-3

2006 2005 2006 2005 2005 2005 2006 2005 2004 2005

3-52

001397

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-11 (Sheet 2 of 2) Raptor Migration Data for Proposed Wind Sites in New York State
Dates Sampled Birds/hr Number of Days Number of Hours Sampled Turbine Height 41 57 16 (21) 2 (21?) 2 21 53.5 19 49 128 206 48 0 231 0 168 148 189 3.1 3.6 (3) 2 0 9.7 0 3.1 8 3.8 8 12 6 0 11 0 9 4 7.7 80% 85% (94.7%) 2,5 0 27% 0 not calc (84.5%) 2,5 125 m 125 m 125 m n/a 400 ft n/a n/a 125 m Total Number of Individuals Number of Species Seen Percent Below Turbine Survey Times Year

Location

Fall Cohocton, Steuben County Howard, Steuben County Dairy Hills, Wyoming County Bliss, Wyoming County Wethersfield, Wyoming County Wethersfield, Wyoming County High Sheldon, Wyoming County Alabama, Genesee County Fall Mean not reported 9/1-10/28 9/11-10/10 9/12-9/17 9/21-11/1 9/13-9/18 8/29-11/4 9/11-10/10 8 10 4 3 3 3 8 5 8.9

~9-3 9-3 9-3 9-4 9-4 9-4 9-5 9-3

2004 2005 2005 2005 2006 2005 2005 2005

1

Source: New York State Department of Environmental Protection 10/1/07

2

(#) = value not reported in results, calculated by DEC based on report text and tables

3

Four turkey vultures were observed but not deemed migratory; not included in overall mean calculation

4

Two broad-winged hawks were observed but not deemed migratory; not included in overall mean calculation

5

Calculated for spring and fall combined

3-53

001398

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.3.4.2 Potential Impact

It is not anticipated that Project construction will have significant impacts on migratory birds. The landscape of the coastline around Cape Vincent would require raptors that are following the lake shore to move westward before continuing on a northerly heading. It is highly likely that raptors that have moved through the Derby Hill area continue on a northerly track and pass east of the Project Area. It is also likely that raptors migrating through the Cape Vincent area are more dispersed due to fewer topographic features and land forms that could concentrate raptor movement. However, during operation of the Project, there is a potential that migratory birds could collide with wind turbines. Although this presents a potential risk for migrating raptors, it is not expected to impact the raptor species that have been observed in the area because of their relatively low abundance and exposure index. Post construction mortality studies conducted at 12 wind facilities throughout the nation indicate a national avian mortality rate of 2.3 birds per turbine per year (birds/turbine/year) (National Wind Coordinating Collaborative, 2004). Two thirds of fatalities documented during post construction mortality monitoring studies were estimated to be migrants. Using this mortality rate, a total mortality of 122 birds/year is estimated. When considering results from only wind facilities located in the eastern U.S. region, the calculated average avian mortality rate is reported as 4.3 birds/turbine/year. This mortality rate would result in an estimate total mortality for the Project of 228 birds/year. On a more local level, first year post-construction mortality monitoring conducted at the Maple Ridge Wind Farm, a wind facility located approximately 40 miles southeast of the Project, indicates avian mortality ranged from 3.1 to 9.6 birds/turbine/year (Jain et al. 2007). Using these mortality rates, a total mortality of between 164 and 509 birds/year is estimated. Based on the results of these studies, total avian mortality impacts at the St. Lawrence Windpower Project are likely to range between 122 to 509 birds/year. However, on an annual basis, fatalities resulting from collisions with wind turbines represent a small fraction of all bird fatalities related to collision with human structures. Collisions with windows and buildings (97,600,000 to 976,000,000 birds per year) and automobiles (60,000,000 to 80,000,000 birds per year) are major sources of avian mortality (Erickson et al., 2001). Based on avian studies conducted within the proposed Project Area, raptors in general do not have high risk for collision due to either low recorded numbers or flight height outside of the rotor swept zone. Turkey vultures are at the highest risk since they were commonly observed, most often in the rotor swept zone. However, while occasionally recorded as fatalities at other wind facilities, the number of turkey vulture fatalities at other wind energy projects is lower than for other raptor species, and turkey vulture fatalities have not been recorded at other wind energy projects as often as would be predicted based on the use or exposure index. (Erickson et al.,

3-54

001399

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

2001, 2002) The National Wind Coordinating Collaborative’s 2004 study also summarized raptor fatality rates at the same 12 nationwide wind energy facilities. This study estimated a national average raptor mortality rate of 0.15 raptors/turbine/year. Using this fatality rate, estimated total raptor mortality for the Project would be approximately 8 raptors/year. The calculated average raptor mortality rate for eastern facilities only is reported as 0.02 raptors/turbine/year. This fatality rate would result in estimated total raptor mortality for the Project of approximately 1 raptor/year. Using results obtained from the Maple Ridge Wind Farm first year post-construction mortality monitoring, raptor mortality (including turkey vultures) represented only 3 percent of total fatalities. Applying this to fatality rates recorded, a total raptor mortality of between 5 and 15 raptors/year is estimated. Based on results from these studies, the Saint Lawrence Windpower Project raptor mortality is likely to range between 1 to 15 raptors/year. Total number of individual birds, number of birds per hour and number of species observed in the Project vicinity are similar to the average numbers for 18 wind facilities studied in the state (Table 3-11). SLW will conduct an operational (post-construction) monitoring program to confirm direct and indirect impacts of the wind farm on birds (Appendix E – Post-Construction Monitoring Plan). This will include an estimate of direct impacts of the operating project in terms of mortality rates of birds caused by collisions with the wind turbines and an estimate of the potential avoidance effects of the wind project on migrant raptors. The pre-construction raptor migration surveys will be repeated during the first year of operation to (1) estimate the spatial and temporal use of the site by migrant raptors, other diurnal migrants (e.g. waterfowl, corvids), and other large birds, (2) compare post-construction use estimates to pre-construction use estimates, and (3) to associate fatality rates to avian use to understand relative risk of collision.
3.3.4.3 Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

SLW has selected the proposed Project layout to minimize impacts to sensitive receptors, including migrating birds. Impacts associated with migratory bird collision mortality with wind turbines have been mitigated by spacing turbines the maximum distance apart, placing electrical collection lines between turbines and the collector substation underground rather than above ground, and implementing the minimum FAA safety lighting requirements. Any necessary above ground power lines will follow the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (http://www.aplic.org) suggested practices for protecting avian species. Although significant bird mortality is not anticipated, the Project will implement a postconstruction avian fatality monitoring program to document impacts. Though the postconstruction monitoring program will not provide mitigation for this Project, information

3-55

001400

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

obtained may be used to modify the design of future wind energy facilities to further minimize impacts to birds and bats.
3.3.5 Breeding Birds

3.3.5.1 Affected Environment

The Saint Lawrence River Valley’s wetlands and grasslands provide habitat to a diverse collection of breeding birds. Waterfowl are important wildlife resources in Jefferson County and the Saint Lawrence River Valley provides nesting habitat for numerous species including: mallard, American black duck, wood duck, green-winged teal, northern pintail and Canada goose. It supports the highest density of breeding mallards in the Atlantic Flyway with a population of nearly 15,000 pairs (Losito, 1993; Northern Ecological Associates, 1994). The Valley is also a priority area for its obligate grassland-breeding bird habitat. It supports 17 percent of the global population of bobolinks (Wells, 2000). Other important grassland species known to nest in the Valley include grasshopper sparrow, upland sandpiper, Henslow’s sparrow, savannah sparrow and eastern meadowlark. Wild turkeys also inhabit the northern part of the County along the Jefferson County/St. Lawrence County border. Song birds are common throughout the County and vary with habitat. Based on results of the 2006 USGS Breeding Bird Surveys (BBS) for three survey routes located within the Project vicinity (Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61116)), 131 species are known to breed in the Project Area (Table 3-12). However, the total number of species observed along individual routes varies between 104 and 117. The most numerous species encountered included: red-winged blackbirds, ring-billed gulls, European starlings, American robins, song sparrows, American crows, yellow warblers and bobolinks. During June and July of 2006, SLW conducted breeding bird surveys for the Project Area (see Appendix E – Avian and Bat Studies). The objective of the breeding bird survey was to estimate the spatial and temporal use of the proposed project area by breeding birds. Survey dates were based on the regional timing recommendations for USGS BBS in upstate New York, (USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, 2001). Twenty survey points were selected to be representative of habitats found across the proposed Project Area. All birds observed were recorded. Point count surveys were repeated twice per day on June 30 and July 7, 2006. A total of 1080 individual birds representing 59 species were observed in 425 groups (see Table 3-13 and Appendix E – Avian and Bat Studies). European Starling, red-winged blackbird, and bobolink

3-56

001401

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-12 (Sheet 1 of 4) Number of Birds/Route Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Number of Birds/Route Ogdensburg 0.05 0.16 ----0.21 2.26 1.74 ----0.26 3.63 0.68 ----2.63 0.16 ----0.16 ----0.37 ----0.79 1.89 ----0.16 0.21 0.05 0.16 0.05 0.05 10.89 0.05 0.21 7.26 ----52.95 ----26.16 7.58 0.79 ----1

Common Name Common Loon Double-crested Cormorant Pied-billed Grebe American Bittern Great Blue Heron Green Heron Black-crn. Night Heron Turkey Vulture Canada Goose Wood Duck American Black Duck Mallard Blue-winged Teal Hooded Merganser Northern Goshawk Sharp-shinned Hawk Northern Harrier Broad-winged hawk Red-tailed Hawk American Kestrel Gray Partridge Ring-necked Pheasant Ruffed Grouse Wild Turkey Virginia Rail Sora Common Moorhen Killdeer Spotted Sandpiper Upland Sandpiper Common Snipe American Woodcock Ring-billed Gull Herring Gull Rock Dove Mourning Dove Black-billed Cuckoo Yellow-billed Cuckoo

Scientific Name Gavia immer Phalacrocorax auritus Podilymbus podiceps Botaurus lentiginosus Ardea herodias Butorides virescens Nycticorax nycticorax Cathartes aura Branta canadensis Aix sponsa Anas rubripes Anas platyrhynchos Anas discors Lophodytes cucullatus Accipiter gentilis Accipiter striatus Circus cyaneus Buteo platypterus Buteo jamaicensis Falco sparverius Perdix perdix Phasianus colchicus Bonasa umbellus Meleagris gallopavo Rallus limicola Porzana carolina Gallinula chloropus Charadrius vociferus Actitis macularia Bartramia longicauda Gallinago gallinago Scolopax minor Larus delawarensis Larus argentatus Columba livia Zenaida macroura Coccyzus erythropthalmus Coccyzus americanus

Watertown --------0.05 1.16 9.26 0.79 0.05 0.47 2.53 0.26 0.26 1.37 ----------------0.21 ----0.42 0.63 0.11 0.74 0.11 0.05 0.05 ----0.05 11.63 0.42 0.26 1.05 ----155.74 0.11 43.89 17 1.26 0.16

Philadelphia 0.21 0.11 0.05 0.26 6.00 0.42 2.79 1.05 1.05 0.11 1.74 0.21 0.05 ----0.05 0.26 0.05 0.42 0.74 ----0.05 ----0.53 0.21 0.05 0.11 5.79 0.05 0.26 3.53 0.05 5.05 ----10.37 7.00 1.00 0.05

3-57

001402

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-12 (Sheet 2 of 4) Number of Birds/Route Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Common Name Eastern Screech-Owl Great Horned Owl Common Nighthawk Chimney Swift Ruby-thr. Hummingbird Belted Kingfisher Red-headed Woodpecker Red-bellied Woodpecker Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Downy Woodpecker Hairy Woodpecker Northern Flicker Pileated Woodpecker Eastern Wood-Pewee Alder Flycatcher Willow Flycatcher Willow/Alder Flycatcher Least Flycatcher Eastern Phoebe Grt. Crested Flycatcher Eastern Kingbird Loggerhead Shrike Yellow-throated Vireo Blue-headed Vireo Warbling Vireo Red-eyed Vireo Blue Jay American Crow Common Raven Horned Lark Purple Martin Tree Swallow N. Rough-winged Swallow Bank Swallow Cliff Swallow Barn Swallow Black-capped Chickadee White-breasted Nuthatch House Wren Winter Wren Sedge Wren Scientific Name Otus asio Bubo virginianus Chordeiles minor Chaetura pelagica Archilochus colubris Ceryle alcyon Melanerpes erythrocephalus Melanerpes carolinus Sphyrapicus varius Picoides pubescens Picoides villosus Colaptes spp. Dryocopus pileatus Contopus virens Empidonax alnorum Empidonax traillii Empidonax spp. Empidonax minimus Sayornis phoebe Myiarchus crinitus Tyrannus tyrannus Lanius ludovicianus Vireo flavifrons Vireo solitarius Vireo gilvus Vireo olivaceus Cyanocitta cristata Corvus brachyrhynchos Corvus corax Eremophila alpestris Progne subis Tachycineta bicolor Stelgidopteryx serripennis Riparia riparia Petrochelidon pyrrhonota Hirundo rustica Poecile atricapillus Sitta carolinensis Troglodytes aedon Troglodytes troglodytes Cistothorus platensis 0.11 0.11 ----2.63 0.11 0.47 0.11 0.05 ----1.42 0.05 3.47 0.05 6.16 5.00 10.37 15.37 3.63 4.68 2.74 5.89 ----0.21 ----15.37 5.68 3.53 35.68 ----3.68 1.63 8.79 0.21 7.37 ----19.11 5.63 0.16 13.63 0.05 ----Number of Birds/Route --------0.11 0.95 0.11 0.47 ------------0.68 0.11 3.16 0.26 4.84 2.32 0.89 3.21 1.32 3.68 1.95 5.32 0.16 0.32 ----8.26 4.58 4.68 38.21 ----0.42 0.84 9.95 0.21 5.58 0.05 16.89 2.32 0.32 11.11 ----0.16 ------------1.32 ----0.79 ----0.05 0.11 0.68 0.16 2.21 0.42 3.47 1.26 0.74 2.00 1.37 4.84 1.53 8.16 0.05 1.53 0.05 8.05 9.58 5.26 32.79 0.21 0.11 0.53 7.58 0.21 0.21 1.68 26.89 5.95 1.79 10.89 0.16 0.21
1

3-58

001403

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-12 (Sheet 3 of 4) Number of Birds/Route1 Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Common Name Marsh Wren Eastern Bluebird Veery Hermit Thrush Wood Thrush American Robin Gray Catbird Northern Mockingbird Brown Thrasher European Starling Cedar Waxwing Blue-winged Warbler Golden-winged Warbler Nashville Warbler Yellow Warbler Chestnut-sided Warbler Yellow-rumped Warbler Black-thr. Green Warbler Pine Warbler Cerulean Warbler Black-and-white Warbler American Redstart Ovenbird Northern Waterthrush Common Yellowthroat Yellow-breasted Chat Canada Warbler Scarlet Tanager Eastern Towhee Chipping Sparrow Field Sparrow Vesper Sparrow Savannah Sparrow Grasshopper Sparrow Henslow's Sparrow Song Sparrow Swamp Sparrow White-throated Sparrow Dark-eyed Junco Northern Cardinal Rose-breasted Grosbeak Scientific Name Cistothorus palustris Sialia sialis Catharus fuscescens Catharus guttatus Hylocichla mustelina Turdus migratorius Dumetella carolinensis Mimis polyglottos Toxostoma rufum Sturnus vulgaris Bombycilla cedrorum Vermivora pinus Vermivora chrysoptera Vermivora ruficapilla Dendroica petechia Dendroica pensylvanica Dendroica coronata Dendroica virens Dendroica pinus Dendrocia cerulean Mniotilta varia Setophaga ruticilla Seiurus aurocapillus Seiurus noveboracensis Geothlypis trichas Icteria virens Wilsonia canadensis Piranga olivacea Pipilo erythrophthalmus Spizella passerina Spizella pusilla Pooecetes gramineus Passerculus sandwichensis Ammodramus savannarum Ammodramus henslowii Melospiza melodia Melospiza georgiana Zonotrichia albicollis Junco hyemalis Cardinalis cardinalis Pheucticus ludovicianus 0.11 0.11 3.42 ----8.74 56.26 6.63 ----1.32 111.63 10.37 0.11 0.16 0.05 33.05 5.32 0.05 0.11 0.05 ----1.00 2.47 0.89 0.05 29.89 ----0.11 0.58 3.42 12.32 3.84 1.32 35.11 1.42 0.42 40.89 3.58 0.32 ----2.63 2.11 Number of Birds/Route 0.05 0.42 2.16 ----4.21 43.26 4.89 ----2.47 34.89 4.11 ----0.11 0.05 39.11 1.42 0.05 0.05 0.26 ----1.47 2.47 1.11 ----20.05 0.05 ----0.32 2.74 8.84 2.89 0.26 12.42 --------39.63 1.84 1.37 ----1.84 4.26 3.32 0.26 0.95 0.21 5.05 47.89 6.58 0.16 2.37 21.26 4.89 0.05 2.21 ----32.32 2.26 0.11 0.32 0.42 0.16 2.84 4.37 2.89 0.68 30.37 --------2.05 9.79 11.37 7.79 0.05 12.26 ----0.05 31.11 6.84 0.37 0.21 0.74 4.58

3-59

001404

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-12 (Sheet 4 of 4) Number of Birds/Route Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Common Name Indigo Bunting Bobolink Red-winged Blackbird Eastern Meadowlark Common Grackle Brown-headed Cowbird Baltimore Oriole Purple Finch House Finch American Goldfinch House Sparrow Total Number of Species
1

1

Scientific Name Passerina cyanea Dolichonyx oryzivorus Agelaius phoeniceus Sturnella magna Quiscalus quiscula Molothrus ater Icterus galbula Carpodacus purpureus Carpodacus mexicanus Carduelis tristis Passer domesticus 0.79 36.00 166.05 25.47 35.00 10.84 10.47 0.05 4.00 35.05 27.32 110

Number of Birds/Route 2.11 28.32 74.47 21.84 14.42 5.68 5.47 0.26 0.37 13.58 27.84 104 8.21 27.00 86.63 23.84 16.63 4.84 3.16 0.26 1.05 17.58 15.74 117

Based on 50 stops per route, 3-minute counts per stop, and representing the averages of the total counts along the route for the period 1966-2005. Source: Sauer et al. (2005), United States Geological Survey. 1966-2005 North American Breeding Bird Survey Database [Online]. 3 The Watertown route is located approximately 10 miles southeast of the Project Area; the Ogdensburg route is located approximately 20 miles northeast; and the Philadelphia route is located approximately 30 miles east.
2

Table 3-13 (Sheet 1 of 3) Avian Species Observed During Project Breeding Bird Surveys
Species/Group Waterbirds Great Blue heron Green heron Ring-billed gull Unidentified gull Waterfowl Canada goose Mallard Shorebirds Killdeer Raptors/Vultures American kestrel Northern harrier Turkey vulture Passerines American crow 53 11 1.325
T

1

Number of Individuals 4 1 47 38 27 2 16 2 4 4 9

Number of Groups 4 1 6 2 4 1 10 2 3 3 7

Mean Use

0.1 0.025 1.175 0.95 0.675 0.05 0.4 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.225

Red-tailed hawk

3-60

001405

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-13 (Sheet 2 of 3) Avian Species Observed During Project Breeding Bird Surveys
Species/Group Passerines American goldfinch American robin Baltimore oriole Barn swallow Black-capped chickadee Bluejay BobolinkBCC Brown-headed cowbird Cedar waxwing Chestnut-sided warbler Common grackle Common yellowthroat Eastern bluebird Eastern kingbird Eastern meadowlark Eastern towhee Eastern tufted titmouse Eastern wood peewee Empidonax spp. European starling Grasshopper sparrowSC Gray catbird Horned lark
SC

Number of Individuals 23 30 6 23 5 2 76 11 4 1 29 29 2 4 32 1 1 5 1 235 1 6 6 3 1 2 11 7 136 1 37 2 48 13 1 1 1 4 6 31

Number of Groups 15 25 3 6 3 2 32 4 1 1 3 20 2 3 28 1 1 5 1 19 1 5 2 3 1 1 11 7 49 1 26 2 35 3 1 1 1 4 5 18

Mean Use

0.575 0.75 0.15 0.575 0.125 0.05 1.9 0.275 0.1 0.025 0.725 0.725 0.05 0.1 0.8 0.025 0.025 0.125 0.025 5.875 0.025 0.15 0.15 0.075 0.025 0.05 0.275 0.175 3.4 0.025 0.925 0.05 1.2 0.325 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.1 0.15 0.775

House wren Indigo bunting Northern cardinal Ovenbird Red-eyed vireo Red-winged blackbird Rose-breasted grosbeak Savannah sparrow Scarlet tanager Song sparrow Tree swallow Unidentified passerine Unidentified sparrow Veery Willow flycatcher Wood thrush
BCC

Yellow warbler

3-61

001406

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-13 (Sheet 3 of 3) Avian Species Observed During Project Breeding Bird Surveys
Species/Group Upland Gamebirds Ruffed grouse Wild turkey Doves Mourning dove Rock pigeon Other Birds Hairy woodpecker Northern flicker Unidentified woodpecker
1

Number of Individuals 1 4 10 14 1 2 3

Number of Groups 1 1 6 5 1 2 3

Mean Use

0.025 0.1 0.25 0.35 0.025 0.05 0.075

T=State Threatened, SC=State Species of Concern, BCC=USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern

were the most common passerines observed. Most of the observed species are associated with agricultural, grasslands, and/or edge habitat. The northern harrier, a NYS threatened species; the horned lark and grasshopper sparrow, NYS species of concern; and bobolink and wood thrush, USFWS 2002 Birds of Conservation Concern, were recorded during the surveys.
3.3.5.2 Potential Impact

Construction and operation of the proposed Project will likely result in minor, temporary impacts to breeding birds. During construction, clearing and work activities in open habitats will temporarily displace nesting and foraging individuals from the work area and suitable adjacent habitats. Approximately 41 acres of pasture/hay fields, which represent much less than one percent (approximately 0.003 percent) of pasture/hay fields in the Town of Cape Vincent, may be displaced by Project infrastructure. Similarly, 17 acres of second growth deciduous forest (approximately 0.001 percent of forested cover in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme) will be cleared for the Project. Of this total, less than 1 acre will be permanently cleared for Project infrastructure and 16 acres will be temporarily cleared for construction. This will result in minor temporary and permanent habitat loss for some forest-nesting avian species. However, unlike most of the northeast where forest habitats remain a high priority, grasslands are more important in the St. Lawrence River Valley and forested areas temporarily disturbed will be initially converted to grassland habitats. Some grassland species may be disturbed or displaced by turbine noise and movement. Studies have shown small scale reductions in density for some nesting grassland bird species close to operating wind turbines (Leddy et al. 1999, Johnson et al. 2000). In general, use by grassland birds was lower in areas with turbines than in areas without. At Buffalo Ridge, Montana, areas 3-62

001407

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

located 180 meters from wind turbines support higher densities of breeding birds than areas within 80 meters of turbines. As previously discussed in Section 3.3.4, it is expected that impacts at the St. Lawrence Windpower Project will be similar to other wind projects; therefore, avian mortality is likely to range between 122 to 509 birds/year. There is a low potential risk that local breeding birds could collide with the wind turbines. This risk is expected to be very low for most of the grassland species, since breeding individuals typically fly well below tree level. Two thirds of fatalities documented during post construction mortality monitoring studies were estimated to be migrants. Migrants typically fly at heights approximating the wind-swept area of a commercial wind turbine while foraging breeding birds, by contrast, are typically flying at lower altitudes; therefore, risk to breeding birds is expected to be low. The risk is slightly higher for nesting species such as red-tailed and broad-winged hawks, which fly above the tree heights, thereby increasing their risk of collision with turbines. This risk is, however, a small risk because these raptor species have a relatively low exposure index based on the one-year survey results (Appendix E – Avian and Bat Studies), and raptor mortality has been relatively low at other eastern wind projects that have been monitored (see Kerns and Kerlinger 2004, Nicholson 2002, 2003, Koford et al. 2005, Arnett et al. 2005, Jain et al. 2007). SLW will fund an operational (post-construction) monitoring program to estimate direct and indirect impacts of the wind farm on breeding grassland birds (Appendix E – Post-Construction Monitoring Plan). This will include an estimate of direct impacts of the operating project in terms of mortality rates of birds caused by collisions with wind turbines and an estimate of the potential displacement effects of the wind project on grassland birds. Pre-construction point count surveys for breeding birds were conducted in the Project Area during the 2006 baseline studies. Additional pre-construction surveys will be conducted in the year prior to construction, to identify a more current baseline. These surveys will then be repeated the first two years of operation, and at least one additional year (either third, fourth, or fifth years) to evaluate potential indirect impacts from the Project.
3.3.5.3 Mitigation Measures

The proposed Project will encourage continued farming activities in the area by supplementing area farmers’ incomes. This will also result in the maintenance of open grassland habitats since the regional climate favors a traditional late season harvest which is beneficial for grassland birds. The Project would result in grassland areas being protected from other development (i.e., housing developments) that might permanently eliminate grasslands in the area. Areas with

3-63

001408

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

grassland species nesting within or adjacent to proposed areas of construction will be avoided until after the breeding season to the extent practicable. Mitigation for habitat loss has been performed through siting Project components to minimize areas of disturbance and restoring all temporarily disturbed areas. All construction employees will receive training pertaining to sensitive environmental issues and known nesting areas on the site. A professional environmental monitor will provide expertise and guidance, and ensure the enforcement of environmental protection criteria outlined in the permits.
3.3.6 Over Wintering Birds

3.3.6.1 Affected Environment

The upper reaches of the St. Lawrence River is a known wintering location for bald eagles (NYSDEC, 2006c). The wintering site is located along the St. Lawrence River in an area roughly bound by Kingston, Ontario and Cape Vincent, New York on the southwest, and Cornwall, Ontario and Massena, New York on the northeast. Active since at least 1975, this wintering area is the second largest known in New York State and annually supports an average of 20 to 30 eagles. As lakes and rivers freeze, bald eagles that have bred in the northern parts of Canada move south to open water in search of food. In early winter, eagles can be spotted at Wellesley Island State Park along the edge of the ice or roosting in trees along the shoreline. As the River freezes, the eagles move further east to the Brockville Narrows or other open water. A waterfowl winter conservation area is located at Wilson Marsh along the eastern edge of Lake Ontario. This 305-acre area consists of open water up to 30 feet deep with flat rock, sand, or gravel on the bottom. A gravel barrier beach at the head of the bay separates it from the marsh, which consists of 98 acres of brushy swamp and 70 acres of mixed hardwood swamp. This area is located at the southwest corner of the Project Area. AWMA, located in the Town of Lyme along the proposed overhead transmission line, supports year round waterfowl habitat. Specifically, Shaver Creek and a number of pothole wetlands provide habitat used by waterfowl. A primary management goal at this 2040-acre AWMA is to increase the amount of waterfowl nesting and feeding cover. Results of the Audubon Christmas Bird Counts for the Watertown count circle, conducted December 2004 through January 2005 and December 2005 through January 2006, indicated that 55 species of birds over wintered in the Project vicinity during that two year period (Table 3-14).

3-64

001409

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-14 (Sheet 1 of 2) Birds Observed During Audubon Christmas Bird Counts for Watertown, NY (NYWA) 1 for Count Years 105 and 106 (12/2004-1/2005 and 12/2005-1/2006)
Survey Date Common Name Snow Goose Canada Goose Tundra Swan American Black Duck Mallard Greater Scaup Long-tailed Duck Common Goldeneye Hooded Merganser Common Merganser Ring-necked Pheasant Ruffed Grouse Wild Turkey Great Blue Heron (Blue form) Bald Eagle Northern Harrier Sharp-shinned Hawk Cooper's Hawk Accipiter sp. Red-tailed Hawk Rough-legged Hawk American Kestrel Ring-billed Gull Herring Gull Great Black-backed Gull Rock Pigeon Mourning Dove Red-bellied Woodpecker Downy Woodpecker Hairy Woodpecker Northern Flicker Pileated Woodpecker Northern Shrike Blue Jay American Crow Common Raven Horned Lark Black-capped Chickadee Tufted Titmouse Scientific name Chen caerulescens Branta canadensis Cygnus columbianus Anas rubripes Anas platyrhynchos Aythya marila Clangula hyemalis Bucephala clangula Lophodytes cucullatus Mergus merganser Phasianus colchicus Bonasa umbellus Meleagris gallopavo Ardea herodias Haliaeetus leucocephalus Circus cyaneus Accipiter striatus Accipiter cooperii Accipiter Buteo jamaicensis Buteo lagopus Falco sparverius Larus delawarensis Larus argentatus Larus marinus Columba livia Zenaida macroura Melanerpes carolinus Picoides pubescens Picoides villosus Colaptes auratus Dryocopus pileatus Lanius excubitor Cyanocitta cristata Corvus brachyrhynchos Corvus corax Eremophila alpestris Poecile atricapillus Baeolophus bicolor 18 Dec 2004 (41 hrs) 11 4523 -16 407 4 4 1 14 39 --93 -1 17 2 3 -52 13 1 34 38 14 547 284 2 15 6 -1 2 74 2601 1 55 227 1 28 Dec 2005 (31 hrs) -913 7 3 84 --170 -100 2 1 290 2 2 -2 3 1 84 11 3 11 17 12 1002 638 2 13 7 5 1 6 163 1330 4 120 206 --

3-65

001410

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-14 (Sheet 2 of 2) Birds Observed During Audubon Christmas Bird Counts for Watertown, NY (NYWA) 1 for Count Years 105 and 106 (12/2004-1/2005 and 12/2005-1/2006)
Survey Date 18 Dec 2004 28 Dec 2005 (41 hrs) (31 hrs) 1 1 18 18 -2 181 2 931 1672 32 -69 121 -3 14 20 -3 614 51 31 41 1 -1 -145 66 46 35 373 711 47 47

Common Name Red-breasted Nuthatch White-breasted Nuthatch Eastern Bluebird American Robin European Starling Cedar Waxwing American Tree Sparrow White-throated Sparrow Dark-eyed (Slate-colored) Junco Lapland Longspur Snow Bunting Northern Cardinal Red-winged Blackbird Brown-headed Cowbird House Finch American Goldfinch House Sparrow Total Number of Species
1

Scientific name Sitta Canadensis Sitta carolinensis Sialia sialis Turdus migratorius Sturnus vulgaris Bombycilla cedrorum Spizella arborea Zonotrichia albicollis Junco hyemalis Calcarius lapponicus Plectrophenax nivalis Cardinalis cardinalis Agelaius phoeniceus Molothrus ater Carpodacus mexicanus Carduelis tristis Passer domesticus

Source: National Audubon Society (2002). The Christmas Bird Count Historical Results [Online].

However, the number of individual species encountered varied from year to year with 47 species observed each year. Species observed included waterfowl, black birds and starling, and song birds. The most numerous species observed, all exceeding a total of 500 individuals, were Canada geese, American crows, European starlings, rock doves, and house sparrows. It is important to note that the Audubon Christmas Bird Counts were conducted in different areas than the Project Area surveys and reflect different years, locations, and habitats. However, they provide a general indication of birds that might be expected in the area absent site-specific data. Winter surveys were conducted for SLW in 2006-2008 within the proposed Project Area. All waterfowl and raptor observations were plotted for six fixed survey points (Appendix E – Avian and Bat Studies). In addition, other large birds such as waterbirds, upland game birds, and species of interest were also recorded during the surveys. Survey results are presented in Table 3-15. Mean use is calculated as the number of individuals observed within 800 meters of the survey point per 60-minute survey. Frequency of occurrence is calculated as the percent of surveys in which a species was observed.

3-66

001411

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-15 (Sheet 1 of 2) Raptor and Other Large Bird Species Observed During 2007 and 2008 Winter Waterfowl and Raptor Surveys at Project Area

2007 Percent Frequency Individuals 49 4 250 115 24 3 131 15 63 6 19 1 1 0.05 11 56 4 16 0.71 3.00 0.29 0.90 80.95 47.62 9.52 42.86 4.76 5 2 4 1 1 2 5.48 1.14 0.14 6.24 19.05 4.76 4.76 9.52 1932 14 235 45 2 216 4 2 2 1 0.19 11.90 9.52 4.76 4 2 37 6 1946 2 1 12 2 47 0.04 0.02 0.41 0.07 21.47 0.16 17 Groups Mean Use

2008 Percent Frequency 2.22 1.11 7.78 2.22 16.67 2.22

Species/Group

Individuals

Groups

Mean Use

Waterbirds

Great Black-backed Gull Herring Gull Ring-billed Gull Unidentified Gull Waterfowl

Canada Goose Mallard Tundra Swan Unidentified Scaup Common Merganser Raptors

Accipiters Coopers Hawk

0.02 0.01 0.01 0.80 1.27 0.17 0.13 0.02 11 4 11 4 0.12 0.04

2.22 1.11 1.11 52.22 68.89 13.33 10.00 2.22 12.22 4.44 1 1 201 72 114 15 12 2 15 1 1 185 62 109 14 10 2 15

Sharp-shinned Hawk Unidentified Accipiter Buteos Red-tailed Hawk Rough-legged Hawk Unidentified Buteo Northern Harrier Bald Eagle Falcons

American Kestrel Merlin

3-67

001412

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-15 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Raptor and Other Large Bird Species Observed During 2007 and 2008 Winter Waterfowl and Raptor Surveys at Project Area
2007 Individuals 8 21 129 1 70 37.62 0 1 146 6.14 0.05 85.71 4.76 3 1.00 14.29 3.43 3.58 0.01 3 0.38 4.76 0.06 Groups Mean Use Percent Frequency Individuals 5 Groups 4 Mean Use 2008 Percent Frequency 3.33 17.78 74.44 1.11

Species/Group Vultures 5 309 309 323 322 1 2867 4 16 16 117 116 1 417

Turkey Vulture Upland Gamebirds Wild Turkey Passerines American Crow Common Raven Total

3-68

001413

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

In comparison, a total of 2,230 individuals in 280 groups of waterbirds, waterfowl, and raptors were recorded during the 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 Audubon Christmas Bird Count surveys (Table 3-14), while Project surveys counted 2,867 individuals in 417 groups (Table 3-15). Four species of waterfowl (all gull species), five species of waterfowl, and ten species of raptors were observed during the Project surveys. Other large birds recorded included wild turkey, American crow, and common raven (Table 3-15). Canada goose was by far the most abundant and commonly observed waterfowl species recorded during the winter surveys. Rough-legged hawk and red-tailed hawk were the most abundant and common raptor species. Two state threatened species, northern harrier and bald eagle, and two state species of concern, Cooper's hawk and sharp-shinned hawk, were observed during the winter 2007-2008 surveys. In general, no concentrated raptor or waterfowl use or movements were seen in the study area. Flight paths and directions were generally scattered and ubiquitous and a few commonly used Buteo perch sites were observed. Numbers of waterfowl in the Project Area were consistent across the two years studied. Differences between species composition and numbers observed during the Audubon Christmas Bird Counts and the Project surveys are likely attributable to habitats present in areas surveyed. The Project survey results reflect the primarily agricultural land use (approximately 82 percent) in the Project Area, the Project’s proximity to the St. Lawrence River and species that are typically attracted to these habitats. The Project Area is included in an area that the NYSDEC routinely surveys for short-eared owls and their habitat. A site visit was conducted with NYSDEC personnel on February 22, 2008 to survey the project area for short-eared owls and identify the location of “roost” sites recorded during previous NYSDEC studies. No short-eared owls were observed during 2007-2008 site surveys or the February 2008 NYSDEC survey targeting short-eared owls (WEST, 2008). The lack of sightings of short-eared owls during these surveys does not necessarily indicate that these owls are not present but suggests that the density or relative abundance of this species in the study area is very low and the relative risk is also very low. Short-eared owls migrate or move to follow preferred prey species. When prey densities are low for a given area (which may fluctuate for any given area from year to year) the low prey densities are reflected in a lower than might be expected population of short-eared owls. Preservation of large areas of grassland habitat within the Project Area is likely to insure long-term use of the area by short-eared owls by preventing alternate development that would possibly eliminate much of their preferred habitat.
3.3.6.2 Potential Impact

Impacts to wintering birds, in particular waterfowl, are likely to be minimal. Most species of waterfowl forage in the open waters of the Saint Lawrence River and Lake Ontario, and roost in

3-69

001414

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

protected coves and wetlands along the shoreline. Impacts to wintering waterfowl are not expected to be significant due to the large numbers of geese in the region, the low occurrence of collision fatalities at other wind projects, and the relatively low abundance of other species of waterfowl in the Project Area. As discussed in Section 3.3.4, it is expected that impacts at the St. Lawrence Windpower Project will be similar to other wind projects; therefore, avian mortality is likely to range between 122 to 509 birds/year. Using results obtained from the Maple Ridge Wind Farm’s first year post-construction mortality monitoring, raptor mortality (including turkey vultures) represented only 3 percent of total fatalities and waterfowl represented less than 1 percent. Applying these percentages to fatality rates recorded, a total raptor mortality between 5 and 15 raptors/year and a total waterfowl mortality rate of between 1 and 5 waterfowl/year is expected. Although the proposed Project would increase collision risk for wintering red-tailed and roughlegged hawks over existing condition, impacts are not expected to be significant. These raptor species have a relatively low exposure index based on the one-year survey results (Kerns et al. 2007), and raptor mortality has been relatively low at other eastern wind projects that have been monitored (see Kerns and Kerlinger 2004, Nicholson 2002, 2003, Koford et al. 2005, Arnett et al. 2005, Jain et al. 2007). There is no information to suggest that winter raptor mortality would be greater at the proposed Project than at other wind projects studied with similar topography and associated migratory patterns. Furthermore, the Project landscape or topography does not have thermal-producing features that might create added risk for migrating raptor or wintering bird populations. Furthermore, the low densities of overwintering threatened species such as the golden eagle, bald eagle, and short-eared owl suggest that the relative risks to these species are very low. No significant impacts to these species are expected from the proposed Project.
3.3.6.3 Mitigation Measures

SLW has selected the proposed Project layout to minimize impacts to sensitive receptors including wintering roosting and foraging birds. In addition, any necessary above ground power lines in the will follow the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee suggested practices for protecting avian species (Avian Power Line Interaction Committee, 2006). No significant impacts to these species are expected from the proposed Project; therefore, no additional mitigation is required.

3-70

001415

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.3.7

Threatened and Endangered Species

3.3.7.1 Affected Environment

A December 2006 response (see Appendix F) from the New York State Natural Heritage Program (NHP) regarding the presence of threatened or endangered species and unique or significant natural communities indicated that three endangered, eight threatened, and three special concern bird species; one endangered and one special concern bat species; one threatened turtle species; one rare fish species, and two endangered plants species occur near the Project (Table 3-16). In addition, a search of the USFWS Jefferson County list of Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species; and the List of Extirpated Species was conducted in October 2007 and December 2008. Search results indicated that the bald eagle (formerly threatened), the Indiana bat (endangered) and Designated Critical Habitat for the Great Lakes population of piping plover (endangered) are currently documented in Jefferson County (see Appendix F). Federal Species: Additional consultation with the USFWS revealed that a hibernaculum for the Indiana bat is located approximately 17 miles southeast of the proposed Project Area. Multiple Indiana Bat spring/ summer roosts have also been documented within ten miles of the Project Area. Bald eagles are known to nest approximately 14 miles for the Project and winter along the St. Lawrence River between Cape Vincent and Massena. Common tern have been documented in the Wilson Bay Marsh located west of the Project Area; the short-eared owl has been documented in the Dutch Point Uplands southwest of the Project Area; and the great blue heron has been documented in Kents Creek also west of the Project (Payne and Cochran, 1972). The northern harrier has been documented at all three locations as well and within the Project Site (WEST, 2007). Designated critical habitat for the endangered piping plover is located in the coastal areas of Lake Ontario in southern Jefferson County. This habitat is limited to sandy shorelines bordering the Lake. Also, two species of conservation concern (USFWS, 2002), bobolinks and wood thrushes were observed during pre-construction surveys. In July and August 2007, WEST, Inc. sampled six mist net sites on the proposed Project Site location to assess the presence or absence of the federally endangered Indiana bat (Appendix E – 2007 Sampling at Six Sites). Three hundred and fifty-three bats of six species were captured, including four Indiana bats which were subsequently radio tracked. One adult male was never relocated, two juvenile males were tracked to a maternity concentration in a forested area south of the Project Site, and one adult female was tracked to a different area in the same forested complex as the two juvenile males. In June of 2008 WEST sampled 11 mist net sites on the proposed Project Site (Appendix E – 2008 Sampling at 11 Sites). One hundred and eighty-five bats of four species were captured; however, no Indiana bats were captured during this sampling

3-71

001416

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-16 (Sheet 1 of 2) Summary of Listed Species Reported in the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Database

Common Name Vascular Plants Lilium michiganense Callitriche hermaphroditica Endangered (St.) NHP Yes Yes Endangered (St.) NHP Yes Yes

Scientific Name

Status (State/Federal) Source

Suitable Habitat On Project Site?¹

Suitable Habitat in Project Area?¹

Suitable Habitat in Project Area?¹ Wet meadows, floodplain forests, swamps Lakes and streams

Michigan Lily

Autumnal WaterStarwort Fish Carpiodes cyprinus S2-Imperiled (NHP listing) NHP No Yes Threatened (St.) NHP Yes Yes

Quillback

Rivers and lakes

Reptiles Emydoidea blandingii Shrub swamps, marshes, and shallow ponds Yes Yes Yes Yes NHP NHP NHP NHP NHP No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Marshes, grasslands and croplands Yes No Freshwater marshes Agricultural areas Grasslands and rocky inland shores NHP Marshes Grasslands Agriculture fields, grasslands Lakes, rivers, reservoirs Streams, ponds, lakes, marshes

Blanding’s Turtle2

Birds3 Asio flammeus Chlidonias niger Lanius ludovicianus Sterna hirundo Ixobrychus exilis Bartramia longicauda Circus cyaneus Haliaeetus leucocephalus Podilymbus podiceps Threatened (St.) Threatened (St.) Threatened (St.) Threatened (St.) Threatened (St.) Threatened (St.) Endangered (St.) NHP Endangered (St.) NHP Endangered (St.) NHP

Short-eared owl

Black Tern

Loggerhead Shrike

Common Tern

Least Bittern

Upland sandpiper

Northern harrier

Bald eagle

Pied-billed grebe

3-72

001417

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-16 (Sheet 2 of 2) Summary of Listed Species Reported in the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Database

Common Name Cistothorus platensis Ammodramus henslowii Gavia immer Ardea herodias Spizella pallida Special Concern (St.) NHP Yes Yes Special Concern (St.) NHP Yes Yes Special Concern (St.) NHP No Yes Threatened (St.) NHP Yes Yes Threatened (St.) NHP Yes Yes

Scientific Name

Status (State/Federal) Source

Suitable Habitat On Project Site?¹

Suitable Habitat in Project Area?¹

Suitable Habitat in Project Area?¹ Marshes and wet meadows Grasslands Lakes Marshes and swamps Grasslands

Sedge Wren

Henslow’s sparrow

Common Loon

Great Blue Heron

Clay-colored sparrow

Mammals Myotis sodalis Myotis leibii Special Concern (St.) NHP No Endangered (St./Fed.) NHP Yes

4

Indiana bat

Yes Yes

Eastern small-footed myotis

Caves, mines, under rocks and tree bark, floodplain forest, beech-maple forest, limestone woodlands Caves, mines, under rocks and tree bark, forest and forest edge

1 Project Area is defined as the larger area of leased parcels equal to approximately 7,900 acres, and the term Project Site is defined as the area required for construction of the Project which includes both the permanent and temporary footprint of disturbance. 2 Documented within 0.6 mile of project site (NHP) 3 Avian species that may be located within a 10-mile buffer of the project boundary 4 Bats that may be located within a 40-mile buffer of the project boundary but have been documented beyond the boundaries of the project site

3-73

001418

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

event. New York bat populations have been recently affected by White Nose Syndrome (WNS). WNS is characterized by a white fungus encircling the noses of most affected bats. The fungus can also be present on the limbs. This fungus is thought to be symptomatic of the problem but may not be the actual cause of death. Affected bats have depleted fat reserves and do not usually survive through winter hibernation. A recent study has identified a new fungus which is a close genetic relative the Geomyces group of fungi, that had colonized the skin of 90 percent of the bats analyzed from all the states affected by white-nose syndrome (Blehert, et. al., 2008). Since the discovery of WNS in New York State in 2006, the numbers of hibernating bats have been drastically declining in New York, Vermont, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. Little brown bats have sustained the largest number of deaths attributed to WNS. Nine of the ten known New York hibernacula containing Indiana bats have been infected with WNS. Half of all of the 52,000 Indiana bats estimated to hibernate in New York utilize one former mine which is now infected with WNS. The only identified Indiana bat hibernaculum in Jefferson County is Glen Park cave. During a January, 2008 census of Glen Park cave, four of the 50 Indiana bat observed were found to be infected with WNS. No confirmed WNS deaths were recorded during this census (Hicks, 2008). There were no reports of WNS mediated deaths for other species during this survey. State Species: Of the 20 state listed species initially identified by the NHP, seven species were also documented during 2006-2008 surveys on the Project Site. These include: northern harrier and bald eagle (state threatened); Cooper's hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, horned lark, grasshopper sparrow (state species of concern); and Indiana bat (state endangered). While suitable habitat for two endangered plant species, the Michigan lily and autumnal waterstarwort are potentially associated within the wetland habitats found in the Project landscape, these species have not been documented during site wetland delineation efforts. Review of the New York State Amphibian and Reptile Atlas identified twenty reptile and amphibian species reported to use the Project Area. According to the Atlas, the Blue-spotted Salamander, a state species of Special Concern, has been reported on the tip of the cape in Cape Vincent. The Atlas also lists the Blanding’s turtle, a listed state Threatened species, as using the Project Area. Riveredge Associates performed a mid-November 2007 Blanding’s turtle habitat survey (see Appendix E – Blanding’s Turtle Survey Report) to evaluate wetlands and adjacent areas for potential use by the species. They determined that the vegetative structure, vegetative species composition, and other habitat parameters present in six wetlands in and around the

3-74

001419

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Project Area and overhead transmission corridor represent suitable habitat for Blanding’s turtle for foraging, nesting, and/or overwintering. Five listed bird species were observed during 2006 breeding bird point count surveys: the northern harrier (state threatened); horned lark and grasshopper sparrow (state species of concern); and bobolink and wood thrush (USFWS 2002 Birds of Conservation for the Lower Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Plain region). Winter raptor surveys did not record short-eared owls; however, two stated listed species of concern, Cooper's hawk and sharp-shinned hawk, were documented.
3.3.7.2 Potential Impact

Potential effects associated with major construction projects on threatened and endangered species include both direct and indirect effects. Direct effects are results of the proposed action and would include effects such as loss of habitat and mortality of individuals. Indirect effects are those caused by the proposed action that are reasonably certain to occur and may include effects such as disturbance and/or displacement of individuals, change in habitat suitability or habitat degradation, and change in population density or distribution. Effects may be temporary (shortterm), for example during the project construction period, or long-term, such as effects arising from long-term operation and maintenance of the facility (Table 3-17). Also, effects may be cumulative, arising from the total impact of development, management, and use of the surrounding land. If “take” is determined to be unavoidable during project construction and operation, the requirement for an Endangered and Threatened Species Incidental Take Permit may be necessary in future planning, review and permitting efforts (see letter from William Gordon, Region 6, to Supervisor Rienbeck and Clerk Ingerson, Jan. 27, 2009 – Appendix F). SLW discussed the contents of the letter during a meeting with the NYSDEC on February 26, 2009, and will continue to work collaboratively with the NYSDEC to avoid as many impacts as is practicable prior to initiating discussion on an incidental take permit. Plants: Michigan lily and autumnal water-starwort have not been documented within the Project Area during wetlands surveys. Suitable habitat for these species within the Project Area is either limited or not available, as the site is primarily agricultural land with limited undisturbed wetland and aquatic habitats to support these species. As wetlands have been avoided or minimized, impacts to Michigan lily and autumnal water-starwort are not anticipated. Reptiles and Amphibians: Project impacts will not occur near areas reported to be habitat for the Blue-spotted Salamander and this species should not be affected by the Project. Two wetlands (of the 6 identified) have potential for Blanding’s turtle habitat and are in the vicinity of

3-75

001420

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-17 Potential Impacts to Threatened and Endangered Species from the Project Impact Duration Short-Term (e.g., during construction) Impact Type Direct Indirect Temporary loss of habitat from Prohibiting or altering construction areas that will be (displacement) use of the area due reclaimed to construction activity. Potential mortality from construction Altering or disturbing species or related activity. behavior patterns due to construction activity. Permanent loss of habitat to wind Prohibiting or altering project. (displacement) use of the area due to the wind project. Potential mortality due to wind plant operation. Altering or disturbing species behavior patterns due to wind project operation. Altering or changing species distribution patterns due to the wind project.

Long-Term (e.g., during project operation and maintenance)

areas proposed for potential wind turbines or transmission lines. Even if Blanding’s turtle actually utilize these habitat areas, the potential for impacts on Blanding’s turtle is low because turbine placement will not occur directly within identified wetlands. The only Project-related activities that appear to create the potential for adverse effects on the identified potential Blanding’s turtle habitat areas are the use of roads and equipment staging areas by heavy equipment during the construction period. SLW has minimized the potential for such habitat impacts by minimizing the placement of roads and staging areas in the vicinity of the potential Blanding’s turtle habitat areas. In addition, access road traffic is expected to be infrequent during operation. Raptors: The bald eagle was delisted by the USFWS in June 2007, but still remains protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and is a state threatened species. Bald eagle occurrence in the St. Lawrence Wind Project Area was documented during the avian studies of the Project Site; however, use of the Project Area was generally low and there are no known nests in the area based on NYSDEC information. In addition, no bald eagle fatalities have been recorded during monitoring studies at other wind energy projects nationwide – including other wind energy projects at which fatalities to other raptor species have been recorded. The lack of recorded bald eagle fatalities at other wind projects suggests that bald eagles are less at risk for wind energy-related fatalities than other raptor species. The risk to bald eagles from the Project is not expected to be significant due to the low use of the Project Area by bald eagles, the poor nesting habitat of the Project Area, and

3-76

001421

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

the apparent lower risk exposure for bald eagles (as compared to other raptor species) suggested by the absence of bald eagle fatalities at other wind projects. Northern harriers observed in the Project Area are possible breeding individuals, winter residents, and migrants. The wetlands and agricultural settings provide suitable habitat for the northern harrier year round. Northern harriers could be at risk of collision with turbines as they have been recorded as fatalities at other wind projects. However, the low level flights and low soaring frequency for breeding individual northern harriers are not likely to result in significant risks for collision with turbines. No golden eagles were counted during the Site surveys and due to the very low relative abundance they are not expected to be impacted. No eagle fatalities have been recorded at the Maple Ridge Wind Farm post-construction monitoring over a two year period. Other Avian Species: It is not anticipated that the listed species associated with wetland habitats (black tern, common tern, least bittern, pied-billed grebe, common loon or great blue heron) will be adversely affected by the Project since documented occurrences are located outside the Project Area and wetland habitats located within the Project Area will be avoided. As discussed in Section 3.3.5.2, some grassland species may be disturbed or displaced by turbine noise and movement. These species include the upland sandpiper, horned lark, grasshopper sparrow, bobolinks, sedge wren, and Henslow’s sparrow. It is not anticipated that these species will have any long-lasting effects resulting from the construction and operation of the St. Lawrence Project provided that construction areas are reclaimed to existing conditions to minimize the overall habitat losses. The piping plover is listed as occurring in Jefferson County. The designated critical habitat area for the piping plover is located along the Lake Ontario shoreline in the southernmost portion of the county where it borders Oswego County. Since the Project occurs in inland areas of the Cape Vincent peninsula it is not expected that construction or operation of the St. Lawrence Project will affect or adversely modify critical habitat for the piping plover. Bats: For Indiana bats, there are no known winter hibernacula within or adjacent to the Project Area that may be affected by the construction and operation of the Project. The population of Indiana bats that could be affected by the Project is believed to be from the nearest known hibernaculum, the Glen Park cave (near Watertown, NY) hibernating population. This cave is located approximately 17 miles southeast of the proposed Project Area.

3-77

001422

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Female Indiana bat in New York are known to disperse between 12 and 40 miles from their winter hibernacula to summer roost locations on their foraging grounds (NYSDEC, 2006d). A small colony of Indiana bats constituting a summer maternal colony was observed during summer 2007 in a forested wetland habitat located south of the Project Site. Based on available information and results of the site surveys as discussed above, Indiana bats appear to use areas near the Project Site only from May through September. During the late fall/winter months it is believed that Indiana bats return to the Glen Park cave. Because the Project Site is near the St. Lawrence River and 17 miles from the Glen Park hibernacula, it is unlikely that the Project will affect wintering Indiana bat populations or bats traveling to and from their hibernacula. Only limited information is available on which to base estimates of potential mortality of summer roosting Indiana bats which may utilize areas near the Project Site. Based upon the available information, it is expected that the mortality impacts of the Project on Indiana bats which may use areas near the Project Site during the May through September period will be similar to other regional wind projects (see Section 3.3.3 Bats), which is to say low. There are several reasons for this conclusion. First, to date there have been no Indiana bat fatalities reported from wind energy projects within the range of Indiana bat. The majority of bat fatalities at wind energy facilities in the Eastern United States are of long distant migrant, non-hibernating species of bats (see section 3.3.3, above). Second, studies at other wind energy projects have shown that summer resident bats do not appear to be at significant risk from wind turbines (Johnson, et al., 2005; Arnett, et al., 2008). Third, existing information on Indiana bat biology suggests that they are at lower risk for wind energy-related fatalities than other species of bats because they typically fly low to the ground below the rotor sweep area, and because their preferred habitat is wooded and riparian areas, rather than more open agricultural fields (USFWS, 2007). An estimate of potential Indiana bat mortality can be developed based on the abundance of Indiana bats relative to the other Myotis species, assuming impacts to Myotis species are equal across species. Using this method, it is estimated that between 4 and 7 Indiana bat fatalities could occur across the Project Area annually. This approach, however, likely significantly overestimates mortality for several reasons. First, as noted in Section 3.3.3.1, mortality impacts are not uniform across species. The absence of any recorded Indiana bat fatalities at other wind energy projects within the range of the Indiana bat suggests that the mortality rate for Indiana bats may be lower than for other Myotis species. Second, the available data indicates that Myotis species are the least common bat fatalities at wind energy projects for which bat mortality data has been collected (see Section 3.3.3.2). Third, the presence of WNS within the Glen Park cave is likely to reduce the number of Indiana bat which may use areas near the

3-78

001423

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Project Site. Evidence to date suggests that WNS results in greater than 90 percent mortality of bats within caves where WNS is found over a two year period (A. Hicks, NYSDEC, pers. comm.). Provided this holds true for the Glen Park Cave, the resident (non-migratory) bat population in the Project Area would be drastically reduced by the end of 2009. WNS was confirmed in Glen Park cave in 2008, and mortality is expected to be greatest over the winter 2008 to 2009 (A. Hicks, NYSDEC, pers. comm.). Under the assumption that the Glen Park Cave bat population experiences a 90 percent decline by 2009 (information from NYSDEC), the relative abundance of the Indiana bats in the Project Area would be expected to drop by 90 percent. If this is the case, and potential mortality impacts are related to abundance, the expected number of Myotis bats impacted would drop to less than 0.25 per turbine per year. Under the same assumption that 5 percent of the Myotis fatalities would be Indiana bats, there would be less than 0.6 Indiana bat fatalities per year for the Project, or approximately one Indiana bat fatality every 1.5 to 2.5 years. This level of mortality is immeasurable and likely less than background mortality for this species. Essentially the relative abundance of Indiana bats in the Project Area would be low enough that no measurable impacts would occur. Disturbance-related effects on Indiana bats also are conceivable; however, monitoring studies at other wind energy projects indicate that bats are not significantly disturbed by wind turbines (see Johnson, et al., 2005; Arnett, et al., 2007). Based on existing information from studies of bats in and around operating wind energy projects, it appears that some bat species can easily fly around turbines, and are not displaced by them. At Buffalo Ridge, Minnesota, based on sampling bat activity at turbines with AnaBat detectors, it was estimated that a minimum of 96,102 bat passes occurred at turbines over a 2-year study period. No relationship between bat activity at the turbines and the number of bat fatalities (Johnson, et al., 2003) was found. Similarly, at the Foote Creek Rim, Wyoming wind energy project, data from AnaBat detectors indicated 2.6 bat passes per turbine per night during the summer and fall (Gruver, 2002). At that project, and at the Buffalo Mountain, Tennessee wind energy facility, bat activity as measured with AnaBats at turbines did not correlate with collision mortality (Nicholson, 2002). Similarly, during the intensive studies of the Mountaineer and Myersdale wind energy projects in the Fall of 2004, field personnel routinely observed bats emerging at dusk and foraging in the clearings around turbines, supporting the hypothesis that at least some bats occupying forests near the turbines were local residents (Arnett, et al., 2005). Horn et al. (2008) documented numerous bats flying close to turbines and even within the rotor swept area indicating that turbines do not create a disturbance strong enough to cause displacement. These studies have all shown that bats can and do fly around turbines and do not appear to be subject to substantial disturbance or displacement effects.

3-79

001424

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

As with fatality impacts, while the evidence suggests that there will be little disturbance effects on bats in general, there is no information specific to Indiana bat populations. Assuming that Indiana bats are most similar to little brown bats in ecology, the wind turbines will not have a disturbance or displacement effect on Indiana bats. Also, construction-related activities will be temporary and some of the construction activities will fall outside of the period when Indiana bats are expected to be in the Project Area. The Project could indirectly affect the summer distribution of Indiana bats in Jefferson County by causing abandonment or movement of the known maternal colony located south of the proposed Project Area. Based on the best information available, however, any disturbance and displacement effects are not expected to be large enough to cause abandonment of the maternal colony. While direct impacts with turbines may create a source of mortality that may eventually lead to the loss of the maternal colony, it could be lost (moved) under natural circumstances if the area of the roost trees becomes less suitable than current conditions. Maternal roosting areas are likely to move over time with or without the proposed Project.
3.3.7.3 Mitigation Measures

Plants: The Project has been designed to avoid sensitive ecological communities, such as wetlands, and to minimize permanent impacts to vegetation to the greatest extent practicable. Therefore, impacts to impacts to Michigan lily and autumnal water-starwort are not anticipated and no mitigation is proposed. Reptiles and Amphibians: To avoid potential impacts to Blanding’s turtle, barriers and culverts will be installed to, as applicable, either prevent movement to or facilitate movement across Project components. Silt fence will be installed to isolate potential Blanding’s turtle wetlands from construction activity. In addition, barriers (silt fence) will be installed to direct the movements of nesting turtles in a manner that limits the potential for road mortality. Silt fence will remain in place until construction and clean-up activities are complete. Potential nesting habitat around selected turbine placements and equipment staging areas will also be created or enhanced as several turbine areas (9, 32, 33, and 43) may provide nesting habitat. A management plan outlining measures to be implemented during construction of the Project to reduce potential impacts to Blanding’s turtles or their habitat will be developed. Raptors: Bald eagle was recently removed from the list of threatened species and the USFWS is developing means by which to permit incidental take of bald eagles for otherwise lawful and permitted actions. Currently, the Project is not expected to result in any incidental take of bald eagles because it will not affect nesting habitat for bald eagles, the relative abundance of bald

3-80

001425

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

eagles in the Project Area is low, and no other bald eagle impacts from wind projects are known. The Project is not expected to affect bald eagle and no mitigation is proposed. In the event that new information becomes available or the density of bald eagles in the Project increases or nesting by bald eagles is confirmed in the Project, suggesting that potential impacts to this species may occur, the Project sponsor will consult with the USFWS to address the potential impacts and if any mitigation measures are warranted. Other Avian Species: Pre-construction surveys for listed bird species were conducted in Project work areas to inform construction and management activities to avoid disturbance of nesting threatened and endangered species. To mitigate temporary impacts to breeding listed species, clearing activities will occur either prior to or after the breeding season. Where nesting individuals are encountered, construction will be rescheduled to minimize disturbance during construction to the extent possible. Bats: The following conservation measures have been implemented during the design of the project or will be implemented before or during construction to offset any potential Indiana bat mortality as a result of the construction and operation of the Project: Avoidance – the project design has taken into consideration the distribution of potential Indiana bat habitat in the project area to avoid potential take of Indiana bats, such as avoiding placement of wind turbines in forested or wetland areas, timing the cutting of trees to the winter season when Indiana bats would be hibernating, and siting the transmission line within an abandoned railroad bed; Project design – the Project has been designed to avoid or minimize cutting deciduous forest habitat to the maximum extent feasible; Project design – the Project has been reduced in scale from 96 turbines to a minimum economically viable size of 53 turbines (79.5 MW). This design effectively minimizes collision risk through fewer turbines; Project design – the Project design was also used to minimize exposure by placing all turbines at appropriate distances from roost trees; Timing – All tree clearing will occur outside of the known usage times for the project area (May – September); and SLW is currently in formal consultation with the USFW, USACE, and NYSDEC. (see Appendix F – between R. Niver, USFWS and B. Gunderman, Acciona, various dates). The Project will be required to comply with conditions and mitigation measures derived through this collaborative process.

3-81

001426

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

As part of the proposed monitoring program, an Indiana bat monitoring plan is being prepared, in addition to the Post-Construction Bird and Bat Monitoring Plan, and will be implemented at the Project post-construction (see Section 3.3.3). The Applicant, working with the USACE, USFWS, and NYSDEC, is in the process of preparing a Biological Assessment (BA) to evaluate in greater detail the possible impacts to Indiana bat populations due to construction and operation of the proposed Project. The BA will be used to initiate formal consultation with the USFWS under the Endangered Species Act in connection with SLW’s application for permits from the USACE. Results of the consultation process will determine whether conservation measures, in addition to those outlined herein, are necessary to avoid, minimize, or mitigate potential impacts from the Project on Indiana bats.
3.3.8 Critical Environmental Areas and Significant Habitats

3.3.8.1 Affected Environment

Critical Environmental Areas: Critical Environmental Areas (CEAs) are specific local or state agency designated geographic areas that have an exceptional or unique character with respect to one or more of the following attributes: A benefit or threat to human health; A natural setting (e.g., fish and wildlife habitat, forest and vegetation, open space and areas of important aesthetic or scenic quality); Agricultural, social, cultural, historic, archaeological, recreational, or educational values; or An inherent ecological, geological or hydrological sensitivity to change that may be adversely affected by any change. CEAs are designated within the jurisdictional boundaries of a local or state agency and can encompass any geographical area that the agency owns, manages, or regulates. No critical environmental areas are presently designated in Jefferson County. Significant Habitats: Several significant habitats, as identified by the NYSDEC and the USFWS, are located in the Project vicinity and include AWMA, the St. Lawrence Wetland and Grassland Man-agement District, and seven Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats (see Exhibit 3.3.1). These habitats are further described below.

3-82

001427

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.3.1 - Significant Habitats

The AWMA is located in Jefferson County, in the Towns of Lyme and Cape Vincent. An approximately 2-mile portion of the proposed overhead trans-mission line will be located on a former railroad bed bordering the extreme western edge of the AWMA. The 2,037-acre Management Area is owned and managed by the NYSDEC. It was designated a New York State Bird Conservation Area in 2003. AWMA has relatively large areas of early successional habitats, including grassland and shrub land. Forested areas and limestone barrens are also present. These habitats support a diversity of early successional bird species. AWMA is managed to maintain and enhance the grassland habitat present to ensure continued use by grassland birds. AWMA represents a migratory concentration site, a diverse species concentration site, an individual species concentration site, and a species at risk site. Protected species previously observed at the AWMA include Short-eared Owl (endangered), Henslow's Sparrow (threatened), Sedge Wren (threatened), Northern Harrier (threatened), and Upland Sandpiper (threatened). The St. Lawrence Wetland and Grassland Management District (SLWGMD), established in 1997, is a two million-acre district encompassing portions of Jefferson, St. Lawrence, and Franklin Counties with over 350,000 acres of grasslands, including agricultural lands. This District is the largest of its kind in the northeast, with a large number of birds, especially

3-83

001428

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

waterfowl and raptors, and other wildlife using the wetlands and grasslands throughout the year for breeding, feeding, roosting and wintering. Within this three county area, the USFWS proposes to buy 1,600 acres for protection and management, and acquire an additional 6,400 acres in easements from surrounding landowners, with land remaining in private ownership. (USFWS, 2000). State coastal policies protect fish and wildlife resources of statewide significance. Seven of these designated Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats are located within 0.5 miles to 10 miles of the Project and include: St. Lawrence River Shoreline Bays – eight shallow bays along the River's mainland shoreline; French Creek Marsh – wetlands extending inland approximately five miles from the Village of Clayton, encompassing an approximate 700-acre streamside wetland and adjacent uplands in the NYSDEC's French Creek Wildlife Management Area; Carlton Island – Featherbed Shoals – an approximate 800-acre, shallow, open water area, containing extensive beds of submergent aquatic vegetation (e.g., wild celery, pondweeds, and muskgrass); Fox Island – Grenadier Island Shoals – an approximate 4,000-acre shallow water area, containing beds of submergent aquatic vegetation (e.g., wild celery, pondweeds), and patches of emergent wetland vegetation around the shoreline of northeastern Lake Ontario; Point Peninsula Marsh - approximate 300-acre flood pond wetland on the west side of the peninsula, separated from Lake Ontario by a narrow sand and cobble barrier beach; also included in the habitat are the shoal areas immediately west and south of the wetland; Point Peninsula – an approximate 2000-acre mosaic of active farmland, old field, and some woodlots and conifer plantations; and Wilson Bay and Marsh – encompasses the open waters of Wilson Bay, and an approximate 200-acre flood pond wetland located at the head of the bay.
3.3.8.2 Potential Impact

Critical Environmental Areas: The Project will not affect Critical Environmental Areas. The Applicant plans to obtain an easement, approximately 100-foot wide and 2-miles long, from the NYSDEC to place the overhead transmission line within the AWMA. Approximately 18 acres of forest (17 temporarily, 0.6 permanently) would be affected to construct this transmission line. The transmission line will follow the existing Development Authority of the North Country (DANC) water line and railroad bed bordering the extreme western edge of the AWMA.

3-84

001429

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Significant Habitats: The St. Lawrence Windpower Project will not interfere with efforts to establish the SLWGMD. SLW encourages preservation of grassland ecosystems, and construction of the Project will avoid or minimize further development and conversion of grassland within the Project Area and areas adjacent to these significant areas. The Project would permanently develop approximately 30 acres of pastures/hay fields; however, where forbs equal or outnumber grasses, this habitat is far less attractive to grassland birds. Wind turbines may affect grassland birds and waterfowl through direct collision; however, birds have good visual acuity and studies indicate that if birds can see the turbines they avoid them (Higgins et al. 1996). It is generally under low visibility situations that the probability of birds colliding with wind turbines increases (Detect, Inc. 2005, Larkin and Frase 1988, Avery et. al. 1976). Wind projects protect land from other types of development, which typically result in massive loss of habitat. Wind projects result in relatively low losses of habitat and result in long term preservation of grassland habitat. Under the proper management scenario for lands around turbines, improved habitat conditions may actually benefit waterfowl and grassland birds by increasing nesting opportunities and reproductive success. The Project will conduct a grassland breeding bird displacement study as part of postconstruction monitoring efforts (see Appendix E). The goal of this study is to evaluate potential indirect impacts from the Project. A gradient analysis (Morrison et al. 2001) will be used to determine any relationship that might exist between density of grassland/steppe avian species and distance from turbines. Any differences between grassland bird use during the pre- and postconstruction period will be calculated at 50-m intervals moving away from the turbines. Land and water uses or developments that destroy a significant coastal fish and wildlife habitat or significantly impair the viability of a habitat would result in an adverse impact to these designated habitats. Habitat destruction is defined as the loss of fish or wildlife use through direct physical alteration, disturbance, or pollution of a designated area or through the indirect effects of these actions on a designated area. Habitat destruction may be indicated by changes in vegetation, substrate, or hydrology, or increases in runoff, erosion, sedimentation, or pollutants. Significant impairment is defined as reduction in vital resources (e.g., food, shelter, living space) or change in environmental conditions (e.g., temperature, substrate, salinity) beyond the tolerance range of an organism. Indicators of a significantly impaired habitat focus on ecological alterations and may include but are not limited to reduced carrying capacity, changes in community structure (food chain relationships, species diversity), reduced productivity and/or increased incidence of disease and mortality. Results of impairment assessment for the seven Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife 3-85

001430

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Habitats located in the vicinity of the Project are presented in Table 3-18. These seven habitats area located 0.5 miles to 10 miles from the Project. Because the Project will not be constructed directly within any of these resources, and will be located a distance from all or them, the Project will have no direct or indirect impact on these resources. Any potential for Project-related construction activities to degrade water quality or increase turbidity or sedimentation will be avoided or minimized by implementing BMPs for soil erosion and sediment control as part of the Project SWPPP discussed in more detail in Section 3.1.3.1. Therefore, the Project will not destroy or significantly impair the viability of any of these habitats.
Table 3-18 Coastal Zone Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitats in Project Vicinity
Will Project Destroy Habitat? No Will Project Impair Habitat Viability? No

Habitat St. Lawrence River Shoreline Bays

Distance From Project 0.5-2 miles

French Creek Marsh

1-2 miles

Carlton Island – Featherbed Shoals

1.5 miles 1

Fox Island – Grenadier Island Shoals Point Peninsula Marsh Point Peninsula

6-8 miles 2 8-10 miles 3 8-10 miles 3

Wilson Bay and Marsh

2-3 miles

Activities That Impair Habitat Viability Activities that substantially degrade water quality, increase turbidity or sedimentation, reduce water levels, or increase water level fluctuations Activities that substantially degrade water quality, increase turbidity or sedimentation, reduce water levels, alter flows, or alter water level fluctuations, or eliminate wetland habitats, or result in significant human disturbance of the area Activities that substantially degrade water quality, or result in substantial alteration or fluctuation of water levels Activities that degrade water quality Activities that degrade water quality, reduce water levels, or increase water level fluctuations Waste disposal, and discharges of sewage or stormwater runoff containing sediments or chemical pollutants and decrease of available habitat Activity that degrade water quality, increase turbidity or sedimentation, reduce water levels, or increase water level fluctuations, or eliminate wetland habitats, or result in significant human disturbance of the area.

No

No

No

No

No No No

No No No

No

No

1 2 3

In St. Lawrence River In Lake Ontario Across Chaumont Bay

3-86

001431

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.3.8.3 Mitigation Measures

Critical Environmental Areas will be avoided; therefore no mitigation will be required. To offset impacts associated with construction of the electrical overhead line through the AWMA, SLW will purchase property that the regional NYSDEC has identified as a desirable acquisition having wildlife value and will deed the property to the NYSDEC. The selected property will be of greater wildlife-related value than the easement area. The AWMA easement and the proposed acquisition property have been assessed according to NYSDEC standards and assessments were reviewed by the regional and headquarter NYSDEC offices. In addition, any necessary above ground electric lines will follow the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee suggested practices for protecting avian species. The Project will not destroy or significantly impair the viability of any Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats; therefore no mitigation will be required.
3.4 Transportation/Traffic

The proposed St. Lawrence Windpower Project Area would be located in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme, and would be surrounded by an extensive network of local, county and state managed roads (see Figure 2-1). This section describes the network of roads that may be used during construction of the proposed wind energy project, the potential impact of construction traffic on the existing transportation system, potential road improvements required and measures to mitigate potential impact. This section has been prepared based on consultations with the New York State Department of Transportation, Region 7.
3.4.1 Affected Environment

Construction of the proposed Project would require hauling long- and semi-heavy loads on local, county and state managed roads. Most of the roads that may be affected are paved, but some are surfaced with packed gravel. The general Project Area includes NYS Route 12E and County Roads 8 (Johnny Cake Road), 9 (Sandy Bay Road/St. Lawrence Road), 4 (Rosiere Road) and 179 (Evans St/Caroline St.). Nearby roads outside the Project Area include Interstate Route 81, NYS Route 12, NYS Route 12F, NYS Route 180 and several other County Roads. NYS Route 12E and County Roads 4 and 9 form a closed network of roads around the proposed Project Area. NYS Route 12E and County Roads 4, 8 and 9 are two-lane asphalt-paved roads. NYS Route 12, which has an annual average daily traffic volume of approximately 4,500 vehicles per day (NYSDOT, 2003), represents the primary supply route for delivery of equipment, such as tower sections, blades, nacelles, hub assembly, and transformers, during the construction phase of the Project. (Figure 3-11). There are several other local roads located

3-87

001432

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

within the Project boundary that will be used during construction as secondary routes for civil works vehicles and transport of electrical equipment associated with the overhead transmission lines. These local roads include Pelo, McKeever, Mason, Peo (Gosier), Favret/Cold Spring, Hell, Constance, Swamp (Wilson), Deer Lick, Wells Settlement (Ashland), Gibbons (Merchant), Cheever and Old Town Spring Roads. Some of these roads have two names; the names in parentheses are the current reference. Most of the local roads are asphalt paved except for Constance Road, and a portion of Mason Road between Favret at County Road 4, which are gravel packed. A portion of Swamp (Wilson) Road is also gravel packed but construction activities will be confined to the paved portion of this road. Photographs of local roads and intersections associated with primary and secondary routes are provided in Appendix G.
3.4.2 Potential Impacts

The potential impacts to traffic and the transportation system are limited to activities that would occur during construction of the Project. Potential impacts to traffic or transportation during the operation of the proposed wind energy Project will be infrequent and minimal, and will be properly mitigated. Impacts during construction include, but are not limited to, the following categories: the adequacy of existing roads and transportation infrastructure to accommodate construction equipment and oversize vehicles delivering wind turbine and tower components; the need for the Project to improve transportation infrastructure to accommodate construction vehicles; the need for the Project to temporarily re-locate overhead lines, traffic lights, cable and phone lines to accommodate oversize vehicles; traffic delays and road closures due to transportation improvements or construction traffic; potential disruption of tourism in the Thousand Islands; and increased traffic over local roads during construction. SLW investigated several routes throughout the Project Area that could be used for delivery of turbine components and related construction materials. The turbine component delivery vehicles would be oversized, requiring modification to intersections along the preferred routes. Since preparation of the DEIS, the roads proposed for material and equipment transport have been minimized. It is expected that delivery of turbine components and materials would come from the north or south along Interstate Route 81. From Interstate Route 81 (Exit 48), the primary route is Route 342 West to NYS Route 12 to Route 9. From Route 9 local roads will be used including Pelo, McKeever, Mason, Peo (Gosier), Favret/Cold Spring, Hell, Constance, Swamp (Wilson), Deer Lick and State Route 12E (between Favret and Deer Lick Roads only). County Roads 8 (Johnny Cake Road), 9 (Sandy Bay Road/St. Lawrence Road), 4 (Rosiere Road), 5 (Church Street/Three Mile Creek Road), and 179 (Evans St/Caroline St.) and local roads Wells

3-88

001433

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Settlement (Ashland), Gibbons (Merchant), Cheever and Old Town Springs will be used as secondary routes for civil works vehicles and transport of electrical equipment associated with the overhead transmission line. This route has been selected to minimize impacts to traffic on the local roads and surrounding communities. Specifically, the route has been designed to reach the largest number of wind turbine locations while minimizing potential impacts and potential disruption to tourism by avoiding route 12E. Existing local road and the turbines, or Project facilities they provide access to, are listed in Table 3-19. Final construction transportation plans would be approved by state and local officials.
Table 3-19 Existing Local Roads and Proposed Wind Turbine Facility
Local Road Name Deer Tick Road Favret Road Swamp Road Cold Springs Road Hell Street Constance Road Peo Road Mason Road Johnny Cake Road McKeever Road Sand Bay Road Turbine Number/Facility 1-2, 3-4 5-8, 9, 10 Substation, O&M Building, Temporary work area and parking 12-13, 14-15 16-19, 26, 27, 29, 30 20-25 28, 31 33, 34-35 32, 36-37, 38, 39-41, 42 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48-49, 50-53

The preferred delivery and transportation route for the proposed Project was selected to minimize impact to local traffic, damage to local, county and state highways, the number of roads being used for delivery, and potential improvements to individual roads. Furthermore, private access roads will be constructed from public roads over privately owned land to the proposed turbine locations. The layout for access roads is depicted on Figure 3-12. An initial assessment of existing conditions associated with the preferred route has been conducted by Creighton Manning Engineering, LLP (see Appendix G) and is summarized in Table 3-20. All roads are asphalt surfaced with the exception of Constance Road and Wilson Road, which are seasonal. Most roads comprising the preferred route are in fair to good condition. The turbine construction cranes will be transported to the site in a semi-dismantled manner and hauled to specific crane assembly areas designated along the turbine access roads. The locations of the crane assembly area will depend on the feasibility of walking the crane between turbine

3-89

001434

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

sites. This will be further evaluated as part of the comprehensive transportation study pending Project approval.
Table 3-20 Preferred Route Road Characteristics
Road State Roads NY Route 12 NY Route 12E NY Route 342 County Roads (CR) CR 8 (Sand Bay Rd) CR 9 (Millens Bay Rd) Local Roads McKeever Rd Mason Rd Favret Rd Gosier Rd Hell St Constance Rd Wilson Rd Deerlick Rd
1

From NY Route 342 Favret Rd I-81 – Exit 48 NY Route 12E NY Route 12 County Rd 9 County Rd 8 Mason Rd NY Route 12E County Rd 4 Hell St Favret Rd NY Route 12E

To County Rd 9 Deerlick Rd NY Route 12 County Rd 4 NY Route 12E County Rd 8 Favret Rd NY Route 12E Mason Rd NY Route 12E NY Route 12E County Rd 4 Pleasant Valley Rd

Traveled Way Width 24 22 24 22 21 23 20 19 20 19 14 20 21

Pavement1 Condition Fair/Good Fair Good Good Good Fair/Good Fair Fair/Good Fair/Poor Fair/Poor Poor Fair/Poor Good

Surface Type Asphalt Asphalt Asphalt Asphalt Asphalt Asphalt Asphalt Asphalt Asphalt Asphalt Seasonal Seasonal Asphalt

Speed Limit 35 to 55-mph 55-mph 55-mph Not Posted 45 to 55-mph Not Posted Not Posted Not Posted Not Posted Not Posted Not Posted Not Posted Not Posted

U.S. and NY State Route Pavement Conditions are based on New York State’s Highway Sufficiency Rating, 2006. Pavement Conditions for County and Local Roads are based on a visual inspection.

The physical dimensions of vehicles delivering the turbine and tower components would dictate the road width and turning radius needs at intersections along the delivery route, as these are the heaviest and longest vehicles that would be necessary for construction. Table 3-21 provides dimensions of specialized vehicles required for delivery of WTG components. Intersections located within the Project Area were visually evaluated using a minimum truck turning radius of 130 to 150 feet, the required radius for the oversize vehicles typically used to deliver turbine and tower components. In addition, an engineer also conducted a screening level visual inspection of road surfaces and integrity of roads within the Project Area to preliminarily assess the types of improvements that might be necessary to accommodate construction traffic.
Table 3-21 Delivery Vehicle Dimensions and Weights
Component Delivery Vehicle 80 m Tower Base Section 80 m Tower Mid Section 80 m Tower Top Section Nacelle Hub Assemble Blades (two) Length 140 ft 0 in 140 ft 0 in 100 ft 0 in 100 ft 0 in 75 ft 0 in 155 ft 0 in Height 20 ft 0 in 18 ft 0 in 16 ft 0 in 18 ft 0 in 18 ft 0 in 13 ft 10 in Width 15 ft 0 in 13 ft 0 in 11 ft 0 in 11 ft 0 in 11 ft 0 in 10 ft 0 in Gross Weight 134,000 lbs 130,000 lbs 86,000 lbs 130,000 lbs 50,000 lbs 35,000 lbs

3-90

001435

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

The Applicant has also identified the following requirements for roads to be used as primary delivery routes for the transport of wind turbine components: Maximum road grade of 10 percent; No dips or rises greater than 18 inches over a 65 foot distance; Maximum vehicle gross weight of 135,000 pounds (lbs) (24,000 pounds maximum per axle); Maximum vehicle turning radius of 150 feet (measured from trailer centerline above rear axle); Maximum vehicle length of 155 feet; Maximum vehicle width of 15 feet; and Maximum vertical clearance of 20 feet (loaded vehicle). In addition to the specialized flat bed trucks needed to transport turbine components, other vehicles commonly involved in wind energy facility construction include: Gravel trucks for access road construction (approximate capacity of 10 cubic yards (cy) per truck and an estimated gross weight of 75,000 lbs); Concrete trucks for construction of turbine foundations and transformer pads (approximate capacity of 10 cy per truck and estimated gross weight of 78,000 lbs); Conventional semi-trailers for delivery of reinforcing steel (two per turbine foundation) and small substation components and interconnection facility material; Pickup trucks for equipment and tools; and Trucks and cars for transporting construction workers. Based on the initial assessment conducted by Creighton Manning Engineering, LLP, some local roads and intersections will require modifications to accommodate the requirements for construction vehicles. Based upon the initial assessment, it appears that Constance Road and Wilson Road may need to be widened and/or repaved to accommodate the vehicles carrying the wind tower components. No bridge restrictions were identified on any of the roads comprising the preferred route; however, culvert and drainage structures would need to be improved on County Road 9 and County Road 8, and Route 12E in the vicinity of Favret Road and Deerlick Road. There are also potentially four instances of traffic signals on the following road segments that may need to be raised to accommodate the height of the tallest design vehicle load: the intersection of NY Route 12/NY Route 342; and the flashing traffic signals at the intersections of NY Route 12/NY Route 180 (Gunns Corners), NY Route 12/County Road 179 (Depauville), and County Road 9/County Road 4 (Saint Lawrence). These modifications are summarized in Table 3-22. The Applicant will conduct a comprehensive transportation study prior to construction.

3-91

001436

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-22 Potential Impacts
Culvert/ Drainage Structure Intersection Quadrant Affected by Preferred Route Curve/Intersection Widening ROW Impacts to Non-Participating Property Owners Impacts to Existing Trees/Vegetation Overhead Signal Clearance Road Condition Improvement Overhead Wire Clearance Existing Sign Impacts

Affected Intersection or Segment

Intersections 1) Route 342/I-81 Exit 48 NB Ramp 2) Route 342/I-81 Exit 48 SB Ramp 3) Route 12/Route 342 4) Route 12/County Rd 9 5) County Rd 9/McKeever Rd 6) County Rd 8/McKeever Rd 7) County Rd 8/Mason Rd 8) Mason Rd/Gosier Rd 9) Favret Rd/Mason Rd 10) Favret Rd/Hell St

Southeast Northeast Southwest Southwest Southeast Southwest Northwest Northwest Northeast Southeast Northwest Southeast Southeast Southwest

11) Hell St/Constance Rd 12) Favret Rd/Wilson Rd 13) Route 12E/Favret Rd 14) Route 12E/Deerlick Rd Segments Constance Road Wilson Road NY Route 12 - at NY Route 180 - at County Road 179 - at County Road 4 1 The quadrant impacted by the preferred route option was chosen because it represents the least amount of impact based on a review of the participating property owners and existing intersection constraints. The impacts shown above should be revised if the primary quadrant impacted by the preferred route changes due to land agreements.

Modifications to intersections may include increasing the corner radii, adding road width upstream of necessary intersections, adding road width downstream of necessary intersections, or a combination of these modifications. The degree to which corner radii can be enlarged is limited by houses, bridges and/or culverts located in proximity to the intersections, which may make it necessary to increase road width either upstream or downstream of intersections requiring improvement. Intersection modifications may require the acquisition of additional property and, in some cases, re-location of utility poles and/or guardrails. Where culverts or ditches cross under existing intersections, culverts may have to be extended. The drainage features at applicable intersections may be modified or new drainage features may be created along the edges of modified intersections to maintain proper drainage. Such improvements or modifications will be coordinated with the appropriate highway departments and appropriate wetland and storm water permits would be obtained. Existing culverts will be inspected and, if

3-92

Utility Pole Impacts

1

001437

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

required, approvals for improvements will be obtained from appropriate local, state and federal agencies. The materials used for construction will be obtained from many locations. In addition to the wind turbine and tower components, typical construction materials will include: gravel, concrete, reinforcing bar, electrical poles, electrical and miscellaneous materials. The vehicles used for delivery of Project materials will include dump trucks, 18-wheel tractor trailers, flat-bed type trucks, short wheel base trucks, and concrete delivery trucks. Since physical dimensions of these vehicles are smaller than the turbine component delivery vehicles, they would be able to employ the route established for delivery of the turbine components. Since these vehicles are standard size and smaller, they can use a greater number of local roads. It is estimated that 35 to 40 concrete trucks would be required for each turbine foundation. This would result in 70 to 80 delivery trips for each turbine or approximately 3,700 to 4,500 total trips over the duration of the project. In addition, material delivery would include gravel for the development of access roads, road improvements, and intersection modifications. Other material deliveries would include reinforcing bar for each foundation, electrical equipment and materials for each turbine and the electrical transmission and interconnect line network. The potential for lane and possibly road closures during road improvements exists. In addition, the increase in traffic over Project roads during construction would impact travel time for those people using county and local roads. SLW does not anticipate adverse safety impacts to the area due to material delivery vehicles. Although there would be a significant number of vehicles in the area during construction activities, safety measures such as traffic controls, flagmen and traffic signs would be implemented to reduce the potential adverse traffic conditions as described in Section 3.4.3.
3.4.3 Mitigation Measures

The proposed Project transportation route has been selected to minimize impacts to roads and surrounding communities. The number of roads used for material and equipment transportation has been limited to the minimum needed for construction. The material delivery route would, in most cases, follow the route established for turbine component delivery. A before and after condition assessment will be conducted and any damage from Project transportation will be fixed either by the Project or the Project will fund the repairs. Steps will also be taken during construction to make certain that safety is a priority including: caution signs, escorts, police, and flag men. Construction equipment and workforce vehicles

3-93

001438

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

would not be parked along public roadways, but rather in designated parking areas, so as to preserve safety along local roadways. In consultation with appropriate state officials, a Project speed limit would be established. SLW would work with state and county officials to enforce all traffic safety requirements. Construction vehicles may create dust plumes on gravel roads. The Project would develop a dust control plan to ensure that visibility along roadways is maintained. See Section 3.9 for further detail on the dust control plan. SLW would obtain all necessary permits from the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) and respective local highway department(s) in order to make necessary road improvements and to operate oversize vehicles. Construction related wear and tear to state, county and local roads would be discussed with the entities that manage the transportation system and an appropriate strategy for road restoration would be developed. SLW would continually assess work areas approximately two weeks ahead of construction and would provide schools (during the school-year), police, fire, and emergency service agencies with advance notice of lane or road closures. Any such lane or road closures on state roads will require state approval. The Applicant will identify all public road upgrades that may be required to accommodate construction vehicles, including shoring up bridge abutments, adding steel plates or gravel to road surfaces, widening roadways, reconfiguring intersections to accommodate the turning radius of large construction vehicles, and identifying the bridges, pipes, and culverts that will not accommodate the construction related traffic. Other improvements such as construction warning signs, or flaggers, will provide motorists with advanced warning of the slow moving construction equipment. Improvements will be made at the Applicant’s expense prior to the arrival of construction vehicles and the Applicant will obtain any easements from adjacent property owners necessary to access and work on private property. The Applicant will repair damage done to roads affected by construction within the approved primary route, at no expense to the towns, county, or state. Prior to construction the specific terms of road use and reconstruction will be negotiated and agreed upon in a Road Agreement(s) between the Applicant and road owner(s). Prior to construction, the Applicant will videodocument the existing roadways to verify the pre-construction roadway conditions. Upon completion of the construction activities, the Applicant will return all roadways to their preconstruction conditions, at a minimum, and video-document restored conditions.

3-94

001439

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.5

Land Use and Zoning

Land use and zoning in the Project Area was determined through review of local town laws and aerial photographs. Land use and zoning are discussed in terms of regional land use patterns, Project Area land use and zoning, agricultural land use, and future land use.
3.5.1 Affected Environment

Existing land use, potential impacts, and proposed mitigation measures are discussed in the following sections.
3.5.1.1 Regional Land Use Patterns

The Project Area is located in the western portion of Jefferson County in the Town of Cape Vincent with a portion of a transmission line and transmission owner interconnection substation in the Town of Lyme. Jefferson County is located in northwestern New York and is bordered by the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario on the north and west, St. Lawrence County to the northeast, Lewis County to the southeast, and Oswego County to the south. Jefferson County is primarily rural and dominated by agricultural land, scattered rural homes, and farms. The major population center of the County is the City of Watertown, which is about 25 miles southeast of the Project Area. This city, including other villages and hamlets in the County are primarily residential. In terms of land use, Jefferson County is characterized by 1,028 farms consisting of 330,561 acres (Census of Agriculture, 2006) of active agricultural land, and residential land uses concentrated in and around villages and hamlets. Pockets of commercial and industrial development are scattered throughout the County along major transportation corridors. The highest percentage of land use by number of parcels for the County is residential properties (62.8 percent), followed by vacant land (21.8 percent), and agricultural properties at 5.1 percent (New York State Office of Real Property Services, 2006). Agriculture is a significant contributor to the County’s overall economy. It is one of the major dairy-producing counties (12th) in the State. Other important agricultural products in the County include: raising chickens for egg production, honey production, beef production, and sugar bushes for maple syrup production. Main crops in the County include: hay, corn, and small grains (Yarnall, 2002). Despite the importance of agriculture, employment in the agricultural sector has declined over the years and only accounted for 3.4 percent of total employment in the County in 2000. Meanwhile, the educational, health, and social services (24.4 percent); retail trade (14.2 percent); and public administration (10.4 percent) sectors have grown in importance (U.S. Census Bureau, 2006).

3-95

001440

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.5.1.2 Project Area Land Use and Zoning

The Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme are predominantly rural with dairy farming leading the agricultural industry in the area. The highest percentage of land use by number of parcels for both towns is residential properties in Cape Vincent (60.1 percent) and Lyme (62 percent), followed by vacant land in Cape Vincent (25.3 percent) and Lyme (28.4 percent). The third highest percentage of land use by number of parcels was agricultural properties in Cape Vincent (7.4 percent) and 4.2 percent in Lyme (New York State Office of Real Property Services, 2006). Both towns have zoning ordinances, and review of the proposed Project would be covered under New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act. The proposed Project will be located within the Agricultural and Residential (AR) District in the Town of Cape Vincent and within the Agricultural and Rural Residence (AR) District in the Town of Lyme (Figure 3-10). A portion (0.26 miles) of the overhead transmission line will also cross the Resort (RES) District in the Town of Lyme and two poles will be placed within this district. A portion of the transmission owner substation may also be located within the RES District. The Applicant will evaluate design alternatives to avoid or minimize, to the extent practicable, placement of the transmission owner substation within this zoning district. In addition to compliance with town regulations for both Cape Vincent and Lyme, a building permit would be required through Jefferson County.
3.5.1.3 Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme

Town of Cape Vincent: The Town of Cape Vincent does not have specific regulations placed on wind energy facilities or turbines. The proposed Project would require Site Plan Approval by the Planning Board. Following approval and any additional reasonable conditions that may apply, a Zoning Permit and Certificate of Compliance is required through the Code Enforcement Office. Once all town permits are finalized, a Building Permit through Jefferson County is required prior to construction. On November 7th, 2006 St. Lawrence Wind Farm submitted a Site Plan Application to the Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board. The Planning Board issued guidance based on material contained in the St. Lawrence Wind DEIS and comments during the public comment period. The following setbacks were required by the Planning Board of Cape Vincent in response to the St. Lawrence Wind DEIS: 1,500 feet from the Village of Cape Vincent boundary line; 1,000 feet to a non-participating property line; 1,250 feet to a non-participating residence; and 750 feet to a participating residence.

3-96

001441

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Through the site plan review process and associated SEQR review, the final Project design will reflect the land use goals and conditions established by the Town of Cape Vincent zoning ordinance. In addition, the locations of turbines and associated Project components will conform to the setbacks and standards outlined in the Town of Cape Vincent's guidance (Appendix F) based on the public comment period, dated July 11, 2007. Town of Lyme: The Project would require a Special Use Permit, followed by a Zoning Permit and Certificate of Compliance. The purpose of the special permit procedure is to allow the Zoning Board of Appeals to attach reasonable safeguards and conditions to special uses (Town of Lyme, 1989). Most of the proposed overhead transmission line and substation are located within the Agricultural and Rural Residence (AR) District. A portion of the overhead transmission line (0.26 miles) will cross the Resort (RES) District and two poles will be placed within this district. A portion of the transmission owner substation may also be located within the RES District. The Applicant will evaluate design alternatives to avoid or minimize, to the extent practicable, placement of the transmission owner substation within this zoning district. New York Department of State Division of Coastal Resources Coastal Zone Consistency Review: A portion (0.41 miles) of the proposed overhead transmission line would cross the Chaumont River in the Town of Lyme and the coastal zone delineated by the New York Department of State’s Division of Coastal Resources in its Coastal Management Program (CMP). The applicant of a permit for development in the coastal zone must submit to the lead federal agency for that permit a “Statement of Consistency” that the project is consistent with New York’s federally approved coastal zone management program and policies. The New York State Department of State’s Division of Coastal Resources must concur with this Statement and issue a “Consistency Determination” before any federal permit may be issued for the Project (15 CFR 930.60). SLW will submit an application to cross the Chaumont River to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The NYS Division of Coastal Resources Consistency Determination must be issued before the Corps may issue a notice to proceed with construction of the overhead transmission line over the Chaumont River. The 0.41-mile portion of the overhead transmission line complies with the State’s applicable coastal policies. Specifically, the Project would be consistent with the following policies: 2 (development policy), 11-12 (flooding and erosion hazards policies), 21-22 (recreation policies), 27 (energy policy), 33 (water and air resources policies), and 44 (wetlands policy) as listed and described in Table 3-23.

3-97

001442

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-23 Consistency with New York State Coastal Policies1
No. 2 Policy Facilitate the siting of water-dependent uses and facilities on or adjacent to coastal waters Buildings and other structures will be sited in the coastal area so as to minimize damage to property and the endangering of human lives caused by flooding and erosion Activities or development in the coastal area will be undertaken so as to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion by protecting natural protective features including beaches, dunes, barrier islands, and bluffs. Water-dependent and water-enhanced recreation will be encouraged and facilitated, and will be given priority over non-water-related uses along the coast. Development, when located adjacent to the shore, will provide for water-related recreation, whenever such use is compatible with reasonably anticipated demand for such activities, and is compatible with the primary purpose of the development. Decisions on the siting and construction of major energy facilities in the coastal area will be based on public energy needs, compatibility of such facilities with the environment, and the facility’s need for a shorefront location. Best management practices will be used to ensure the control of stormwater runoff and combined sewer overflows draining into coastal waters. Preserve and protect tidal and freshwater wetlands and preserve the benefits derived from these areas. Consistency Measures The 0.41-mile segment of the overhead transmission line and Interconnection Substation would not preempt the reasonably foreseeable development of water dependent uses. The 0.41-mile segment of the overhead transmission line and Interconnection Substation is not located in coastal erosion hazard areas, coastal high hazard areas, or floodways. The 0.41-mile segment of the overhead transmission line and Interconnection Substation will not be located on beaches, dunes, barrier islands, or bluffs and will not result in disturbance of these areas. The 0.41-mile segment of the overhead transmission line and Interconnection Substation will not result in a barrier to the recreational use of a major portion of a community's shore. Water-related recreation use is not compatible with the development, and a reasonable demand for public use is not foreseen. Purpose and need is discussed in Section 2.3 of the SDEIS. Sections 3.1 through 3.13 discuss compatibility with the environment. The activity will be performed in accordance with applicable permit conditions, including the SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges during Construction. The 0.41-mile segment of the overhead transmission line and Interconnection Substation will not affect tidal or freshwater wetlands.

11

12

21

22

27

33

44
1

Source: NYSDOS Coastal Management Program. 2002. State Coastal Policies. Accessed December 11, 2008 http://nyswaterfronts.com/downloads/pdfs/State_Coastal_Policies.pdf.

All of the State's policies are derived from existing laws and regulations administered by various State agencies. The NYSDEC administers many of the programs found in the State’s polices (e.g., the Department operates regulatory programs, which provide protection to tidal and freshwater wetlands [Policy 44], restrict development and other activities in flood and erosion hazard areas [policies 11-12], and protect air and water resources [policies 33]). Other agencies, such as the Public Service Commission and the State Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment administer programs that regulate the siting of energy transmission facilities and regulate the location of electric power plants.

3-98

001443

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.5.1.4 Agricultural Land Use

Approximately 1,028 working farms occupy 330,561 acres in Jefferson County according to the 2002 U.S. Department of Agricultural National Agricultural Statistics Service (Census of Agriculture, 2006). The leading agricultural products in Jefferson County include: dairy products (78.1 percent), cattle and calve products (9.3 percent), hay and silage products (5.3 percent), colonies of bees and honey products (1.6 percent), and 1.6 percent as corn used for grain (Yarnall, 2002). According to U.S. Census Bureau (2006) statistics, 3.4 percent of the population was engaged in farming in 2000. The Project Area affects one agricultural district (Jefferson County Agricultural District #2 North) and the entire Project Area is located in this district. Agricultural land use is a significant component of the Project Area with approximately 6,280 (80 percent) acres of the Project Area in row crops, field crops, or pastureland. The Project Area includes approximately 60 working farms, most of which are dairy farms. The patchwork of fields and farms located in the many valleys edged by ridge tops with steep slopes is what defines the landscape/community character of the majority of the Project Area. Within the Project Area, approximately 60 percent of the area is designated as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance (Table 3-24).
Table 3-24 Summary of Prime Farmland1 in the Project Area
Farmland Class Prime Farmland Prime Farmland if Drained Not Prime Farmland Farmland of Statewide Importance
1

Total Acres by Farmland Class 77.9 101.0 111.2 256.5

Total Percent by Farmland Class 14 18 20 47

Source: Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resource Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Survey Area, State [Online].

3.5.1.5 Future Land Use

Other than the proposed Project, future land use patterns in the area are anticipated to remain largely unchanged for the foreseeable future. Inquiry with the Town of Cape Vincent found one proposed industrial development (1 acre of land bought by the Town for water storage) outside of the Project Area. Various residential developments, including a proposed seasonal trailer park development would be dispersed throughout the Town. Inquiry with the Town of Lyme found no commercial or industrial proposed or planned future developments. Several residential developments have been proposed in the Village of Chaumont and on the outskirts of town. BP

3-99

001444

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

submitted a Site Plan application to the Cape Vincent Planning Board in December 2006 for a wind energy facility. No other new projects are planned for Cape Vincent.
3.5.2 Potential Impacts

The Project would have impacts on land use. These would include temporary, constructionrelated impacts, as well as permanent, long-term impacts. These impacts are described below.
3.5.2.1 Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme

The proposed Project is designed to meet or exceed all of the requirements in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme land use and zoning ordinances. The proposed Project is compliant with current local zoning and land use regulations in Cape Vincent and Lyme.
3.5.2.2 Agricultural Land Use

Most of the proposed Project would be built on or adjacent to agricultural lands. Construction of the Project would result in the temporary disturbance of approximately 425 acres of agricultural land and the permanent conversion of approximately 41 acres of agricultural land to wind turbines, a substation, and access roads. Two types of impacts may result from wind facility construction on agricultural lands. The first is the permanent loss of productive agricultural land because it would be used for Project facilities such as access roads and turbine foundations. The second potential impact is reduced agricultural productivity of the soils disturbed during construction. Both types of impacts can be minimized or completely avoided with proper planning.
3.5.2.3 Future Land Use

The proposed Project would not interfere with alternative future plans to develop the land to be occupied by the wind energy facility or its ancillary facilities. Minimum buffers from wind turbines place a slight constraint on development that can be co-located on parcels that have wind turbines or are adjacent to wind turbines. However, capturing the wind asset provides an individual benefit to landowners, an economic benefit to the local community, and energy security, as well as environmental and human health benefits to the state. The buffers are not a significant impact on other equally desirable uses. There appears to be no conflict between the proposed Project and future residential developments.

3-100

001445

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.5.3

Mitigation Measures

3.5.3.1 Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme

The proposed Project is compliant with current local zoning and land use regulations in Cape Vincent and Lyme.
3.5.3.2 Agricultural Land Use

To minimize impacts to agricultural resources, the Project has been sited and would be built in accordance with guidelines provided by the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets (Appendix A). The agricultural protection measures provide guidance for siting wind power facilities, constructing access roads, staging and storage areas, vegetation clearing and disposal, excavation and backfilling, turbine erection, and restoration. These mitigation measures include: Minimizing impacts to normal farming operations by locating structures and access roads along field edges where possible. Having roads that must cross agricultural fields stay on ridge tops and other high ground to minimize cut and fill and potential drainage problems. Avoiding disturbance of surface and subsurface drainage features (e.g., diversions, ditches, tile lines). Building the surface of access roads through agricultural fields’ level with adjacent field surfaces. Installing culverts and water bars to maintain natural drainage patterns. Prohibiting vehicular access to turbine sites until topsoil has been stripped and permanent access roads have been constructed. Stockpiling topsoil from work areas separate from all other excavated material (e.g., rock, subsoil). Maintaining a minimum depth of 48 inches in cropland, hayland, and improved pasture areas to bury electric wires. Removing excess subsoil and rock, and onsite disposal of such material may be allowed if approved by the Environmental Monitor. Temporarily fencing work areas in active pastureland to protect livestock. Removing and disposing of all construction debris offsite at the completion of restoration. Restricting heavy equipment to designated access roads, crane paths, and work pads at the structure sites for all setup, erection, and breakdown activities. Disposing of excess concrete offsite and washing of concrete trucks outside of active agricultural areas.

3-101

001446

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Restoring agricultural land based on a seasonal schedule. Decompacting all disturbed agricultural areas to a depth of 18 inches after construction. Grading access roads to allow for farm equipment crossing and to restore original surface drainage patterns. Stabilizing restored agricultural areas with seed and/or mulch. Repairing all surface or subsurface drainage structures damaged during construction. Providing a monitoring and remediation plan of no less than two years immediately following completion of the initial restoration.
3.5.3.3 Future Land Use

Construction and operation of the proposed Project would not have a significant impact on future land uses. Consequently, no mitigation is necessary to address these impacts.
3.6 Utilities and Community Services

The Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme are served by several community facilities and services including: public utilities, police protection, fire protection and emergency response, health facilities, education facilities, and parks and recreation facilities.
3.6.1 Affected Environment

These community facilities and services are briefly discussed below, and are generally considered adequate for the local population.
3.6.1.1 Utilities and Infrastructure

Utilities: Utilities and infrastructure in the Project Area include various overhead and underground facilities. Aboveground components include electric distribution and telephone lines along most of the public roads. Communications towers, including television and radio broadcast antennas and cellular phone communications towers also occur in and around the Project Area. Underground utilities include sewer and water mains, telephone lines, and cable television lines. These utilities are concentrated in the towns and villages in the vicinity of the Project Area. Electrical services throughout Jefferson County are provided by National Grid, and natural gas is available along the Black River corridor and the southern portion of the I-81 corridor (Yarnall, 2002). An existing Development Authority of the North Country (DANC) 12-inch water line, the Western Jefferson County Regional Water Line, is located within the abandoned railroad rightof-way proposed for the overhead transmission line route. This water line provides water to 3-102

001447

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

homes in five towns, four villages and the General Brown High School The water source is the Saint Lawrence River. Police Protection: Three (3) police departments are located near the Project Site. All emergency calls are dispatched by the Jefferson County 911 center. The New York State Police and Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department have police protection jurisdiction in the Project Area, and the Cape Vincent Village Police Department patrols within its respective village limits and does not have jurisdiction beyond its municipal boundaries. The County Sheriff’s Department provides patrol cars for the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme (Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department, 2006). The New York State Police (Troop D) augments the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department and are headquartered in Oneida (New York State Police, 2006). The nearest satellite station is located about 25 miles southeast of the Project Site in Watertown. The main police stations for the Project Area include: Cape Vincent Village Police Department 177 North James Street Cape Vincent, New York 13618 (315) 654-3400 Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department 753 Waterman Drive Watertown, New York 13601 (315) 786-2700 New York State Police, Troop D, Zone 3 Station 25873 State Route 37 Watertown, New York 13601 (315) 782-2112 Fire Protection and Emergency Response: Three fire departments are located near the proposed Project Area. The Cape Vincent Volunteer Fire Department and the Three Mile Bay Fire Department provide advanced emergency medical and critical care services, and the Chaumont Fire Department provides basic life support services (New York State Department of Health, 2006a). Other nearby local fire departments may provide additional support if needed and they would be chosen based on proximity and response time. Local fire departments in the Project Area include the following:

3-103

001448

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Cape Vincent Volunteer Fire Department, Inc. 241 East Broadway Street Cape Vincent, New York 13618 (315) 654-2004 Three Mile Bay Fire Department, Inc. 8581 New York State 12 East Three Mile Bay, New York 13693 (315) 649-2888 Chaumont Volunteer Fire Department 11385 New York State 12 East Chaumont, New York 13622 (315) 649-2410 The Cape Vincent Volunteer Fire Department services most of the Project Area. There are about 55 active volunteers. The fire department’s emergency response equipment includes one Kendrick’s extrication device Exhibit 3.6.1 – Fire Districts Jurisdictional Boundaries and one basket stretcher. The Chaumont Volunteer Fire Department has approximately 48 active firefighting volunteers and 30 nonfirefighting volunteers. Its emergency response equipment includes a 1000 foot life line, two backboard and spider straps, and one stokes basket and straps. The Three Mile Bay Fire Department does not have equipment available to assist in vertical rescue. The jurisdictional boundaries of each are shown in Exhibit 3.6.1. The Cape Vincent Volunteer Fire Department has Mutual Aid Agreements with both of these area fire departments.

3-104

001449

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Health Care Facilities: Three (3) major hospitals are located in Jefferson County. The Samaritan Medical Center in Watertown and River Hospital in Alexandria Bay are both located about 26 miles from the Project Area. The Carthage Area Hospital is located about 40 miles from the Project Area in Carthage (New York State Department of Health, 2006b). As stated, local hospitals near the Project Area include: Samaritan Medical Center 830 Washington Street Watertown, New York 13601 (315) 785-4000 River Hospital, Inc. 4 Fuller Street Alexandria Bay, New York 13607 (315) 482-2511 Carthage Area Hospital 1001 West Street Road Carthage, New York 13619 (315) 493-1000 The Samaritan Medial Center provides a comprehensive range of services to visitors and residents of Jefferson County and the surrounding area, including primary medical care, ambulatory surgery, emergency services, burns care, intensive care, maternity, psychiatric, and several specialty health services. The hospital provides 294 beds for various patient needs, including medical-surgical (166), psychiatric/mental (32), pediatric (30), maternity (24), physical/medical/rehabilitation (16), neonatal care (12), pediatric and general intensive care (10), and coronary care (4). The Samaritan Medical Center also has five extension clinics that provide additional services. (NYSDOH, 2008a). River Hospital has 14 physicians on staff to provide primary care medical service, ambulatory surgery, emergency services, and social work service, as well as other specialty services to residents and visitors of Jefferson County and the surrounding thousand islands region (NYSDOH, 2008b; River Hospital, 2008). The hospital also provides 15 beds for special use (River Hospital 2008). Carthage Area Hospital, located furthest of these three hospitals from the Project area, and its several extension clinics also provide several medical care services and 48 beds (NYSDOH, 2008c). Jefferson County has 22 fire departments and organizations that provide paramedic, critical care, and basic life support ambulance services, including the Cape Vincent Volunteer Fire 3-105

001450

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Department (Advanced EMP-Critical Care). The Chaumont Fire Department is also one of several fire departments and organizations in Jefferson County that provides non-transporting first response basic life support services. (NYSDOH, 2008d) Educational Facilities: Two (2) public school districts provide educational services to the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme, including associated villages and hamlets. The Project would be located in the Thousand Islands and Lyme Central school districts. The Thousand Islands Central School District total enrollment during the 2004 to 2005 academic school year for grades K through 12 was 1,162 students (New York State Education Department, 2006a). This school district is composed of two elementary schools, one middle school, and one high school. The Cape Vincent Elementary School is located in Cape Vincent and the other three school buildings are located in the Town of Clayton. Located in Chaumont about 10 miles from the Project Area, the Lyme Central School District total enrollment during the 2004 to 2005 academic school year for grades K through 12 was 365 students (New York State Education Department, 2006b). No other public or private schools are located in the Project Area. The school district offices are located as follows:
Thousand Islands Central School District, District Office

8481 High Street Clayton, New York 13624 (315) 686-5594
Lyme Central School District

11868 Academy Street Chaumont, New York 13622 (315) 649-2417 Parks and Recreation: The Project Area and vicinity includes several parks and recreational facilities. These areas include two state parks near the water, four other scenic visitor areas, two wildlife management areas (WMAs), and one fish hatchery that is managed by three groups. These parks and recreational facilities offer many recreational opportunities. Burnham Point and Cedar Point State Parks are located near the Project Area (New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation, 2006). These parks accommodate activities such as boating, hunting, picnicking, camping, fishing, and swimming. Other scenic visitor areas near the Project Area include Beadle Point, Tibbetts Point and Lighthouse, Wilson Point, and Dablon Point. The Tibbetts Point Lighthouse is located at the entrance from Lake Ontario into the St. Lawrence River, and is still actively maintained by the

3-106

001451

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

U.S. Coast Guard. After the lighthouse became fully automated in 1976, the light-keeper’s room was converted into a hostel; the Lighthouse Museum is located adjacent to the hostel. Two WMAs are located in the Project vicinity and include: French Creek WMA, approximately 1.5 miles northeast, and Ashland Flats WMA, part of which is crossed by the overhead transmission line. In addition, the historic Cape Vincent Fish Hatchery is located near the Project Area. The State fish hatchery, formerly a Bureau of Fisheries building, was built in 1856, but is no longer managed by the government. Today, there is a program between the State, the Lake Ontario Fisheries Coalition, and the Village of Cape Vincent to raise Walleye in 13 of the 24 fish ponds in the Village of Cape Vincent that have been idle for over 30 years. Six ponds were opened in 2005, one additional pond was opened in 2006, and one additional each year for a total of 13 ponds. Each pond has the potential of raising 30,000 fingerlings each spring to be released (Village of Cape Vincent, 2005). The New York State Seaway Trail is also a State designated recreational resource in the vicinity of the Project Area. The Seaway Trail is an approximate 454 mile scenic route consisting of locals roads that parallel Lake Erie, the Niagara River, Lake Ontario, and the St. Lawrence River. The Seaway Trail has been selected as one of “America’s Byways” by the United States Department of Transportation.
3.6.2 Potential Impacts

The Project is not anticipated to result in significant adverse effects to community facilities or services within the Project Area, including utilities, emergency services, education facilities, and other community services.
3.6.2.1 Utilities and Infrastructure

Utilities: Short-term impacts during construction of the Project would be limited to minor increases in the demand for fossil fuels and petroleum products necessary for the operation and maintenance of construction equipment, machinery, and vehicles. Energy use would increase as a result of construction personnel traveling to and from the site. However, neither of these represents significant impacts on energy resources. The Project would not result in significant increases in the demand for utilities such as telephone, water, and sanitary sewer needs. Utilities would be required during construction for the operation of the staging areas (e.g., job trailers). There is a slight possibility that some overhead electrical distribution lines would have to be temporarily relocated to accommodate crane routes during construction. SLW will collaborate with utility owners to reduce impacts to their facilities to the maximum extent practicable.

3-107

001452

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Impacts to existing utility distribution facilities are not anticipated as a result of Project operation and maintenance. An existing house is located along the proposed transmission route on east side of Ashland Road. The Project has acquired sufficient easements to site the transmission line around the house. There is also a slight potential for disruption of water service during construction of the overhead transmission line. Transmission poles will be sited along the Exhibit 3.6.2 – Boom Crane same corridor as the existing DANC water line. The exisiting water line is sited within an approximately 40 to 60 foot wide permanent easement. The Project has acquired its own easements for a power line ranging in width from 66 feet to 100 feet wide. As the Project easements width is greater than the permanent width of the DANC easements, there is flexibility in siting the transmission poles, which also allows feasibility of siting both along the same corridor. An approximately 20- to 30-foot wide temporary work area adjacent to the transmission line centerline will be required to place the poles. Poles will be installed using a truck mounted auger, a boom crane (see Exhibit 3.6.2), and a telehandler (see Exhibit 3.6.3). Work will be planned prior to construction and a few locations may also be widened to allow for passing lanes or turnaround points. There are locations where the abandoned railroad bed is less than 20 feet wide and places where it is bordered by wetlands. These locations will be spanned to the greatest extent possible. The typical construction process for the overhead transmission poles includes: Augering a bore hole approximately 3 feet wide and 15 feet deep for placement of the pole. Placement of the pole with a boom crane. The pole will be lifted and tipped into the hole with the help of a telehandler controlling the pole base. Concrete may be required when installing poles, water crossings will be avoided to the greatest extent possible during delivery. Backfill of the borehole with concrete.

3-108

001453

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Work will be accomplished from either the top of the abandoned railroad ROW or along side of the ROW, depending on setback and weight restrictions. Since large trucks will be used, the potential for ground vibration exists; however speed Exhibit 3.6.3 – Telehandler limits will be strictly enforced to avoid or minimize construction-related vibrations. No blasting will be used in the vicinity of the water line to install transmisson poles. In the event that significant rock is present, the poles will be sited to avoid rock excavation. If avoidance is not feasible, rock may be drilled to avoid blasting. SLW will collaborate with DANC to design the proposed overhead transmission in a manner that avoids or minimizes impacts to their facilities. Construction guidelines will be implemented and strictly enforced for work within the vincity of the water line, and a contingency plan will be developed for the unlikely event of disruption of water service during construction. Impacts to the existing water line are not anticipated as a result of Project operation and maintenance, as the overhead transmission line will be designed with appropropriate setbacks that will minize direct or indirect impacts to the water line. In addition, the design will provide adequate spacing allowing DANC ready access to the water line for necessary repairs or improvements. SLW will develop a detailed contingency plan to deal with the unlikely event that construction or maintenance of the transmission line causes damage to the water line and disruption of water service. The Project would not result in significant adverse long-term impacts to local utilities and energy resources. Long-term energy use would increase slightly as a result of facility maintenance and operation personnel traveling to and from the site. However, these impacts would be minor because the amount of required electricity and fuel is small, and local fuel suppliers and utilities have sufficient capacity available to serve the Project’s needs. In addition, the Project will inject new power into the regional grid at the Lyme Substation increasing the local electricity supply and system reliability. As a result, no other improvements to the existing energy supply system would be necessary beyond any system upgrades identified by the National Grid Facility Study to interconnect the Project transmission line to the Lyme Substation. Emergency Services: The Project would not have significant adverse impacts on the demand for emergency services. Existing services (e.g., police, fire, ambulance, and health care) have the personnel and equipment necessary to respond to emergencies that could occur during both

3-109

001454

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

construction and operation of the Project. However, certain Project-related activities could affect the ability of emergency service providers to perform their duties. For instance, during construction, large vehicles and temporary road closures could block emergency vehicle access to area farms and homes. This is not anticipated to be a significant problem due to the small number of residents within the Project Area, the general availability of alternate access routes, and correspondence and coordination that would occur between construction managers and local police departments. SLW in collaboration with the Cape Vincent Fire Department (CVFD), have also developed an Emergency Response Plan (see Appendix B) to define prevention and emergency response measures for hazardous materials spills, medical/fire/law enforcement, weather emergencies, and evacuation. The Project also could experience vandalism and/or trespass problems that would require involvement of local police. Based on experience with other wind power projects in New York, this is not anticipated to be a significant impact. The wind turbines themselves also pose a slight risk related to falling ice that may accumulate on rotor blades during the winter. Although ice can fall off the turbine blades under certain conditions during the winter, the maximum distance ice has been observed to fall from wind turbines is less than 400 feet (Morgan et al., 1998). A more typical scenario would involve any accumulated ice falling straight down and landing around the tower base. This is consistent with the findings of Morgan et al. (1998) and with anecdotal reports from other operating wind projects in the northeastern region of the country. Compliance with setbacks and measures to control public access, such as fences and warning signs, will minimize public safety risks associated with ice shedding. Turbines have been sited to maintain a minimum distance of 1,250 feet from non-participating residences and 750 feet from participating residences. Educational Facilities: During construction, the Project would not adversely impact the local school districts. Temporary construction workers would not create significant demand for school district services or facilities because they would stay only for the duration of construction, which would be approximately 7 to 10 months. These workers typically would not relocate their families to the area for this short duration. Transportation planning for construction would take into account school bus routes and schedules. Component deliveries to the extent possible will not be conducted during school bus pick-up and drop-off time. Additional measures to manage and mitigate impacts to traffic and transportation will be developed as part of the Transportation Plan. The Project will work with transportation officials. During operation, the Project is not anticipated to result in a significant increase in the demand on educational facilities. The operating Project would employ between 4 and 6 full-time

3-110

001455

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

employees. The existing educational facilities have sufficient capacity to accommodate this small number of school children in the area. The Project could have a positive economic impact on the school districts. In New York, a portion of the funds from the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) that SLW would negotiate is typically dedicated to the school districts. In other New York communities that host wind projects, PILOT funds to school districts have significantly increased the districts ability to pay down debt, advance capital improvements, and otherwise improve the educational experience for local students. Section 3.11 provides additional discussion of school district revenues, expenditures, and indebtedness. Park and Recreation Facilities: Other community services and facilities, such as libraries and park and recreation facilities would not be adversely affected by construction or operation of the Project. Some construction workers may stay in nearby campgrounds for the constructionduration of the Project, but this number is not significant. Additional municipal and county revenue generated by the Project would help maintain and possibly expand these services and facilities. Based on available information, the Project is not expected to have a negative effect on tourism. A 2002 study conducted for the Scottish Renewables Forum and the British Wind Energy Association investigated the effect of wind farms on existing tourism at scenic areas. The researchers surveyed 307 tourists in the Argyll region of Scotland, noted for its scenic beauty and landscape, and concluded that "the wind farms are not seen as having a detrimental effect on their visit and would not deter tourists from visiting the area in the future." An additional discussion of potential visual impacts is presented in Section 3.8.
3.6.3 Mitigation Measures

The Project would have a beneficial impact on utilities and infrastructure by providing clean renewable energy that can be used by the people of Jefferson County and New York State. In addition, this would advance the New York State goal expressed in the PSC “Order Approving Renewable Portfolio Standard Policy,” issued on September 24, 2004, calling for an increase in renewable energy used in the State from the then current level of approximately 19 percent to 25 percent by the year 2013 (PSC 2008). Utilities: To protect local utilities and utility services, including aboveground electrical lines and/or poles, and buried natural gas lines, SLW would meet with the corresponding utility entities to review the Project components, Project construction schedule, identify crossing methodologies, and develop any relocation plans that may be required. Additionally, prior to construction, buried utilities would be identified by the contractor using Protection of

3-111

001456

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Underground Facility procedures (16 NYCRR Part 753) and in accordance with the Dig Safely New York Program. The Applicant will work with DANC to identify exact locations of the water line, weight restrictions for working on and around the water line, and appropriate setbacks from the water line. The setbacks will be based on several factors including industry standards and DANC requirements. Siting will also consider OHSA requirements for working setbacks around transmission lines in the event DANC needs to work on the water line during the operation of the wind farm. To specifically minimize potential impacts to the water line the Applicant will: Survey and flag the centerline of the water line prior to construction; Determine and establish approriate setbacks; Locate pole placement based on setbacks and side-slope charateristics; Adjust pole spacing to avoid potential problem areas, (e.g. steep sloped portions of the embankment); Set a low level speed limit to reduce vibrations for trucks working in the vicinity of the water line; Determine the best location of work area (top of abandoned railroad ROW versus adjacent to the ROW) for equipment used to place poles; and Develop a contingency plan in collaboration with DANC to address potential impacts to the water line or disruption in service. The contingency plan will at a minimum include the following elements: Instruction of construction workers on the presence of the water line, avoidance and minimization of potential impacts to the water line, and response procedures in the event of an impact or disruption in service to the water line. This training will be part of the initial training scheduled for the Emergency Response Plan (ERP). Daily notification to DANC on work schedules when working in the vicinity of the water line; List of contacts for notification in the event of an impact or disruption; Definitions of impacts or disruptions to include at a minimum: o breakdown of the physical water systems (installation) to the extent that it is not possible to keep the water line in use; o impacts to the quality of water requiring boiling; and o impacts to the quality of water that are considered unfit for human consumption even if boiled; Notification procedures in the event of an impact or disruption; and

3-112

001457

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Response procedures in the event of an impact to the water line or disruption of service. Emergency Services: Construction and operation of the proposed Project would not have a significant impact on most emergency services, such as police, ambulance, and health care facilities. To mitigate concerns of the local fire departments regarding inexperience with the components of the new wind facility, during construction and operation of the wind power facility, SLW would maintain appropriate level of preparedness and equipment for emergency rescue operations involving the nacelle and tower. In addition, the appropriate personnel involved with the Project would meet with the local emergency service personnel (police, fire, ambulance, and health care) to review and discuss the planned construction process. During this meeting the Project representative would review with the local personnel the important details involved with Project construction including the unique construction equipment, the overall construction process and construction scheduling. During this meeting all hazardous materials that may be present during construction and/or operation would be discussed. In collaboration with the CVFD, SLW has developed an Emergency Response Plan (ERP) to be followed by all emergency response personnel in case of an emergency at the St. Lawrence Wind Power Facility. This ERP (see Appendix B) defines prevention and emergency response measures for hazardous materials spills, medical/fire/law enforcement, weather emergencies, and evacuation at the Project Site. It was developed for the Project to ensure the safety of employees and local residents, visitors, and their property. Educational Facilities: Construction and operation of the proposed Project would not have a significant impact on educational facilities. Consequently, no mitigation is necessary to address these impacts. Further, PILOT payments to be made by SLW will provide revenues for use by school districts. Park and Recreation Facilities: Construction and operation of the proposed Project would not have a significant impact on other community services and facilities, such as libraries and park and recreation facilities. Consequently, no mitigation is necessary to address these impacts. Further, improvements to the Tibbetts Light House site proposed as mitigation for cultural resources impacts discussed in Section 3.7 will provide for enhanced user experience at this recreational facility.

3-113

001458

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.7 3.7.1

Cultural Resources Archeological Resources

3.7.1.1 Affected Environment

The area of potential effect for archeology (archeology APE) includes areas likely to have ground disturbances related to Project construction, facility lifespan and decommissioning. A review of archeological site files maintained by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation revealed 12 Native American and 5 Euroamerican archeological sites previously recorded within one mile of the APE. The Native American sites include one PaleoIndian find, three Woodland Stage sites (including one St. Lawrence Iroquois village site), and eight sites of unknown Native American prehistoric period chronological association. The five Euroamerican archeological sites include the remains of nineteenth-century structures. An additional two sites are recorded within the site files of the New York State Museum that have not been attributed to either the prehistoric or historic time periods. Review of historic cartographic sources indicated that early Euroamerican settlement in the area was near roads, most of which reflect current roadways. The Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board requires siting wind turbines no closer than 1,250 feet from participating residences, 750 feet from non-participating residences. Therefore, the Project also avoids most historic-period structures and potential archeological remains of former historic-period structures within the archeology APE. Cultural resources studies were initiated to determine the presence of archeological resources. These studies have been designed to be in compliance with the New York SHPO Guidelines for Wind Farm Development Cultural Resources Survey Work (2006). A field inspection was conducted of a majority of the Project Area of potential effects for archeology (archeology APE), including areas of proposed construction and ground disturbances. The Phase 1A investigation was conducted to identify aboveground evidence of archeological sites, areas that have the potential to contain intact archeological resources, and areas recommended for no additional testing due to wetlands, extreme slopes and/or visible evidence of ground disturbances (TtEC, 2007a). Field inspection of the Project revealed that the archeology APE is relatively undisturbed and the general topography of the archeology APE exhibits low relief. Most of the archeology APE appears to be suitable for archeological testing. The archeology APE may have been an attractive environment to Native American populations. Potable water sources are plentiful and the archeology APE retains proximity to aquatic food resources along lowland streams and marshes and across large upland marshes. Lithic resources such as Black River chert nodules are relatively abundant along many streams and riverbanks

3-114

001459

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

throughout the archeology APE. Canoe travel was possible along the shore of Lake Ontario and across the portage between the Chaumont River and French Creek, east and north of the archeology APE. Ceremonial or burial places have been recorded at several locations near the archeology APE. Thus, the archeology APE would have been suitable for occupation and/or use by Native American populations. One factor that may have limited Native American populations within the archeology APE may have been the scarcity of well drained soils that would likely have been preferred for settlement locations. Approximately nine percent of soils within the archeology APE currently exhibit good drainage (TtEC, 2007a). A Phase IB archeological survey was completed by SLW’s cultural resources consultant in 2007, and was provided to the SHPO for their review and comment (Clark, Mack and Will, 2008). A testing strategy was developed and implemented following consultation with the SHPO. In total, 3,298 30-centimeter diameter shovel tests were excavated. Only one prehistoric pottery sherd was recovered in one shovel test, while 22 historic-period artifacts were recovered in 13 scattered shovel tests. Prehistoric- and historic-period artifacts were considered isolated finds rather than archeological sites; however, a prehistoric inventory form was submitted to SHPO for the isolated pottery sherd (SHPO A04505.000177). One historic-period poured concrete foundation and other surface features and structural debris were discovered near the proposed transmission line, but these historic-period remains will be avoided during construction. SLW’s cultural resources consultant recommended that no additional archeological field investigations should be conducted for this Project (Clark, Mack and Will, 2008). SHPO reviewed the Phase 1B archeological survey report on July 16, 2008, and SHPO recommendations are discussed in Section 3.7.1.3, below. In summer 2008, the Project layout was revised reducing the number of turbines from 96 to 53. In addition, some roadways and buried electrical interconnects were changed. SLWF described the changes to the Project layout in a letter and project comparison map addressed to Nancy Herter, dated September 5, 2008. On October 30, 2008, upon review, SHPO indicated there were no archeological concerns with the revised Project layout (Letter from Nancy Herter, SHPO, to Blayne Gunderman, Acciona Energy, October 30, 2008, see Appendix F).
3.7.1.2 Impact Analysis

SLW’s cultural resources consultant recommended that construction and operation of the Project will not affect archeological resources that are potentially eligible for the NRHP (Clark, Mack and Will, 2008). In the event of future archeological discoveries in the archeological APE, SLW intends to avoid impacts to archeological resources that may be potentially eligible to the NRHP.

3-115

001460

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.7.1.3 Mitigation Measures

SHPO completed the review of archeological investigations in a letter dated July 16, 2008 (Letter from Nancy Herter, SHPO, to Blayne Gunderman, Acciona Energy, July 16, 2008, see Appendix F). SHPO expressed no further archeological concerns excepting the conditions that: 1. The SHPO receive a journal-ready article summarizing the results of the sensitivity modeling. 2. The historic features identified in the proposed above-ground transmission line are avoided by the construction, and construction plans should be submitted showing avoidance of these historic features. 3. A qualified archeologist will monitor ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the pottery find (SHPO A04505.000177). If further archeological deposits are identified, construction must cease and consultation must be initiated with the SHPO and the Onondaga Nation. Archeologically sensitive areas that must be avoided during project construction will be clearly identified as “No Access” on Project construction maps. Prior to the start of construction, and Unanticipated Discoveries Plan will be developed, describing actions to be taken in the event that archeological sites, including possible human remains, are accidentally discovered during Project construction. The Project Environmental Inspector or Project Engineer will be responsible for monitoring compliance with Project construction plans and implementing the Unanticipated Discoveries Plan.
3.7.2 Architectural Resources

3.7.2.1 Affected Environment

Historic architectural resources include standing structures that were style-dated as 50 years old or older. The APE for architecture (architecture APE) was defined by the Project viewshed which is included in the Visual Resource Assessment prepared by Saratoga Associates (see Section 3.8). The architectural site files maintained online by the SHPO indicated that there are currently 23 NRHP-listed properties located within one mile of the Project, including one NRHP District (Broadway Historical District). Three historical architectural investigations were conducted for differing parts of the architecture APE, including: 1) an architectural inventory within a one-mile ring around the proposed construction locations (TtEC, 2007b); 2) a second study within one- to two-mile ring (TRC, 2007), and; 3) a third study within two- to five-mile ring of Project construction (TRC, 2008 – Appendix H). In total, SHPO determined that 145 individual historic properties were identified that might be eligible for the NRHP. These included 37 historic properties previously listed in the New York State Register of Historic

3-116

001461

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Places (SRHP) and the NRHP (including two districts), 86 properties were identified by SHPO as eligible for inclusion in the NRHP (see Table 3-25 and Exhibit 3.7.1). Seven properties were unevaluated by SHPO and might be eligible for the NRHP, and 15 properties were determined by SHPO as not eligible for the NRHP (Letter from John A. Bonafide, SHPO, to Andrew C. Davis, New York State Department of Public Service, May 28, 2008, see Appendix F). Historic properties were widely scattered across the Project landscape, including village/hamlet and rural settings.
3.7.2.2 Impact Analysis

SHPO completed the review of historic architectural investigations in a letter dated May 28, 2008 (Letter from John A. Bonafide, SHPO, to Andrew C. Davis, New York State Department of Public Service, May 28, 2008, see Appendix F). SHPO concluded that the proposed project will have an adverse impact on cultural resources. SHPO identified 38 properties that should undergo additional visual assessment and requested additional visual simulations to continue SHPO review. Several key areas where visual impacts should be addressed include the Village of Cape Vincent and National Register-listed properties and districts. Since preparation of the DEIS, SLW has initiated measures to reduce adverse effects on historic properties. The number of proposed turbines has been reduced from 96 to 53 turbines, reducing

3-117

001462

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-25 (Sheet 1 of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number Jean Philipe Galbrand du Fort House (90NR01173) John Borland House (90NR01168) Otis Starkey House (90NR01181) Warren Wilson House (90NR01130) Captain Louis Peugnet House (90NR1126) George Reynolds House (90NR01127) Reuter Dyer House ( 90NR01124) Nicholas Cocaigne House (90RN1121) Johnson House (90NR01125) Broadway Historic District (90NR01169) James Buckley House (90NR01170) Remy Dezengremel House (90NR01122) Joseph Docteur House (90NR01123) Xavier Chevalier House (90NR01120) Claude Vautrin House (90NR01129) Fairview Manor (05NR05454) St. Vincent of Paul Catholic Church (90NR01180) Union Meeting House (90NR01128) Burnham House (90NR01171) Gen Sacket House (90NR01178) Lewis House (90NR01175) Anthony Levi building (90NR1166) Aubertine Building (90NR01167) 31469 Rosiere Road 6338 Gosiere Road 33110 Mason Road 38289 State Route 12E, Clayton 139 Kanady Street 6433 Millens Bay Road 565 Broadway 467 James Street 230 Market Street 580 Broadway 496 Broadway 30538 Rosiere Road 169 Joseph Street Village of Cape Vincent 33071 Tibbetts Point 2867 Favret Road 29902 County Road 4 34191 Route 12E 32115 County Road 6 4670 Favret Road 9500 Point Street 127 Joseph Street Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent 313 James Street Cape Vincent Address Village/Town Determination 1 NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL

Map Code

NRL-1

NRL-2

NRL-3

NRL-4

NRL-5

NRL-6

NRL-7

NRL-8

NRL-9

NRL-10

NRL-11

NRL-12

NRL-13

NRL-14

NRL-15

NRL-16

NRL-17

NRL-18

NRL-19

NRL-20

NRL-21

NRL-22

NRL-23

3-118

001463

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-25 (Sheet 2of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number Glen Building (90NR01174) Roxy Hotel (90NR01176) Cornelius Sacket House (90NR01177) Rogers Brothers Farmstead (95NR00907) Tibbetts Point Lighthouse (90NR01119) Wilcox Farmstead (90NR03009) Chaumont House (90NR03014) Chaumont Historic District (90NR03013) Evans Gaige Dillenback House (90NR03016) George House (90NR03018) St. Johns Episcopal Church (90NR01179)* Duvillard Mill (90NR01172) Vincent Le Ray House (90NR01182) house farmstead farmstead farmstead Beechwood outbuilding associated with Beechwood house farmstead servants quarters house house 3204 NY 12E 2481 NY 12E 31429 CR 6 31429 CR 6 596 W. Broadway 523 W. Broadway 523 W. Broadway 266 N. Lake Street 139 S. Kanady Street 29766 CR 6 2066/2072 Deerlick Road 375 Broadway 583 Broadway 352 Market Street 27405 Washington Street 27655 Evans Road Along Main Street 11616 Main Street County Route 57 Tibbetts Point 27658 Dablon Point Road 571 Broadway 310 Broadway Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Chaumont Chaumont Chaumont Chaumont Chaumont Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent 352 Broadway Cape Vincent Address Village/Town Determination 1 NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE

Map Code

NRL-24

NRL-25

NRL-26

NRL-27

NRL-28

NRL-29

NRL-30

NRL-31

NRL-32

NRL-33

NRL-34

NRL-35

NRL-36

T-4

T-7

T-10

T-14

T-20

T-21

T-24

T-25

T-26

T-36

T-47

3-119

001464

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-25 (Sheet 3 of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number house house Market Street Cemetery house house house house house house tourist cabins factory (now historical museum) house house farmstead house house The United Church commercial - fisheries house house Riverside Cemetery house tourist cabins boat house house 662 S. James Street 561 S. James Street 437 S. James Street 260 E. Broadway 567 E. Lake Street 212 William Street 742 E. Broadway (rear) No number; State Route 12E 32719 NY 12E 34725 County Route 7 34765 CR7 35109 CR 7 233/235 S. Point Street 134 N. Point Street 173/175 N. James Street 184 N. Market Street 131 W. Gouvello Street 151 W. Gouvello Street 266 S. Market Street 179 W. Lake Street 320 S. Market Street 383 S. Market Street No address; Market Street 277 W. Broadway Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent 139 W. Broadway Cape Vincent Address Village/Town Determination 1 NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE UN NRE UN NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE

Map Code

T-48

T-50

T-78

T-91

T-93

T-98

T-101

T-126

T-127

T-129

T-147

T-155

T-167

T-176

T-181

T-184

T-209

T-247

T-264

T-269

T-297

T-301

T-336

T-337

T-346

3-120

001465

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-25 (Sheet 4 of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number farmstead house tourist cabins house Cedar Point State Park office building parsonage New England Barn St. Lawrence Union Cemetery house farmstead St. Vincent de Paul Church house commercial building farmstead house house farmstead farmstead farmstead house house New St. Vincent de Paul Cemetery Judd Cemetery Sand Bay Cemetery Bayworth Farm 30485 Rosiere Road Vacant, no number; W side Hell St. 5477/5553 Constance Road 5477/5553 Constance Road 32175 Hell Street 4609 Favret Road 250 Center No number; NY State Route 12E No number; NY State Route 12E No number; NY State Route 12E 27846 Dablon Point Road 31305 Rosiere Road 5851 Dezengremel Road 31345 Rosiere Road 31385 Rosiere Road 7242 Millens Bay Road 33751 Rosiere Road St. Lawrence Union Cemetery 33905 Rosiere Road 35158 Rosiere Road Cedar Point SP 36091 State Route 12E 35681 State Route 12E 35530 State Route 12E Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent 35438 CR 7 Cape Vincent Address Village/Town Determination 1 NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE UN NRE UN NRE

Map Code

T-356

T-358

T-359

T-368

T-380/HR-35

T-408

T-420

T-421

T-424

T-428

T-445

T-450

T-453

T-461

T-464

T-470

T-471

T-473

T-479

T-484

T-505

C-1

C-3

C-4

HR-9

3-121

001466

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-25 (Sheet 5 of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number Merchant House Edsall House Vincent Schaumont Farmstead Hemple House and Farm Furman House Rosseau House St. Vincent de Paul Cemetery Worner House and Farm Calhoun House and Dairy Farm farmstead Kernan Cottage Hickory Point Club Cottages Kernan Cabin Carleton Villa Kernan House Kernan Cottages George Brothers Building (90NR03017) Borden House Sizeland Cottage 1 Sizeland Cottage 2 Walts House St. Paul's ME Church White House J. Wells House Wells Settlement/Wells Family Cemetery 3063 Carleton Island Road #1 3089 Carleton Island Road #1 3063 Carleton Island Road #1 3158 Carleton Island Road #3 3164 Carleton Island Road #3 3164 Carleton Island Road #3 27428 Mill Street 27707 Water Street 27605 Water Street 27587 Water Street 27375 Washington Street 27487 Washington Street 27490 Washington Street 29340 Ashland Road 30228 / 30215 Ashland Road Grenadier Island Road #3 15782 French Creek Road 30252 Burnt Rock Road Intersection of Rosiere and Dezengremel roads 30485 Rosiere Road 30411 Rosiere Road 30374 Rosiere Road 30321 Rosiere Road 69031 Stony Point Road Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Clayton Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme 27341 Stony Point Road Cape Vincent UN NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE UN NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRL NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE Address Village/Town Determination 1

Map Code

HR-11

HR-12

HR-15

HR-16

HR-17

HR-18

HR-20

HR-22

HR-32

HR-36

HR-40

HR-41

HR-42

HR-43

HR-44

HR-45

HR-46

HR-50

HR-52

HR-53

HR-54

HR-55

HR-56

HR-62

HR-63

3-122

001467

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-25 (Sheet 6 of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number Mitchell House and Farm Harris/Emerson Cemetery Thomas House Anthony House/Farm Dodge Farm Colello House 37455 NY Route 12E 12283 County Route 9 31700 Swalia Road Lyme Clayton Clayton 10163 County Route 8 Lyme Robinson Road, west of Three Mile Creek Lyme 27817 Three Mile Point Road North Lyme Address Village/Town Determination 1 NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE

Map Code

HR-64

HR-68

HR-69

HR-70

HR-71

HR-72

1

NRE = National Register Eligible; NRL = National Register Listed; UN = Unevaluated, but considered NRE

3-123

001468

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

visual effects on some historic properties. For the 38 properties identified by SHPO that required additional visual assessments, eight simulations were created to assist analyses of impacts (see Appendix I). As measured by the number of turbines observed from historic properties, the new turbine alignment reduced visual impacts at 22 properties. Visual impacts were generally similar when comparing the former (96 turbines) and new (53 turbines) alignments at 13 historic properties. Increased visual impacts were observed at three historic properties as a result of the new alignment. A letter describing this assessment of the visual impacts of the revised turbine alignment was submitted to SHPO on October 14, 2008. (Letter from Blayne Gunderman, Acciona Energy, to John Bonafide, SHPO, October 14, 2008, see Appendix F).
3.7.2.3 Mitigation Measures

In addition to avoidance and reduction measures, SLW intends to perform other mitigation for visual effects. SLW held a meeting on October 15, 2008 with Cape Vincent town supervisors and Lyme councilmen and the town historian to identify projects that may satisfy the Towns’ and SHPO’s expectations for appropriate mitigation. The Town of Cape Vincent expressed interest in renovations to the historic Tibbetts Lighthouse property. A meeting on December 6, 2008 with Joe Dudek, President of the Tibbetts Point Lighthouse Historical Society, identified several restoration priorities, including burying electrical lines at the entrance to the historic property, eave and porch replacement and painting at the Keeper’s Cottage, and new fencing around the property, all potentially to be funded by SLW. The Town of Lyme was reluctant to discuss visual mitigation with SLW because the Town of Lyme currently has a moratorium on wind energy development in effect. Town Supervisor, Scott Aubertine, indicated that once the moratorium is lifted, the Town would be pleased to discuss mitigation measures. SLW will continue drafting a Memorandum of Agreement for Visual Impact Mitigation, to be approved by the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme and by SHPO.
3.8 3.8.1 Visual Resources/Community Character Introduction

The 2007 DEIS included a Visual Resource Assessment (VRA) of the proposed Project to identify potential visual and aesthetic impacts and to provide an objective assessment of the visual character of the Project. The VRA was provided as Appendix C of the DEIS. The VRA followed New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Program Policy “Assessing and Mitigating Visual Impacts” (NYSDEC, 2000) and SEQRA criteria for analyzing and minimizing impacts on visual resources. This visual policy requires a visual assessment when a proposed facility is potentially within the viewshed of a designated aesthetic resource. Where significant adverse aesthetic impacts are identified, the Applicant (e.g., developer) is

3-124

001469

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.7.1 -

3-125

001470

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

required to employ reasonable and practicable measures to eliminate, mitigate or compensate for such effects. The following identifies and evaluates the potential visual impact of the Current Project incorporating key components of the 2007 VRA by reference.
3.8.1.1 Project Description

The 2007 VRA was based on the original 96-turbine project (Original Project). The currently proposed project is limited to 53 turbine locations and a total capacity of approximately 79.5 MW (Current Project). At the time of the 2007 VRA, the specific turbine type and model had not yet been selected. In order to consider the worst-case scenario, the VRA assumed the largest turbine model under consideration would be used throughout the project. The studied turbine type was a 3.0 MW unit measuring 275 feet (84 meters) tall from ground to nacelle (hub) with a 300-foot (91 meter) rotor diameter with the apex of blade rotation reaching approximately 425 feet (129.5 meters) above ground elevation. Under the revised application, the project proposes to use a smaller 1.5MW turbine measuring 262 feet (80 meters) ground to nacelle, with a 269foot (82-meter) rotor diameter, resulting in the apex of blade rotation reaching approximately 390.5 feet (121 meter blade tip height). The Current Project is substantially smaller in scale than the Original Project. The number of turbines is reduced from 96 to 53 (45%) and each turbine is reduced in height from 425 feet to 390.5 feet (-34.5 feet) compared to turbines evaluated the 2007 VRA. Turbines are generally contained within the same perimeter area as the Original Project. However, with fewer units, turbine density is substantially reduced.
3.8.1.2 Landscape Character/Visual Setting

Landscape character is defined by the basic pattern of landform, land use, vegetation, water features, and human development. This descriptive section offers an overview of the intrinsic visual condition of the study region and establishes the baseline condition from which to evaluate visual change. The Project Area is located in the western portion of Jefferson County in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme. Jefferson County is located in northwestern New York and is bordered by the St. Lawrence River to the north and Lake Ontario to the west, St. Lawrence County to the northeast, Lewis County to the southeast, and Oswego County to the south. Jefferson County is primarily rural and dominated by agricultural land, scattered rural homes, and farms. Further, the proposed Project is located in the Thousand Islands region of New York State at the convergence of the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario. The Thousand Islands is a popular waterfront vacation destination extending from the eastern shore of the St. Lawrence River. The region,

3-126

001471

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

well known for the scenic beauty of its shoreline and over 1,800 islands, offers numerous cultural, recreational and entertainment attractions. While resorts, restaurants and tourist attractions on the American side of the River are largely clustered around the Villages of Clayton and Alexandria Bay, recreational and tourism resources are found throughout the Thousand Islands area, including the waterfront portion of the study area. A more detailed discussion of the natural and built elements that comprise the visual setting of the study area is provided in Section 2.0 of the 2007 VRA.
3.8.2 Visual Impact Assessment

Although the St. Lawrence Windpower Project remains a highly visible facility, the reduced size of the Current Project results in less impact on the aesthetic resources of the region than presented in the 2007 VRA. The following summarizes this difference:
3.8.2.1 Affected Viewshed

Due to the height and number of proposed wind turbines, both the Original and Current Projects would be visible from locations throughout the 5-mile visual study area. A viewshed analysis included in the 2007 VRA identified the geographic area within which there was a relatively high probability that some portion of the Original 96-turbine Project would be visible. SLW prepared a revised viewshed map to illustrate the visibility of the Current 53-turbine Project (see Exhibits 3.8.1 and 3.8.2). Viewshed Methodology: The overall accuracy of viewshed mapping is dependent on the number and location of control points (study points representing proposed turbines) used in the viewshed calculation. To calculate the maximum range of potential turbine visibility, one control point was established at the turbine high point (i.e., apex of blade rotation) for each of the 53 turbines. The resulting composite viewshed identifies the geographic area within the 5-mile study radius where some portion of the proposed wind energy Project (the apex of one or more turbine blades) is theoretically visible. One viewshed map was prepared defining the area within which there would be no visibility of the Current Project because of the screening effect caused by intervening topography (see Exhibit 3.8.1). This treeless condition analysis is used to identify the maximum potential geographic area within which further investigation is appropriate. A second map was prepared illustrating the probable screening effect of existing mature vegetation. This vegetated condition viewshed identifies the geographic area within which one would expect to be substantially screened by intervening forest vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.2).

3-127

001472

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.8.1 -

3-128

001473

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.8.2 -

3-129

001474

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Identified viewshed areas are further quantified to illustrate the number of turbines that may be visible from any given area. This cumulative degree of visibility is summarized on each map using the following groupings: 1-10 turbines visible; 11-20 turbines visible; 21-30 turbines visible; 31-40 turbines visible; and 41-53 turbines visible By themselves, the viewshed maps do not determine either how much of each turbine is visible above intervening landform or vegetation (e.g., 100%, 50%, 10% etc. of total turbine height) or whether a specific wind turbine will actually be visible from any given vantage point, but rather the geographic area within which some portion of one or more turbines theoretically would be visible. In this evaluation, ArcGIS 9.1 and ArcGIS 3D Analyst software was used to generate viewshed areas based on publicly available digital topographic and vegetation data sets. Viewshed overlays were created by first importing a digital elevation model (DEM) of the study area. This DEM, obtained through the United States Geological Survey (USGS) from its National Elevation Dataset, is based on the best available digital elevation data including the 1:24,000-scale USGS topographic maps (10-foot contour intervals) and is accurate to a 10-meter grid cell resolution. The computer then scanned 360 degrees across this DEM from each control point, distinguishing between grid cells that would be hidden from view and those that would be visible based solely on topography. Areas of the surrounding landscape were identified where each control point would be visible; areas in shadow would not be visible. Vegetation data was extracted from the National Land Cover Data (NLCD) acquired from the USGS. The NLCD dataset, produced by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristic Consortium, was developed from multi-spectral classification of LANDSAT 7 Thematic Mapper (TM) imagery (2001) sampled to a 30-meter grid cell resolution.1 The screening effect of vegetation was then incorporated by adding 40 feet in height to DEM grid cells that are completely forested (according to NLCD dataset) and repeating the calculation procedure. Based on field

1

Thirty-meter resolution is the smallest vegetative grid cell increment commonly available for the Project region. This resolution provides an appropriate degree of accuracy for development of five-mile viewshed maps given the fairly broad patterns of existing land use in the area, as well as the accuracy of mapped topographic data (i.e., 1:24,000-scale USGS topographic maps with 10-foot contour intervals)

3-130

001475

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

observation, most trees in forested portions of the study area are significantly taller than 40 feet. This height thus represents a conservative estimate of the effect of vegetative screening 2. It is important to note that the NLCD dataset is based on interpretation of forested areas that are clearly distinguishable from multi-spectral satellite imagery. As such, the potential screening value of site-specific vegetative cover such as small hedgerows and individual trees and other areas of non-forest tree cover may not be represented in the viewshed analysis. Furthermore, the NLCD dataset does not include the screening value of existing structures. This is a particularly important distinction in populated areas, including the Village of the Cape Vincent and other commercial and residential areas, where existing structures are likely to provide significant screening of distant views. With these conditions, the viewshed map conservatively overestimates potential Project visibility in areas where the Project may be substantially screened from view. It is noteworthy that untrained reviewers often misinterpret treeless condition viewshed maps to represent wintertime, or leafless condition visibility (i.e., Exhibit 3.8.1). In fact, deciduous woodlands provide a substantial visual barrier in all seasons. Since the NLCD dataset generally identifies only larger stands of woodland vegetation that is clearly distinguishable from multispectral satellite imagery, viewshed maps that include the screening value of existing vegetation are equally representative of both leaf-on and leaf-off seasons (i.e., Exhibit 3.8.2). Treeless condition analysis is provided only to assist experienced visual analysts to identify the maximum potential geographic area within which further investigation is appropriate. Such topographyonly viewshed maps are not generally intended or appropriate for public interpretation or presentation. Finally, the viewshed maps indicate locations in the surrounding landscape in which one or more turbine highpoints (i.e., apex of blade rotation) might be visible. These maps do not imply the magnitude of visibility (i.e., how much of each turbine is visible), the viewer’s distance from each visible turbine or the aesthetic character of what may be seen. Viewshed Interpretation: Table 3-26 indicates the degree of theoretical visibility of the revised Project within the 5-mile radius study area as illustrated on the viewshed map. The geographic area affected by the Current 53-turbine Project is approximately the same as was found for the
2

The 2007 VRA viewshed used the Coastal Services Change Analysis Program (C-CAP) dataset acquired from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (2000) to represent vegetative cover. The revised viewshed used 2001 NLCD acquired from the USGS to represent vegetative cover. The more current NLCD data does not include coverage in Canada.

3-131

001476

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Original 96-turbine Project. The principal difference between the two projects is the number of turbines potentially visible from any given location. Throughout the five-mile radius study area, the number of turbines in the revised Project potentially visible at given locations is substantially reduced as compared to the original viewshed map. This clearly results from the reduction in project size by 43 turbines.
Table 3-26 Viewshed Coverage Summary
Topography Only Viewshed (see Exhibit 3.8.1) Acres Percent Cover 3,144 4% 2,587 2,093 1,967 2,504 78,898 91,193 3% 2% 2% 3% 86% 100% Vegetation and Topography Viewshed (see Exhibit 3.8.2) Acres Percent cover 29,430 32% 9,132 6,242 6,254 6,291 33,343 91,193 10% 7% 7% 7% 37% 100%

No Turbines Visible 1-10 Turbine Visible 11-20 Turbines Visible 21-30 Turbines Visible 31-40 Turbines Visible 40-53 Turbines Visible Total

Table 3-26 and Exhibit 3.8.2 indicate that one or more of the proposed turbines theoretically would be visible from approximately 68 percent of the five-mile radius study area. Approximately 32 percent of the study area will likely have no visibility of any wind turbines due to intervening landform or vegetation. Turbine visibility is most common from inland agricultural areas where cleared lands provide long vistas in the direction of turbine groupings. Project visibility will also occur from unscreened coastal areas (primarily along the St. Lawrence River), Lake and River Islands, and from on-water vantage points throughout the five-mile radius study area. The area most directly affected by views of the Project will be central portion of the turbine area where multiple turbines will be visible up to 360-degrees around a vantage point. Viewers to the north and west of CR 6 (Rosiere Road) will encounter views of a large number of turbines (30 to 53) at foreground and middleground distances (e.g., ½ to 3 miles). Similar views of multiple turbines will occur along portions of NY Rte.12E, Deer Lick, Favret, Mason, McKeever, Sand Bay (CR 9), Johnny Cake, Gosier, Hell, Constance, Wilson, and Branche Roads. This high degree of Project visibility is the result of broad agricultural clearing and the lack of screening hills. While the viewshed map indicates theoretical visibility of multiple turbines within the Village of Cape Vincent, field observation determined the prevalence of mature street trees and site landscaping combined with one- and two-story residential and commercial structures (not

3-132

001477

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

included in the multi-spectral satellite imagery of the NLCD dataset) will commonly block views in the direction of the Project from the downtown and waterfront area. Filtered or framed views of proposed turbines are possible through foreground vegetation and buildings from the perimeter of the Village. Direct views are more prevalent on the outskirts of the Village where localized residential and commercial structures, street trees and site landscaping are less likely to provide a visual barrier. Similarly, viewshed mapping indicates a high degree of Project visibility from many shoreline areas northeast of the Village of Cape Vincent. Based on field observation, such visibility would likely be limited to some degree by existing clusters of localized (non-forest) vegetation that is not clearly distinguishable in the multi-spectral satellite imagery of the NLCD dataset. Nonetheless, views of some portion of numerous turbines will occur from shoreline areas along the St. Lawrence River. Direct views of multiple turbines will also occur from near shore and offshore vantage points on the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario. Views are also found on Lake and River islands from shoreline areas oriented toward the Project, as well as island hillsides with down slope vistas in the direction of the Project. Water and island views are found on both sides of the international border within the five-mile study area.
3.8.2.2 - Affected Receptors

Inventory of Visually Sensitive Resources: Because it is not practical to evaluate every conceivable location where the proposed Project might be visible, it is accepted visual assessment practice to limit detailed evaluation of aesthetic impact to locations generally considered by society, through regulatory designation or policy, to be of cultural and/or aesthetic importance. In rural areas where few resources of statewide significance are likely to be found, it is common practice to expand inventory criteria to include places of local sensitivity or high intensity of use. Definitions of visual resources are found on page 18-19 of the 2007 VRA. A detailed description of inventoried resources is provided in Section 3.2.2 of the 2007 VRA. Visibility Evaluation of Inventoried Resources: Each inventoried visual resource was evaluated to determine whether a visual impact might exist. This consisted of reviewing viewshed maps and field observation to determine whether or not individual resources would have a view of the proposed Project. A trained field observer visited each inventoried visual resource determined through viewshed evaluation to be potentially affected by the Original Project to confirm view potential. Potential visibility was confirmed if the observer found an unobstructed line-of-sight between the subject 3-133

001478

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

receptor and the study area. Field confirmation of potential visibility was conducted on December 12, 2006, December 31, 2006 and December 21, 2007. Refer to Section 3.4.1 of the 2007 VRA for additional information. Table 3-27 lists 783 visual resources located within the five-mile study area and identifies potential Project visibility. The location of these visual resources is referenced by numeric code within Exhibit 3.8.3.
3.8.2.3 – Factors Affecting Visual Impact

To bring order to the consideration of visual resources, the inventory of visual resources is organized into several recognizable elements; landscape units, viewer/user groups, distance zones and circumstances of view. Landscape Units: Landscape units are areas with common characteristics of landform, water resources, vegetation, land use, and land use intensity. While a regional landscape may possess diverse features and characteristics, a landscape unit is a relatively homogenous, unified landscape of visual character. Landscape units are established to provide a framework for comparing and prioritizing the differing visual quality and sensitivity of visual resources in the study area. Discrete landscape units were identified through field inventory and air photo interpretation, and divide the study area into zones of unique patterns and visual composition. Landscape Units identified within the Project Area include: Rural Agricultural; Rural Hamlet; Village Center; and Waterfront Definitions of these Landscape Units are provided in Section 3.3.1 of the 2007 VRA. In response to the recommendation of regulatory agencies following review of the 2007 VRA, an additional Landscape Unit has been added to this assessment. Open Water – Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River are popular recreational waterways during the late spring though early fall seasons. The Thousand Islands region is well known for the scenic character of its shoreline and many islands, attracting thousands of visitors annually. The aesthetic quality of the open water landscape is central to the region’s appeal as a vacation destination.
3

67 visual resources were evaluated in the 2007 VRA. Eleven supplemental receptors, including locations along the Seaway Trail, as well as locations on Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River were added at the request of several regulatory review agencies following initial review of the 2007 VRA.

3-134

001479

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-27 (Sheet 1 of 4) Visual Resource Visibility Summary
Potential Visibility Map ID
Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Excluding Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.1) Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Including Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.2)
1

Receptor Name

Municipality

Inventory Type

Actual View Likely Based on Field Confirmation of Existing Lineof-sight

Cultural Resources
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10.1 12.1 13 18 19 20 21 22 26 27 28 30 31 32 35 36 Broadway Historic District LeRay, Vincent, House St. Vincent of Paul Catholic Church Lewis House Roxy Hotel Borland, John, House Buckley, James, House St. John's Episcopal Church Sacket, Cornelius, House Starkey, Otis, House Galband du Fort, Jean Philippe, House Glen Building Burnham, E. K., House Duvillard Mill Aubertine Building Anthony, Levi, Building Sacket, General, House Cocaigne, Nicholas House Peugnet, Captain Louis, House Johnson House Tibbetts Point Lighthouse Rogers Brothers Farmstead Dyer, Reuter, House District School No. 3 Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Lyme Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance View from top of lighthouse

3-135

001480

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-27 (Sheet 2 of 4) Visual Resource Visibility Summary
Potential Visibility Map ID
Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Excluding Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.1) Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Including Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.2)
1

Receptor Name

Municipality

Inventory Type

Actual View Likely Based on Field Confirmation of Existing Lineof-sight

Cultural Resources
37 38 40.1 41 42 43 44 48 50 51 53 54 55 56 Dezengremel, Remy, House Wilson, Warren, House Fort Haldimand Site Reynolds, George, House Chevalier, Xavier, House Vautrin, Claude, House Union Meeting House Docteur, Joseph, House The Row Taft House Taylor Boathouse Three Mile Bay Historic District Wheeler, Menzo, House Stone Shop, Old Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Lyme Town of Lyme Town of Lyme Town of Lyme Town of Lyme Town of Lyme Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance

Not visited

Recreational and Tourist Resources
9.1 10 11 13.1 15 17 19.1 24 25 31.1 31.2 Village of Cape Vincent River Access Village of Cape Vincent Historical Museum Cape Vincent Village Green Cape Vincent Recreation Park Wolfe Island Ferry Landing Cape Vincent Public Dock NYS DEC Research Station & Aquarium Village of Cape Vincent Boat Launch Village Waterfront Park Lake Ontario ¾ Mile Off Tibbetts Point Lake Ontario 2 Miles Off Tibbetts Point Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Local Importance Local Importance Local Importance Local Importance Local Importance Local Importance Statewide Significance Local Importance Local Importance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance

3-136

001481

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-27 (Sheet 3 of 4) Visual Resource Visibility Summary
Potential Visibility Map ID
Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Excluding Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.1) Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Including Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.2)
1

Receptor Name

Municipality

Inventory Type

Actual View Likely Based on Field Confirmation of Existing Lineof-sight

Recreational and Tourist Resources
31.3 36.1 40.2 40.3 40.4 40.5 40.6 40.7 49 59.2 62 33 35.1 Lake Ontario ¾ Mile Off Wilson Point Long Point State Park Burnham Point State Park St. Lawrence River off Cape Vincent St. Lawrence River off Wolfe Island St. Lawrence River off Burnham Point St. Lawrence River off Millen Bay St. Lawrence River off Cedar Point Ashland Flats Wildlife Management Area Cedar Point State Park French Creek State Wildlife Management Area Intersection Merchant Rd & CR6 NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail Near Bates Rd Town of Cape Vincent Town of Lyme Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Clayton Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Local Importance Other Statewide Significance

Highway Corridors/Roadside Receptors
39 40 41.1 41.2 45 46 47 57 58 59 59.1 Intersection Favret Rd & Hell St. NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail at Burnham Point State Park NY Rte 12E—Seaway Trail near CR 8 NY Rte 12E—Seaway Trail near Poplar Tree Bay NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail Near Millen Bay Intersection Millers Bay Rd & Rosiere Rd (CR4) Intersection Favret Rd & CR 4 Intersection CR5 & Millers Bay Rd Intersection Macomb Settlement Rd & St Lawrence Rd (CR9) Intersection Rosiere Rd (CR4) & St Lawrence Rd (CR9) NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail at Cedar Point State Park Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Lyme Town of Clayton Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Other Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Other Other Other Other Other Statewide Significance

3-137

001482

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-27 (Sheet 4 of 4) Visual Resource Visibility Summary
Potential Visibility Map ID
Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Excluding Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.1) Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Including Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.2)
1

Receptor Name

Municipality

Inventory Type

Actual View Likely Based on Field Confirmation of Existing Lineof-sight

Highway Corridors/Roadside Receptors
61 63 65 NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail Near Pelo Rd Intersection of Deferno Rd & Grant Rd NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail 1 Mile SE of Clayton Town of Clayton Town of Clayton Town of Clayton Statewide Significance Other Statewide Significance

Residential/Community Resources
14 59.3 Cape Vincent Elementary School CR 9 – Thousand Islands HS
1

Village of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent

Local Importance Other

Key
Visibility Indicated No Visibility Indicated Filtered view through trees or limited view through structures possible (field observed) Substantially screened by local structures or vegetation (field observed)

3-138

001483

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

The waters of the Lake and River contain buoys, lighthouses, maritime commercial and industrial activities, a variety of boats and ships including freighters, ferries, and pleasure craft. In general, these waters appear dark bluish-gray in color. Cloud cover, wind sun reflectance and surface glare affect the color of the water and often create patterns of color variation over the water surface. The visible texture of the water is affected by the action of waves. These factors contribute to an amalgam of shimmering colors and patterns of light that are of aesthetic interest and may command the attention of observers. Shoreline development of varying density is visually evident across the coastal area. Waterfront residences, docks, bulkheads, boats and other structures are common along the mainland and many islands on both the American and Canadian coast. Views across open water are unencumbered. Vistas radiate 360 degrees and extend to the horizon and the distant shoreline. Viewer/User Groups: Viewers engaged in different activities, while in the same Landscape Unit, are likely to perceive their surroundings differently. The description of viewer groups is provided to assist in understanding the sensitivity and probable reaction of potential observers to visual change resulting from the proposed Project. Viewer/User groups identified within the Project Area include: Local Residents; Through Travelers; Recreational Users; and Tourists Definitions of these viewer/user groups are provided in Section 3.3.2 of the 2007 VRA. Distance Zones: Distance affects the apparent size and degree of contrast between an object and its surroundings. A description of each distance zone is provided in Section 3.3.3 of the 2007 VRA to assist in understanding the effect of distance on potential visual impacts. Distance zones include: Foreground (0-½ mile); Middleground (½ mile to 3 miles); and Background (3-5 miles to horizon)

3-139

001484

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.8.3 -

3-140

001485

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Duration/Circumstances of View: The analysis of a viewer’s experience must include the distinction between stationary and moving observers. The length of time and the circumstances under which a view is encountered is influential in characterizing the importance of a particular view. Duration and circumstances of view include: Stationary Views; and Moving Views Definitions of duration and circumstances of view are provided in Section 3.3.4 of the 2007 VRA.
3.8.2.4 – Summary of Affected Resources

As listed in Table 3-27, of the original 78 inventoried visual resources, 22 would likely be screened from the proposed Project by either intervening landform or vegetation/structures and are thus eliminated from further study. Table 3-28 summarizes the factors affecting visual impact (landscape unit, viewer group, distance zone and duration/frequency/circumstances of view) described above for each of the 56 visual resource determined to have a potential view of the proposed Project. Although the Current Project includes 43 fewer turbines than the Original 96-turbine Project, all of the same visual resources will likely view one or more turbines. The Current Project does not eliminate any previously affected visual resource from view, nor does it newly impact any previously unaffected receptor. There is no difference in the number of visual resources potentially affected by the Current 53-turbine Project. The principal difference is simply the number of turbines visible from each affected receptor.
3.8.2.5 – Degree of Project Visibility

Photo Simulations: To provide a fair and adequate representation of how turbines will appear within the study area from a variety of distances and locations, representative photo simulations were prepared. The specific location of these simulations was chosen for their relevance to the factors affecting visual impact (viewer/user groups, landscape units, distance zones and duration/frequency and circumstances of view discussed above (see Section 3.8.2.1 above). These simulations do not include views from all potentially affected visual resources, but rather provide representative examples of how the proposed project will appear under varying circumstances of distance and landscape character. Because the visibility of wind turbines will most commonly affect local residents from rural homes and during daily travel along local roads, and most open vistas of the Project typically occur in isolated locations along rural roadways, views selected for photo simulation favor such views even though the number of viewers will not be large.

3-141

001486

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-28 (Sheet 1 of 4) Visual Resources with Potential Views of the Project
Factors Affecting Visual Impact Distance (miles) /Distance Zone
(nearest turbine) 1.3 / Middleground (T1) 1.3 / Middleground (T3) 1.1 / Middleground (T3) 1.0 / Middleground (T3) 0.9 / Middleground (T3) 1.0 / Middleground (T3) 1.2 / Middleground (T5) tourists local residents local residents local residents Village Center Village Center Village Center 52 5 2 Rural Agricultural Waterfront Waterfront local residents, recreational, tourists local residents, recreational, tourists NA - limited view local residents local residents local residents local residents 1.2 / Middleground (T5) 1.2 / Middleground (T5) 1.1 / Middleground (T5) 1.1 / Middleground (T8) 0.9 / Middleground (T8) 0.9 / Middleground (T8) 0.7 / Middleground (T3) 0.2 / Foreground (T4) 1.2 / Middleground (T1) 1.8 / Middleground (T1)

Map ID Municipality
Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Local Importance Local Importance NA - limited view NA - limited view Statewide Significance NA - limited view Statewide Significance NA - limited view Statewide Significance NA - limited view Village Center Village Center Village Center Statewide Significance NA - limited view Village Center Statewide Significance NA - limited view Village Center Local Importance NA - limited view Village Center local residents local residents Local Importance NA - limited view Village Center local residents, recreational, tourists Statewide Significance NA - limited view Village Center local residents Statewide Significance NA - limited view Village Center local residents Statewide Significance NA - limited view Village Center local residents Statewide Significance NA - limited view Village Center local residents, tourists

Receptor Name

Inventory Type

Number of Turbines Theoretically 1 Visible (see Exhibit 3.8.3)

Landscape Unit

Viewer/User Group(s)

Moving/ Stationary
Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary Stationary

2

Broadway Historic District

3

LeRay, Vincent, House

4

St. Vincent of Paul Catholic Church

13

Galband du Fort, Jean Philippe, House

13.1

Cape Vincent Recreation Park

14

Cape Vincent Elementary School

19

Burnham, E. K., House

19.1

NYS DEC Research Station & Aquarium

20

Duvillard Mill

21

Aubertine Building

22

Anthony, Levi, Building

24

Village of Cape Vincent Boat Launch

25

Village Waterfront Park

26

Sacket, General, House

27

Cocaigne, Nicholas House

28

Peugnet, Captain Louis, House

30

Johnson House

3-142

001487

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-28 (Sheet 2 of 4) Visual Resources with Potential Views of the Project
Factors Affecting Visual Impact Distance (miles) /Distance Zone
(nearest turbine) 2.9 / Middleground (T1) 3.9 / Background (T1) 3.0 / Background (T1) 2.1 / Middleground (T2) 1.0 / Middleground (T2) 1.4 / Middleground (T6) 2.1 / Middleground (T9) 7.1 / Background (T14) local residents local residents travelers, local residents Waterfront Waterfront Waterfront 53 53 53 53 Open Water Open Water Open Water Open Water travelers, local residents, tourists tourists recreational recreational recreational recreational recreational 1.3 / Middleground (T14) 0.4 / Foreground (T10) 0.4 / Foreground (T15) 0.4 / Foreground (T26) 2.0 / Background (T22) 0.5 / Middleground (T26) 1.5 / Middleground (T8) 2.0 / Background (T3) 1.5 / Middleground (T23) 1.6 / Middleground (T39)

Map ID Municipality
Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Lyme Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance 32 Statewide Significance 17 Statewide Significance 35 Other 53 Statewide Significance 47 Statewide Significance 9 Rural Agricultural Rural Agricultural Rural Agricultural Statewide Significance 53 Waterfront Statewide Significance 47 Rural Agricultural Statewide Significance 35 Rural Agricultural local residents travelers, local residents, tourists recreational Other 8 Rural Agricultural Statewide Significance 35 Waterfront local residents travelers, local residents, workers Statewide Significance 35 Open Water recreational Statewide Significance 53 Open Water recreational Statewide Significance 36 Open Water recreational

Receptor Name

Inventory Type

Number of Turbines Theoretically 1 Visible (see Exhibit 3.8.3)

Landscape Unit

Viewer/User Group(s)

Moving/ Stationary
Moving Moving Moving Stationary Moving Stationary Moving Stationary Stationary Stationary Moving Moving Stationary Stationary Moving Moving Moving Moving

31.1

Lake Ontario ¾ Mile off Tibbetts Point

31.2

Lake Ontario 2 Miles Off Tibbetts Point

31.3

Lake Ontario Off ¾ Mile Wilson Point

32

Rogers Brothers Farmstead

33

Intersection Merchant Rd & CR6

35

Dyer, Reuter, House

35.1

NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail Near Bates Rd

36.1

Long Point State Park

37

Dezengremel, Remy, House

38

Wilson, Warren, House

39

Intersection Favret Rd & Hell St.

40

NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail at Burnham Point State Park

40.1

Fort Haldimand Site

40.2

Burnham Point State Park

40.3

St. Lawrence River off Cape Vincent

40.4

St. Lawrence River off Wolfe Island

40.5

St. Lawrence River off Burnham Point

40.6

St. Lawrence River off Millen Bay

3-143

001488

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-28 (Sheet 3 of 4) Visual Resources with Potential Views of the Project
Factors Affecting Visual Impact Distance (miles) /Distance Zone
(nearest turbine) 2.1 / Middleground (T53) 0.6 / Middleground (T53) 0.4 / Foreground (T38) 0.5 / Foreground (T22) 0.3 / Foreground (T36) 0.4 / Foreground (T31) 0.5 / Middleground (T38) 0.4 / Foreground (T38) travelers, local residents travelers, local residents local residents Rural Agricultural Rural Agricultural 4 34 53 53 53 Rural Agricultural Rural Agricultural Waterfront Rural Agricultural Waterfront recreational travelers, local residents travelers, local residents travelers, local residents travelers, local residents, tourists local residents travelers, local residents, tourists 0.8 / Middleground (T32) 1 / Middleground (T14) 1.3 / Middleground (T14) 2.1 / Middleground (T14) 4.1 /Background (T32) 2.9 / Middleground (T47) 1 / Middleground (T47) 1.1 / Middleground (T53) 0.4 / Foreground (T53) 2.2 / Middleground (T47)

Map ID Municipality
Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Lyme Town of Clayton Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Clayton Town of Clayton Statewide Significance Other Statewide Significance Other Other Other 18 Statewide Significance 41 Statewide Significance 53 Other 50 Other 47 Rural Agricultural Rural Agricultural Rural Agricultural Statewide Significance 50 Waterfront Statewide Significance 30 Waterfront Statewide Significance 53 Rural Agricultural local residents local residents travelers, local residents, tourists Statewide Significance 45 Rural Agricultural local residents Statewide Significance 47 Waterfront travelers, local residents, tourists Statewide Significance 52 Waterfront travelers, local residents, tourists Statewide Significance 24 Waterfront local residents Statewide Significance 53 Open Water recreational

Receptor Name

Inventory Type

Number of Turbines Theoretically 1 Visible (see Exhibit 3.8.3)

Landscape Unit

Viewer/User Group(s)

Moving/ Stationary
Moving Stationary Moving Moving Stationary Stationary Stationary Moving Moving Moving Stationary Stationary Moving Moving Moving Moving Moving/ Stationary Moving

40.7

St. Lawrence River off Cedar Point

41

Reynolds, George, House

41.1

NY Rte 12E—Seaway Trail near CR 8

41.2

NY Rte 12E—Seaway Trail near Poplar Tree Bay

42

Chevalier, Xavier, House

43

Vautrin, Claude, House

44

Union Meeting House

45

NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail Near Millen Bay

46

Intersection Millers Bay Rd & Rosiere Rd (CR4)

47

Intersection Favret Rd & CR 4

48

Docteur, Joseph, House

49

Ashland Flats Wildlife Management Area

57

Intersection CR5 & Millers Bay Rd

58

Intersection Macomb Settlement Rd & St Lawrence Rd (CR9)

59

Intersection Rosiere Rd (CR4) & St Lawrence Rd (CR9)

59.1

NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail at Cedar Point State Park

59.3

CR9 - Thousand Islands HS

61

NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail Near Pelo Rd

3-144

001489

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-28 (Sheet 4 of 4) Visual Resources with Potential Views of the Project
Factors Affecting Visual Impact Distance (miles) /Distance Zone
(nearest turbine) 2.5 / Middleground (T47) 4.3 /Background (T47) 5.0 / Background (T47)

Map ID Municipality
Town of Clayton Town of Clayton Town of Clayton Statewide Significance 2 Waterfront travelers, local residents, tourists Other 14 Rural Agricultural travelers, local residents Local Importance 1 Rural Agricultural recreational

Receptor Name

Inventory Type

Number of Turbines Theoretically 1 Visible (see Exhibit 3.8.3)

Landscape Unit

Viewer/User Group(s)

Moving/ Stationary
Stationary Moving Moving

62

French Creek State Wildlife Management Area

63

Intersection of Deferno Rd & Grant Rd

65

NY Rte.12E-Seaway Trail 1 Mile SE of Clayton

1

Viewshed mapping does not include the screening value of existing structures. This is a particularly important distinction in populated areas, including the Village of the Cape Vincent and other

commercial and residential areas, where existing structures provide significant screening of distant views. With these conditions, the viewshed map (Exhibit 3.8.2) conservatively overestimates theoretical visibility in areas where the Project may be substantially screened from view. For this reason the approximate number of turbines visible is not reported for visual resources located in the Village Center Landscape Unit.

3-145

001490

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Original Project Simulations: The 2007 VRA included 16 representative photo simulations. These simulations represented a worst-case condition assuming the Original 96-turbine Project using 3.0 MW units measuring 275 feet (84 meters) tall from ground to nacelle (hub), up to 425 feet (129.5 meters) at the apex of blade rotation. The Current 53-turbine Project proposes a smaller 1.5MW turbine measuring 262 feet (80 meters) ground to nacelle, up to 390.5 feet (121 meter) at the apex of blade rotation. All photo simulations of the Original Project are presented in Appendix A of the 2007 VRA. Current Project Simulations: Considering the 2007 VRA evaluated a worse-case condition most of the simulations contained in the 2007 VRA have not been revised to reflect the lesser impact of the Current Project. However, to compare the change in project visibility between the Original Project and Current Project, four (4) of the original simulations that had views of turbines under both the Original and Current Project configurations were updated. These photo simulations from these four locations are provided in Appendix I herein. The following summarizes and compares project visibility under both the Original and Current Project configurations. Figure 1: VP2 Broadway Historic District - The Broadway Historic District is a National Register Historic District located along the St. Lawrence River in the western portion of the Village of Cape Vincent. The location selected for photo simulation is representative of constrained views typical of the Village Center Landscape Unit. In this vicinity, structures and trees generally block most views, however, filtered or framed views are possible through foreground vegetation and buildings. The photo simulation location is a vantage point where a limited line-of-sight between intervening structures and vegetation allows a view in the direction of the Project. Few other locations with similar visibility are found within the historic district or western portion of the Village. This study location is a worst-case vantage point. Although viewshed mapping indicates that many turbines theoretically would be visible from this location, field verification determined intervening structures, street trees and other local vegetation would screen most, if not all turbines from view. Note: The photo simulation of the Original Project from the Broadway Historic District (see Figure A1 of the 2007 VRA) was found to have a minor alignment inaccuracy that revealed a greater degree of project visibility than would actually 3-146

001491

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

occur from this vantage point. This discrepancy has been corrected. Figure 1 (Appendix I) includes a revised simulation of the Original Project as well as a simulation of the Current Project for comparison purposes. Figure 2: VP24 Village of Cape Vincent Boat Launch (compare with 2007 VRA Figure A2) The Village of Cape Vincent public boat launch is a heavily used seasonal waterfront recreation facility in the eastern portion of the Village. The location selected for photo simulation is representative of constrained views typical of the Village Center Landscape Unit. In this vicinity, structures and trees generally block most views; however, filtered or framed views are possible through foreground vegetation and buildings. The photo simulation location is a vantage point where a limited line-of-sight between intervening structures and vegetation allows a view in the direction of the Project. Few other locations with similar visibility are found along the Village waterfront. This study location is a worst-case vantage point. Although viewshed mapping indicates that many turbines theoretically would be visible from this location, field verification determined intervening structures, street trees and other local vegetation would screen most turbines from view. Figure 3: VP43 Vautrin, Claude House (compare with 2007 VRA Figure A9) - The Claude Vautrin House (c.1855), located on Mason Road in the Town of Cape Vincent, is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. This private residence is surrounded by open agricultural land with little topographic relief. This receptor was selected for photo simulation as a representative example of exposed views typical of the Rural Agricultural Landscape Unit where distant vistas (½ mile or more) are common across the expansive agricultural plain. The Vautrin House is located along the south perimeter of the Project Area. Due to the lack of intervening topography or significant vegetation, unimpeded view of numerous turbines extending nearly 180 degrees is likely. Viewshed mapping indicates that some portion of many, if not all Project turbines theoretically would be visible above intervening vegetation from this location. Field verification confirms this finding. Although this study location is a worst-case vantage point, this degree of project visibility is typical of many places within the Rural Agricultural Landscape Unit.

3-147

001492

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Figure 4:

VP45 NY Rte. 12E – Seaway Trail Near Millen Bay (compare with 2007 VRA Figure A10) - The Seaway Trail is a 454-mile scenic route paralleling Lake Erie, the Niagara River, Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River. Selected as one of “America’s Byways” by the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Seaway Trail follows NY Rte.12E through the study area from Clayton southeast to Sackets Harbor. This location was selected for photo simulation as a representative example of open views along much of the Seaway Trail in the Town of Cape Vincent where distant vistas (½ mile or more) are common across the expansive agricultural plain. The Seaway Trail in this vicinity parallels the north perimeter of the Project Area. Due to the lack of intervening topography or significant vegetation along much of the Seaway Trail in the Town of Cape Vincent, unimpeded view of numerous turbines, often extending nearly 180 degrees, is likely. Viewshed mapping indicates that some portion of many, if not most turbines theoretically would be visible above intervening vegetation from this location. Field verification confirms this finding. Although this study location is a worst-case vantage point, this degree of project visibility is typical of many places within the Rural Agricultural Landscape Unit.

Supplemental photo simulations are also provided to illustrate the extent of project visibility from additional key locations. These photo simulations were added at the request of several regulatory review agencies following initial review of the 2007 VRA. The following summarizes project visibility from each of the supplemental receptors. Photo simulations from these supplemental locations are also provided in Appendix I herein4. Figure 5: Figure 6: VP41.2 NY Rte 12E – Seaway Trail near CR 8 (panoramic view); and VP41.2 NY Rte 12E – Seaway Trail near Poplar Tree Bay (panoramic view) Similar to Figure 4, these supplemental locations were selected for photo simulation as representative examples of open views along the Seaway Trail in the Town of Cape Vincent where distant vistas (½ mile or more) are common across the expansive agricultural plain.

4

Several of the supplemental simulations are presented in panoramic format to fully illustrate views extending beyond the field-of-view of a single photo frame. Panoramic views are a compilation of 50mm (equivalent) photo frames. Panoramic images illustrate a wider field-of-view than can be captured in a single photo frame, and by their nature distort normal perspective. To remedy this condition, photo simulations of these views are also provided as a series of single 50mm (equivalent) frames covering the full extent of the associated panorama.

3-148

001493

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Viewshed mapping indicates that some portion of many, if not most turbines theoretically would be visible above intervening vegetation from this location. Field verification confirms this finding. Although this study location is a worstcase vantage point, this degree of project visibility is typical of many portions of Route 12E in the Town of Cape Vincent. Figure 7: VP59.3 CR9 – Thousand Islands High School (panoramic view) – Thousand Islands High School is located on County Route 9 near the intersection with NYS Route 12E. The high school is nearly surrounded by open agricultural land with little topographic relief. This receptor was selected for photo simulation as a representative example of exposed views typical of the Rural Agricultural Landscape Unit where distant vistas (½ mile or more) are common across the expansive agricultural plain. This receptor is located along the northeast perimeter of the Project Area. Due to the lack of intervening topography or significant vegetation, unimpeded view of numerous turbines extending nearly 180 degrees is likely. Viewshed mapping indicates that some portion of many, if not most turbines theoretically would be visible above intervening vegetation from this location. Field verification confirms this finding. Although this study location is a worst-case vantage point, this degree of project visibility is typical of many places within the Rural Agricultural Landscape Unit. Figure 8: Figure 9: Figure 10: Figure 11: Figure 12: Figure 13: Figure 14: Figure 15: VP31.1 Lake Ontario off Tibbetts Point; VP31.2 Lake Ontario off Tibbetts Point; VP31.3 Lake Ontario off Wilson Point; VP40.4 St. Lawrence River off Wolfe Island; VP 40.3 St. Lawrence River off Cape Vincent (panoramic); VP 40.5 St. Lawrence River off Burnham Point; and VP 40.6 St. Lawrence River off Millen Bay; and VP 40.7 St. Lawrence River off Cedar Point (panoramic); Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River, bordering the Project Area to the north and west, are popular recreational waterways during the late spring through early fall season. The Thousand Islands Region is well known for the scenic character of its shoreline and many islands, attracting thousands of visitors annually. The open water landscape is central to the region’s appeal as a vacation destination. 3-149

001494

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Figures 8 through 15 (Appendix I) provide typical views of the Current Project from three (3) locations on Lake Ontario and five (5) locations on the St. Lawrence River. Due to the lack of intervening coastal topography, unimpeded view of numerous turbines, often extending nearly 180 degrees, is likely from on-water vantage points. Viewshed mapping indicates that some portion of many, if not all turbines theoretically would be visible above intervening vegetation. Field verification confirms this finding. Degree of Project Visibility Summary: Photo simulations illustrate that, when visible, a substantial portion of individual turbines will be seen above intervening landform and vegetation. From foreground vantage points (within ½ mile), all or most of the 275-foot tall turbine tower, nacelle and 300-foot diameter turbine rotor will commonly be visible above intervening vegetation. From background vantage points (3+ miles), foreground vegetation will often screen the lower portions of the turbine structure (tower and nacelle) limiting views to the upper portion of the rotor turning above the tree line. This high degree of Project visibility is attributed to the broad agricultural clearing and lack of screening hills typical throughout much of the five-mile radius study area. The Current Project is substantially smaller in scale than the Original Project. The number of turbines is reduced from 96 to 53 (45 percent) and each turbine is reduced in height from 425 feet to 390.5 feet (-34.5 feet) compared to turbines evaluated the 2007 VRA. Turbines are generally contained within the same perimeter area as the Original Project. However, with fewer units, turbine density is substantially reduced.
3.8.2.6 – Compatibility with Regional Landscape Patterns

The visual character of a landscape is defined by the patterns, forms and scale relationships created by lines, colors, and textures. Some patterns dominate while others are subordinate. The qualitative impact of a project is the effect the development has on these patterns, and by corollary, the visual character of the regional landscape. Existing Landscape: The visible patterns (form, line, color, and texture) found within the Project region can best be described as representative of the agricultural landscape typical of northern Jefferson County, NY. Given the rural nature of the study area, visible colors are natural, muted shades of green, brown, gray, and other earth tones. When viewed from a

3-150

001495

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

distance, the landscape maintains a rather uniform and unbroken blending of colors, which tend to fade with hazing of varying atmospheric conditions. The following describes the compatibility of the proposed Project with regional landscape patterns within which it is contained and viewed. Form: The form of the regional landscape is essentially a planar landscape. The woodland edge of agricultural fields commonly creates a brief vertical offset of the prevailing planar form. The proposed wind energy project will be comprised of approximately 53 thin tapered vertical structures distributed throughout the landscape; topped with large rotating blades. The introduction of such clearly man-made and kinetic structures creates an obvious visual disruption of the agricultural landscape. Line: The existing landscape maintains a horizontal line formed by extended vistas over an agricultural plain that often forms the visible horizon. The well-defined vertical form of the approximately 53 turbines visible across this plain introduces a contrasting and distinct perpendicular element into the landscape. Views will commonly include multiple turbines at varying distances from the viewer. While the horizontal configuration of turbines across the landscape is an approximate grid pattern, turbine rows will most commonly be viewed off-axis creating the appearance of a rather random arrangement. Color: The neutral off-white color of the proposed turbine tower, nacelle and blades will be most often viewed against the background sky. Under these conditions the turbines would be highly compatible with the hue, saturation and brightness of the background sky and distant elements of the natural landscape. Color contrast will decrease with increasing distance and/or periods of increased atmospheric haze or precipitation. Texture: Tubular style monopole towers have been specifically selected, instead of skeletal (or lattice) frame towers, to minimize textural contrast and provide a more simple, visually appealing form. Scale/Spatial Dominance: The proposed wind turbines will be the tallest visible elements on the horizon and will be disproportionate to other elements commonly visible on the regional landscape. From most foreground and middleground vantage points the contrast of the proposed turbines with commonly recognizable features, such as structures and trees, will result in the proposed Project being perceived as a highly dominant visual element.

3-151

001496

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.8.2.7 – Shadow Flicker

Under certain combinations of geographical position, time of day and time of year, the sun may pass behind the rotor of a wind turbine and cast a shadow over neighboring properties. When the blades rotate, the shadow flicks on and off; the effect is known as shadow flicker. Shadow flicker impacts occur only within buildings where the flicker appears through a narrow window opening. The seasonal duration of this effect can be calculated from the geometry of the machine and the latitude of the potential site. In most cases however, where separation is provided between wind turbines and nearby dwellings, shadow flicker is not a problem. (Scottish Executive Development Department, 2002). Only dwellings within 130 degrees either side of north relative to a turbine can be affected and the shadow can be experienced only within 10 rotor diameters of the wind farm. (TNEI Services Ltd., 2007). The Current Project substantially reduces the occurrence of shadow flicker at nearby residences. A study of shadow flicker impact of the Original Project is contained in Appendix K of the DEIS. Based on the Original 96-turbine layout, of 197 studied shadow receptors located within 10 rotor diameters, 34 receptors were projected to be impacted by shadow flicker of more than 30 hours per year. An updated shadow flicker study of the 53-turbine Current Project is contained in Appendix J. The updated study found that, of 186 studied shadow receptors located within 10 rotor diameters: 75 (40.3 percent) will be affected less than 1 hr/yr; 87 (46.7 percent) will be affected 1-10 hrs/yr; 16 (8.6 percent) will be affected 11-20 hrs/yr; and 8 (4.3 percent) will be affected 21-30 hrs/yr. None of the 186 studied shadow receptors located within 10 rotor diameters would be impacted more than 30 hours per year. The shadow flicker analysis presents a highly conservative assessment of potential flicker impact. This assessment simply identifies the total time a shadow could fall on the exterior of studied structure. The analysis does not consider whether or not a window exists on the impacted side of a structure that might result in a period of shadow flicker on the interior of a building, or whether site screening might prevent impacts even where a window with the proper orientation exists. Given the conservatism of the study, and the low levels of impacts projected, no adverse impact associated with shadow flicker is expected to result from the currently proposed project. The most impacted residences will not experience more than 30 hours per year of impact. For

3-152

001497

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

residences where there are intermittent shadow flicker impacts, is greatest, such impacts might be considered an annoyance by some, or might be unnoticed by others. Aviation Obstruction Lighting: The United States Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires red flashing aviation obstruction lighting be placed atop the nacelle of many project Exhibit 3.8.4 – Approved FAA Lighting Plan turbines to assure safe flight navigation in the vicinity of the Project. The currently proposed Project will reduce the number of aviation obstruction lights necessary. Only 34 illuminated turbines will be necessary for the Current 53-turbine project (see Exhibit 3.8.4). Compliance with FAA regulations would have required approximately 50 turbines be illuminated under the Original 96-turbine Project. Transmission Line: The proposed Project includes an approximately nine (9) mile long 115 kV overhead transmission line and new collection and interconnect substations. The transmission line will generally follow an existing abandoned railroad bed and current underground water line for approximately 7.5 miles in a southeasterly direction into the Town of Lyme. At the hamlet of Chaumont, the transmission line will turn to the northeast, approximately 750 feet north Old Town Spring Road for approximately ½ mile before turning southeast and crossing the Chaumont River. The transmission line will then connect to the new Rockledge substation. The transmission line will leave Rockledge crossing CR 179 and terminating at the existing electric substation. A Transmission Infrastructure Visibility Study is provided as Appendix K. The following summarizes key findings of this assessment. View Description - This transmission line will include approximately 150 wooden monopole structures, approximately 68 to 75 feet in height. Wires will be suspended from diagonally braced horizontal insulator assemblies. Transmission structures will be spaced approximately

3-153

001498

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

300 feet apart. These simple wooden poles will be similar in character to roadside utility poles found along most public roads. While the poles will be roughly 1½ to 2 times the height of typical utility poles, the distance between poles will be greater. Typical roadside utility poles are commonly spaced 100-200 feet apart depending on their height. Views From Roadways - The proposed transmission line will follow an abandoned railroad grade for approximate 7.5 miles (85 percent of its total length). Only a short section (approximately 500-600 feet) will be along the roadside (CR 179 near the existing substation). Direct roadside visibility will be substantially limited to crossings at: Old Town Springs Road – Town of Lyme County Route 8 – Town of Lyme Merchant Road – Town of Lyme County Route 5 – Town of Lyme (refer to Figure 8) Ashland Road – Town of Lyme Burnt Rock Road – Town of Cape Vincent County Route 4 (Rosiere Road) – Town of Cape Vincent (refer to Figure 12) Hell Street– Town of Cape Vincent (refer to Figure 14) Wilson Road – Town of Cape Vincent Figures 8, 12, 14, 22 and 24 (Appendix K) illustrate transmission line views at road crossings. Distant Views - From some vantage points the proposed transmission line will be visible in the distance across open fields. Such views may include multiple poles extending across open areas. The degree of visibility depends on distance from the observer. Figures 2, 4, 6, 10, 12, 16 and 22 (Appendix K) illustrate transmission line views across open fields. Visually Sensitive Areas – The proposed transmission line crosses the Chaumont River approximately 3,500 feet upstream of the Route 12E bridge in Chaumont. The proposed crossing is approximately 900 feet downstream of an existing transmission line crossing the Chaumont River. The Chaumont River is a popular boating and fishing resource. Figures 2, 18 and 20 (Appendix K) illustrate the transmission line crossing of the Chaumont River. The Ashland Flats Wildlife Management Area (WMA) is open to the public for hunting, fishing, and hiking. A designated snowmobile trail crosses the central portion of the WMA. The existing abandoned railroad creating the western boundary of the WMA is shown on WMA maps as a foot-trail. The proposed transmission line would be located along the abandoned railroad grade in this area. Figure 10 (Appendix K) illustrates the view of the transmission line passing through the

3-154

001499

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Ashland Flats WMA as seen from Swamp Road. Figure 14 (Appendix K) illustrates the view of the transmission line along the existing railroad grade.

The Bay Breeze Golf Links is a 9-hole course near the hamlet of Chaumont. The proposed transmission line would extend in a northerly direction from the existing abandoned railroad grade, adjacent to the 5th green before turning to the northeast across open field. The transmission line will be directly visible from the 5th fairway and green, the 6th tee, and other areas of the golf course. Figure 4 (Appendix K) illustrates the view of the proposed transmission line from the 6th tee at the Bay Breeze Golf Links. The overhead transmission line will connect the new collection substation on Swamp Road in the Town of Cape Vincent with the new Rockledge substation on CR 179. The Rockledge substation will connect to the transmission grid through an existing National Grid electric substation located on the opposite side of CR 179 in the Town of Lyme. The substations will include an array of transformers, line termination structures, surge protection, grounding, metering, switching, protection and other control equipment. The substations will be contained within a chain link fence enclosure. Views of the new collection substation will be limited to lightly traveled Wilson Road and more distant views from a short segment of Favret Road. The view of the substation from Favret Road is illustrated in Figure 16 (Appendix K). Views of the interconnect substation will be limited to CR 179 in the immediate vicinity of the proposed substation. The view of the interconnect substation from CR 179 is illustrated in Figure 24 (Appendix K).
3.8.3 Mitigation Measures

Current Turbine Reduction: Although the St. Lawrence Windpower Project will be a visible facility, the reduced size of the Current Project effectively mitigates visual impact by reducing the number and size of turbines visible when compared to the Original Project. Reduced Density - The Current Project reduces the number of turbines from 96 to 53 (45%). The geographic area affected by the Current 53-turbine Project is approximately the same as was found for the Original 96-turbine Project. The principal difference is the number of turbines potentially visible from any given location. Throughout the five-mile radius study area, the number of turbines potentially visible substantially reduced as compared to the Original Project. Reduced Height – The height of each turbine is reduced from 425 feet to 390.5 feet (-34.5 feet) compared to the Original Project. The reduction of the height reduces the vertical scale of the project. 3-155

001500

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Increased Setback - The project is classified under the Town of Cape Vincent Zoning Ordinance as a utility, and is, therefore, permissible as a site plan use in the Agricultural / Residential District. The Planning Board has required that the wind turbines be sited outside of the River District, the boundary of which is 1,000 feet from the centerline of 12E. SLW, however, has chosen to site its turbines an additional 1,000 feet away from the boundary of the River District boundary in order to minimize visual impacts on the River District and the River, itself. Other Mitigation Opportunities: Considering the proposed Project will include up to 53 wind turbines that will be visible over a wide viewshed area, traditional treatments such as fences, earthen berms and vegetative screening cannot be applied in an effective manner to screen these major structures. However, such treatments will be used where practicable to screen foreground views from specific fixed receptors, such as houses. The following mitigation measures are proposed for the Project: The wind turbines will be painted (using a non-specular material) an off-white color and would not be used for commercial advertising. SLW places a high priority on facility maintenance, not only for operational purposes, but for aesthetic appearances in the community as well. The turbine areas and facilities will be kept orderly and maintained on a regular basis. Perimeter screen plantings will be used to minimize visibility of the proposed substations and Operations and Maintenance Building. Aviation warning lighting will be limited to the minimum required by the FAA. The Project will purchase aviation warning lights that are shielded or otherwise directed so that they are the least visible from the ground, and are sited in accordance with applicable Town land use laws and ordinances. Due to the height of the proposed turbines, the FAA requires red flashing aviation obstruction lighting to be placed atop the nacelle on 35 turbines, to assure safe flight navigation in the vicinity of the Project.
3.8.4 Visual Impact Conclusion

The U.S. Department of Energy and New York State Public Service Commission have mandated that renewable energy sources, such as wind turbines, will provide an increasing percentage of the nation’s electricity in the coming years. Meaningful development of renewable wind energy will reduce the reliance on fossil fuel combustion and nuclear fission facilities and result in reduction in air pollutants and greenhouse gasses. This Project is proposed to meet, in small part, this ambitious federal and state objective to provide an environmentally friendly and renewable energy source to help meet the growing energy needs for New York State residents and business.

3-156

001501

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

By their very nature, modern wind energy projects are large and visible facilities. The need to position these tall moving structures in visible locations cannot be readily avoided. The siting of wind turbines within a rural agricultural area provides increased opportunity for potentially discordant views both near and far. While the use of mitigation techniques will help to minimize adverse visual impact, the construction of the St. Lawrence Windpower Project will be an undeniable visual presence on the landscape. However, unlike development projects such as housing complexes and commercial centers, the proposed wind energy facility can and will be decommissioned and removed at the end of its useful working life. All of the towers will be removed and the project area restored to as near its present condition as possible, thus restoring the landscape to its original condition.
3.9 3.9.1 Air Quality Affected Environment
Exhibit 3.9.1 – Air Monitoring Stations in the Project Vicinity

The NYSDEC Division of Air Resources publishes air quality data annually. The most recent air quality data available is the 2007 Annual New York State Air Quality Report - Ambient Air Monitoring System (NYSDEC, 2007). This report includes ambient air quality data through 2007, as well as longterm monitoring trends in air quality derived from data collected at monitoring stations across the State. The following is a summary of existing air quality as reported therein. Concentrations are taken from monitoring stations located in Jefferson County, New York, or the nearest location (Exhibit 3.9.1). Ambient air quality standards are shown in parentheses. Short-term concentrations are based on the highest and second-highest measured concentrations (consistent with the applicable standard not to be exceeded more than once per year) unless otherwise noted. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) [Nick’s Lake #2167-03] Annual - 0.0009 parts per million (ppm) (0.03 ppm) 24-hour - 0.006 ppm (0.14 ppm) 3-hour - 0.010 ppm (0.50 ppm) 3-157

001502

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Inhalable Particulates (PM10) [Nick’s Lake #2167-03] 2004 Annual – 13 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) (Sampling terminated in 2005) Inhalable Particulates Less Than 2.5 Microns (PM2.5) [Potsdam #4477-01] Annual Average of Last 3 Years – 6.7 ug/mg3 (15 ug/m3) Average of 98th Percentile of Last Three Years – 22 ug/mg3 (65 ug/m3) Ozone (O3) [Perch River #2223-01] 4th Highest Daily Maximum 8-hour Average during Last 3 Years - 0.079 ppm (0.08 ppm) PM10 (Sulfates and Nitrates) [Nick’s Lake #2167-03] Sulfate Fraction 2004 Annual – 3.7 ug/m3 (Data after 2004 not available) Nitrates Fraction 2004 Annual – 0.2 ug/ m3 (Data after 2004 not available) The EPA Green Book (EPA, 2008) lists Currently Designated Non-Attainment Areas for all criteria pollutants by county for the entire United States. As of its last update on August 15, 2008, Jefferson County is designated as within attainment for all major pollutants monitored, with the exception of 8-hour (hr) ozone, which is out of compliance in part of the county. Energy use is one of the single largest sources of greenhouse gases in the U.S. and the world because conventional fossil fuels, such as coal, produce carbon dioxide (CO2) as a byproduct of combustion. There is currently approximately 30 percent more CO2 in the atmosphere than there was at the start of the Industrial Revolution, and atmospheric CO2 levels are expected to double during this century. The US emits about 25 percent of global warming pollution even though it has only four percent of the world's population (Energy Information Administration 2004). Average global temperatures have risen already by one degree Fahrenheit, and projections indicate an increase of two to ten degrees within this century. With increasing temperatures resulting from use of conventional fossil fuels, global warming threatens human populations and the world's ecosystems with worsening heat waves, floods, drought, extreme weather, and by spreading infectious diseases (IPCC, 2001).

3-158

001503

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.9.2

Potential Impacts

Wind energy benefits the local ambient air quality and long-term health of the atmosphere because it produces electricity without emitting pollutants. Unlike conventional fossil fuel-fired electric power plants, no pollutant emissions are associated with wind power generation. To the extent that electricity produced by wind energy displaces electricity produced by fossil-fired power plants, pollutant emissions are reduced and air quality is improved. Based on USEPA’s Emissions and Generation Resource Integrated Database (EPA eGRID), average output emission rates for upstate New York power generators are approximately equal to the following: SO2 at 3.00 pounds (lbs)/MWh, NOX at 0.83 lb/MWh, and CO2 at 699.63 lbs/MWh (EPA eGRID, 2007 Version 1.0 Year 2005 Summary Tables). Using these emission factors and assuming a maximum wind farm generation potential of 79.5 MW along with an approximate capacity factor of 30%, the project will displace roughly: 313.4 tons per year of SO2 86.7 tons per year of NOX 73,085.4 tons per year of CO2 Based upon these assumptions, the proposed Project would result in estimated annual reductions of approximately 313.4 tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2), 86.7 tons of nitrogen oxides (NO2), and substantial quantities of other pollutants including particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds. This not only leads to healthier air, but also helps to reduce climate change impacts associated with fossil-fuel burning power plants. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions contribute to global warming. The proposed Project would offset approximately 73,085.4 tons of carbon dioxide annually that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere. By offsetting air pollutants and greenhouse gases, the Project provides a benefit to environmental resources and human health. However, during construction there may be short-term localized air quality impacts. Temporary, minor adverse impacts to air quality may result from the operation of construction equipment and vehicles. Impacts would occur as a result of emissions from engine exhaust and the generation of fugitive dust during earth-moving activities and travel on unpaved roads. The increased dust and emissions would likely not be sufficient to significantly impact local air quality. However, dust could cause annoyance at certain yards and residences located adjacent to unpaved town roads or project access roads.

3-159

001504

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.9.3

Mitigation Measures

The Project would have a long-term beneficial impact on air quality, by displacing emissions of air pollutants from fossil fuel-fired electric generating facilities. This emissions displacement may be viewed as mitigation for other environmental impacts associated with the Project. Construction generated dust would be mitigated by a number of standard best management practices (BMPs). First, SLW would minimize the extent of exposed or disturbed areas on the site at any one time, and those areas would be restored or stabilized as soon as practicable. During construction, dust problems would be identified and reported to the construction project manager and the contractor. Water (or other DOT approved dust control substances) would be used to wet down dusty roads as needed during construction activities. Other standard dust control mitigation measures include: Vehicles used during construction would comply with applicable Federal and State air quality regulations; Limiting engine idling time and equipment shut down when not in use; Dust suppression on unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas, and using water or DOT approved dust suppression materials in compliance with State and local regulations; Traffic speeds on access roads would be kept to 25 mph to minimize generation of dust; Car-pooling among construction workers would be encouraged to minimize constructionrelated traffic and associated emissions; Disturbed areas would be re-planted or graveled to reduce wind-blown dust; and Erosion control measures would limit deposition of silt to roadways.
3.10 Noise

3.10.1 Affected Environment

The proposed St. Lawrence Windpower Project, consisting of 53 1.5 MW Acciona AW-82/1500 WTGs, will be located in the Town of Cape Vincent in Jefferson County, New York. The Project Area consists primarily of open farmland with existing noise sources such as road traffic, farming equipment, and natural sounds (i.e., leaf rustle, insect noise), etc. Potentially sensitive receptors in the general vicinity of the Project include structures such as residences, schools, and churches. Locations of non-residence receptors within 1-mile of the Project are shown in Exhibit 3.10.1. These receptors were considered as a part of the noise impact analysis and the existing ambient acoustic conditions were assessed by completing a baseline sound level survey.

3-160

001505

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.10.1 – Non-Residence Receptors within 1-mile of the Project

To most accurately represent ambient sound levels in the Project Area in terms of seasonal and diurnal variation, long-term baseline sound surveys were completed during summertime and wintertime at six different monitoring locations. The six locations were chosen to provide even coverage throughout the Project Area. Sound levels at all six monitoring stations were reasonably consistent with each other. Similar baseline sound surveys conducted in homogeneous rural areas have very similar results (personal comm., David Hessler). Baseline measurements were conducted in consecutive 10-minute intervals, recording the equivalent sound level (Leq) and residual sound level (L90). The Leq value is the average sound level over each measurement interval, which for this study was 10 minutes. Approximately half

3-161

001506

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

the time the sound level is louder than the Leq, and about half the time it is quieter than the Leq. From a statistical perspective the Leq is the mean sound level that is most likely to be observed at any given moment and is defined as the steady, continuous sound level, over a specified time, which has the same acoustic energy as the actual varying sound levels over the same time. The L90 level is essentially the lowest sound level that is consistently present when no events are happening, for example, when it is quiet and the wind has momentarily slacked off. It represents the quiet lulls between noise events, such as cars going by or planes flying overhead. The L90 measure is considered a conservative sound level for assessing increases arising from a proposed project because it is the near-minimum background level that only occurs, by definition, 10 percent of the time. The remaining 90 percent of the time a higher background sound level exists and project noise is less perceptible. Consequently, this background level represents the "worst-case" situation in terms of potential impact. Both the Leq and L90 are used to provide a more complete analysis of sound. The Leq represents an essentially normal situation, while the L90 captures the maximum potential impact that might occur intermittently and briefly. The L90 is not the permanent or typical background sound level, so the relative impact basing the impact on the Leq is shown to provide some context. Using the L90 is appropriate to evaluate impacts at sensitive receptors, such as residences. Both of these statistics are illustrated in Exhibit 3.10.2.
Exhibit 3.10.2 – Example Showing Relationship between Leq and L90 Statistical Sound Levels (Hessler, 2008)

3-162

001507

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

A regression analysis was performed using the measured baseline statistical sound levels and wind speed. The wind speed was measured in 10-minute intervals by an anemometer 40 m (131 ft.) above the ground, located within the site area. Sound levels were then plotted against the measured wind speed, which was normalized to a height of 10 m (33 ft.). The distances from the anemometer location to sound monitor locations ranged from approximately 0.8 mile to 7.3 miles. Results of this analysis show that winter baseline sound levels are highly dependent on wind speed. There are no local ordinances or regulations that govern the methodology for assessment of potential noise associated with the Project; therefore, the primary basis for evaluating noise impacts is the Program Policy “Assessing and Mitigating Noise Impacts” published by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC, 2001). The NYSDEC guideline document states that an incremental increase of 6 dBA over the ambient sound level, which is defined as an Leq, when considered cumulatively, is the minimum threshold at which adverse noise impacts may potentially begin to occur.
3.10.2 Potential Impact 3.10.2.1 Construction

The proposed Project would generate noise during and after construction. The detailed Project Noise Impact Assessment (NIA) is included in Appendix L. Construction noise would include noise generated during access road construction, electrical tie-in line trenching, site preparation, foundation installation, material and subassembly delivery, and erection. Project construction will temporarily constitute a moderate, unavoidable impact at some homes in the Project Area. Quantifying these impacts is difficult because construction activities will be constantly moving from place to place, making noise impacts highly variable at any given point in time. The individual pieces of equipment likely to be used for each phase of construction are shown below, in Table 3-29. This table also shows the maximum total sound levels that might occur at the closest non-participating residences and the distance from a specific construction site at which its sound would drop to 40 dBA, which is a level that is generally considered acceptable even when background or masking, sound level is low. Analysis results show that sound levels ranging from 56-63 dBA might temporarily occur over several weeks at homes 1,000 feet from turbine construction sites. Such levels would not generally be considered acceptable on a permanent basis or outside normal daytime working

3-163

001508

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.10.3 – L90 Regression Analysis Results – Winter Conditions (Hessler, 2008)

Exhibit 3.10.4 – Leq Regression Analysis Results – Winter Conditions (Hessler, 2008)

3-164

001509

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

hours, but the noise will be temporary, occur during the daytime, and be limited in duration. For others, Project construction noise may be an unavoidable but temporary impact. The estimated sound levels at 50 feet in Table 3-29 also demonstrates that a maximum allowable sound level of 80 dBA recommended in the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) construction noise guidelines is only likely to occur at, or within 200 feet of any specific construction site. Consequently, construction activities at the site of each turbine will result in sound levels that are substantially below 80 dBA at any homes due to the setback distance of at least 1,000 feet. There may be some instances during road construction or trenching operations where the separation distance from homes is less than 200 feet; however, the occurrences of such instances is unlikely.
Table 3-29 Construction Equipment Sound Levels by Phase
Typical Estimated Maximum Sound Total Level at 50 Level at 50 feet per Phase feet (dBA) (dBA)1 Road Construction and Electrical Line Trenching Dozer, 250-700 hp 88 Front End Loader, 300-750 hp 88 92 Grader, 13-16 feet blade 85 Excavator 86 Foundation Work, Concrete Pouring Piling Auger 88 88 Concrete Pump, 150 cu yd/hr 84 Material and Subassembly Delivery Off Highway Hauler, 115 ton 90 90 Flatbed Truck 87 Erection Mobile Crane, 75 ton 85 85
1

Equipment Description

Maximum Sound Level at a Distance of 1000 feet (dBA)

Distance until Sound Level Decreases to 40 dBA (feet)

63

5500

59

4200

61 56

4800 3400

Not all vehicles are likely to be in simultaneous operation. Maximum level represents the highest level realistically likely at any given time.

3.10.2.2

Operation

The Applicant, SLW, has selected the Acciona AW-82/1500 WTG for the Project. Sound power data was obtained by the WTG manufacturer and the critical operational design level was determined for use in the acoustic noise modeling analysis. The sound power level (spl) that was used in the noise assessment was taken directly from the certified WINDTEST measurements lab report for Acciona’s 82m rotor turbine. The measurements were done in accordance with IEC 61400-11 and MEASNET of a WTGS type. The critical operational design level is the worst case in terms of potential noise impact and perceptibility as it occurs when the differential between the background level and turbine sound power level is greatest. At higher wind speeds turbine sound power levels increase, while the masking background sound level also increases significantly. The worst case acoustic condition for the proposed Project occurs at a wind speed

3-165

001510

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

of 6 m/s, with the highest differential occurring between the wintertime L90 background level of 37 dBA and turbine sound power level (LW) of 101.7 re 1 pW at this wind speed. Table 3-30 shows the estimated frequency content of the turbine sound power level at 6 m/s, below.
Table 3-30 Acciona AW 82/1500 Sound Power Level Spectrum at 6 m/s Octave Band Center Frequency (Hz) Estimated Lw (dB re 1 pW) 31.5 107 63 104.3 125 103.8 250 102.8 500 100.4 1k 96.8 2k 90.2 4k 82.8 8k 72.7 dBA 101.7

The Acciona AW-82/1500 WTG sound power level spectrum at 6 m/s speed was inputted into CadnaA (ver. 3.6.115), DataKustik’s acoustic modeling program. CadnaA conforms to ISO 9613-2 Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors and enables the Project and its surroundings, including terrain features, to be realistically modeled in three-dimensions. Modeling of the current Project layout as of October 1, 2008 assumed the nominally maximum downwind sound level from each turbine in all directions simultaneously. In other words, although physically impossible, an omnidirectional 6 m/s wind is assumed. In addition, a moderate ground absorption coefficient (0.5) was selected to represent the rural farming land in the Project Area (see Exhibit 3.10.5). A predicted Project-only sound level of 42 dBA or higher means that under normal day-to-day circumstances of wind and weather operational noise from the nearest turbines is likely to be clearly audible much of the time, except during calm or near calm conditions. Turbulent airflow sometimes leads to short-term increases in sound emissions that make the sound more noticeable than it would be if it were perfectly constant. In general, Project sound emission under normal circumstances is likely to have a variance of +/- 5 dBA from the mean predicted level. On rare occasions when a passing storm, frontal system or otherwise disturbed airflow moves over the site sound levels can substantially increase above the mean for brief periods (on the order of 5 to 20 minutes). In addition, atmospheric phenomena, such as temperature inversions, can temporarily elevate or enhance the Project sound level at a given location. In short, wind and weather conditions will develop from time to time causing Project sound levels to increase over the nominally predicted level but field experience indicates that these unavoidable and inevitable excursions are infrequent, short-lived and the vast majority of the time sound levels will be close to the mean predicted value. It should also be noted that Project audibility does not cease at the 6 dBA threshold but extends further out for some distance.

3-166

001511

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.10.5 – Predicted Sound Levels at 1000 ft. using ISO 9613 for ground coefficients of 0, 0.5 and 1 - Compared to Measured Levels (Hessler, 2008)
E1000 WIND SPEED @ 1m MODEL LEVEL, Ag=0.5 MODEL LEVEL, Ag=0 WIND SPEED @ 80m S1000 N1000 MODEL LEVEL, Ag=1.0

70 REFLECTIVE GROUND SURFACE, MIXED GROUND SURFACE, ABSORPTIVE GROUND SURFACE

60

50

40

30

LA90 SOUND LEVEL, dBA OR WIND SPEED, m/s

20

10

0
14 DAY PERIOD IN AUGUST 2008 IN 10-MINUTE SAMPLES

3-167

001512

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Modeling results were compared to the NYSDEC cumulative incremental increase guideline of 6 dBA, which equates to a Project-only sound level of 42 dBA, as a basis for impact analysis. Modeling results evaluating compliance with the State guideline are shown in Exhibits 3.10.6 and 3.10.7 (and in the NIA in Appendix L) in the form of sound contour maps. The area inside the 42 dBA sound contour line (in blue) represents the region where, under the NYSDEC criterion, sound from the Project may result in an adverse impact. These figures indicate that the 6 dBA incremental increase criterion will be met at the vast majority of non-participating residences. Only three residences on CR 8 (between Route 12E and McKeever Road) and one at the intersection of Route 12E and Deerlick Road were found to have a Project sound level that was slightly above the 6 dBA potential impact threshold. All remaining homes in the Project Area, and particularly the numerous houses along the St. Lawrence River shoreline, are well outside of the area in which adverse Project noise impacts have been modeled based upon the L90 analysis. While most homes are outside of the 42 dBA sound contour line, many of these homes will notice an increase in sound levels due to operation of the Project. Exhibits 3.10.8 and 3.10.9 show the area where sound from the Project may result sound levels of 38 dBA, a sound level that is 1 dBA above the wintertime L90 background level of 37 dBA. While Project-related sound may be audible in locations where there is a 1 dBA increase over the background level, it does not necessarily mean that it will be annoying. However, the higher the incremental increase over existing baseline levels, the greater the possibility for future Project related noise complaints. Response to any increase in background sound levels is largely subjective and will vary from person to person depending on several factors including predetermined perceptions of the project and economic incentives. Project participants are less likely to be affected by noise than non-participants. For comparison, the NYSDEC recommendations for determining the potential for adverse noise impact are presented in Table 3-31. To place the associated noise levels in context, typical sound levels are provided in Table 3-32.

3-168

001513

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-31 Effect of Increases in Noise Levels on Receptors
Increase in Existing Ambient Sound Levels (dBA) 0–3 3–6 >6 10 Expected Effect on Receptors No appreciable effect Potential for adverse noise impact limited to cases where only the most sensitive receptors are present. Potential noise impact. Requires a closer analysis of impact potential depending on existing SPLs and the character of sound emissions, land use and receptors. Perceived as a doubling of the sound level

Table 3-32 Typical Sound Levels
Device Leaf Blower Weed Whacker 1/4" Drill Lawn Mower Handheld Electric Mixer Vacuum Cleaner Hairdryer Clothes Washer Dishwasher Window Fan on High Clothes Dryer Normal Conversation Refrigerator Typical Living Room Quiet Room Quiet basement w/o mechanical equipment Grand Canyon at Night (no roads, birds, wind) Normal Human Breathing dBA 95-105 94-96 92-95 88-94 86-91 84-89 80-95 65-70 63-66 60-66 56-58 55-65 40-43 40 28-33 20 10 <10

3-169

001514

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.10.6 – Noise Modeling Results for All Turbines (Hessler, 2008)

3-170

001515

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.10.7 –Noise Modeling Results for Western Turbines (Hessler, 2008)

3-171

001516

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.10.8 –Noise Modeling Results to 38 dBA for All Turbines (Hessler, 2008)

3-172

001517

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.10.9 –Noise Modeling Results to 38 dBA for Western Turbines (Hessler, 2008)

3-173

001518

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

A predicted Project-only sound level of 42 dBA or higher means that, under normal day-to-day circumstances of wind and weather, operational noise from the nearest turbines is likely to be audible much of the time, except during calm or near calm wind conditions. In addition, wind and weather conditions (i.e., temperature inversions) will develop from time to time causing Project sound levels to increase, sometimes substantially, over the nominally predicted level. It should also be noted that the Project also may be audible at locations at which the sound impacts are less than 42 dBA depending on wind, weather and atmospheric conditions. Below the 6 dBA sound increase threshold, however, the typical prominence of Project sound emissions above background is significantly lower and much less likely to be regarded as objectionable. Cumulative impacts were also investigated with respect to the proposed BP Cape Vincent Wind Farm Project, which may be located to the southeast of the Project. Exhibit 3.10.10 (Plot 2 in Appendix L) shows the mean sound level contours that can be expected with both projects operating together. The sound level contours show that a few non-participating residences may exceed allowable Project-only sound level of 42 dBA, which is consistent with the NYSDEC cumulative incremental increase guideline. Therefore, the cumulative modeling analysis showed that a number of turbines in this adjacent project are close enough that the sound levels at some residences between the projects are likely to experience slightly higher sound levels than they otherwise would if the St. Lawrence Windpower Project existed in isolation. While addition of the BP turbines would increase the area within the 42 dBA impact threshold boundary, only a few non-participating residences that were near the threshold boundary would be included if the BP project were added. These residences or groups of residences are properties that are primarily affected by the St. Lawrence Project and only secondarily affected by the adjacent project. The actual change in sound exposure at these locations would be small due to this cumulative affect. Table 3-33 summarizes the predicted sound levels with the St. Lawrence Windpower Project alone and with both projects at these four locations which are also depicted in Exhibit 3.10.4. The predicted cumulative increase in sound levels is expected to be in the order of 1-2 dBA above that for the St. Lawrence Project alone at all affected groups of residences.
Table 3-33 Potential Cumulative Noise Impacts
Expected Sound Level with Only the St. Lawrence Project, dBA 40.6 41.2 41.4 40.4 Potential Sound Level with Both Projects in Operation, dBA 42.5 42.2 42.2 42.4 Cumulative Increase, dBA 1.9 1.0 0.8 2.0

Location A B C D

3-174

001519

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 3.10.10 – Expected Mean Sound Level contours with St. Lawrence Windpower Project and Cape Vincent Wind Power Project Operating Together (Hessler, 2008)

3-175

001520

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.10.3 Mitigation Measures

As discussed above, construction noise will cause temporary unavoidable noise impacts. In an attempt to minimize construction noise impacts, the following mitigation measures will be applied to Project construction, as necessary and practicable: Adhering to regular construction work hours Mondays through Saturdays, and typically not working on Sundays or after dark; All construction equipment will be maintained in good working condition in order to reduce general noise emissions; When practical, heavy equipment will be shut down when not active, to minimize idling noise; All internal combustion engines will be fitted with appropriate muffler systems; and Adjacent landowners will be advised in advance of any significant noise-causing activities and these will be scheduled to create the least disruption to residents. In addition, turbine locations will continue to be evaluated based upon potential noise impacts from the St. Lawrence project, as well as potential cumulative impacts from the St. Lawrence and BP projects. The Project has been purposely designed to minimize environmental noise during Project operations by siting wind turbines as far away from existing residential receptor locations as practicable, while keeping the Project an economically viable source of clean renewable energy. In addition, the Project has selected the 1.5 MW Acciona AW-82/1500 WTG, which is among the quietest wind turbines commercially available for its class, size, and power rating. It is not expected that mitigative measures will be required during Project operations; however, the following options will be considered by SLW, if needed: Implementing a complaint resolution program whereby neighboring residents can contact SLW with their concerns. Complaints will be logged and promptly investigated in order to resolve any verifiable issue or exceedance condition, and mitigation may be taken on a case-by-case basis. Elements of the complaint resolution program include: providing a dedicated Community Relations employee, preconstruction communication, safety and environmental compliance briefings, providing channels for registering a complaint, and formalized process to resolve a complaint. The details of the complaint resolution program are provided in Appendix M.

3-176

001521

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.11

Socioeconomics

To understand the effects this Project would have on the socioeconomic conditions in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme, in Jefferson County, New York, it is important to understand the current state of the economy in the area. Socioeconomic information is described in terms of population and housing, economy and employment, and municipal revenues and taxes.
3.11.1 Affected Environment

Existing population and housing, employment and income, and municipal revenues and taxes in the County, Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme, and Villages of Cape Vincent and Chaumont are described and evaluated below.
3.11.1.1 Population and Housing

The estimated population of Jefferson County in 2005 was 116,384. Between 1990 and 2000, the County's population increased by 0.7 percent and between 2000 and 2005 it increased by 4.2 percent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2006). According to U.S. Census Bureau (2006) data for 2000, the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme have populations of 3,345 and 2,015, respectively; and the Villages of Cape Vincent and Chaumont have populations of 760 and 592, respectively. All but the Village of Chaumont experienced a population increase in the Project vicinity between 1990 and 2000. The Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme experienced population increases of 20.8 percent and 18.5 percent, respectively and the Village of Cape Vincent experienced an increase of 11.3 percent. The Village of Chaumont experienced a slight decrease of 0.2 percent (1 person) between 1990 and 2000 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2006). Housing units for Jefferson County and each municipality for 2000 are presented in Table 3-31. In 2000, the number of total available housing units in the two Towns and two Villages varied. The Town of Cape Vincent had the most number of housing units and the highest vacancy rate at 2,783 total units, of which 867 units (31.2 percent) were occupied and 1,916 units (68.8 percent) were vacant. The Town of Lyme had a similarly high vacancy rate and low occupancy rate. The Villages had higher occupancy rates ranging from 69.3 percent to 85.3 percent (Table 3-34).

3-177

001522

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-34 2000 County and Municipality Housing Units Total Available Housing Units Number 54,070 2,783 2,183 502 273

Occupied Housing County and Town/Village Number Percentage Jefferson County 40,068 74.1 Town of Cape Vincent 867 31.2 Town of Lyme 813 37.2 Village of Cape 348 69.3 Vincent Village of Chaumont 233 85.3 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2006

Vacant Housing Number 14,002 1,916 1,370 154 40 Percentage 25.9 68.8 62.8 30.7 14.7

3.11.1.2

Economy and Employment

According to the U.S. Census Bureau (2006), the largest industry in Jefferson County in 2000 was educational, health, and social services, with 24.4 percent of all workers employed in this sector. The second largest industry was retail trade (14.2 percent), and the third largest industry was public administration (10.4 percent). The educational, health, and social services was the top industry in each Town and Village, and the second and third largest industries in the Towns and Villages varied between public administration and retail trade. However, the third largest industry in the Town of Cape Vincent was construction (11.4 percent). The 2005 unemployment rate for Jefferson County was 4.8 percent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2006).
3.11.1.3 Municipal Revenues and Taxes

Municipalities (i.e., Towns, Villages and counties) are responsible for providing specific services to those who live and work within their boundaries. Municipalities incur costs associated with providing these services, and to offset these costs, collect revenues by levying taxes. Tax revenues in the Project vicinity accrue from both sales taxes and real property taxes. The taxing jurisdictions in the Project vicinty include Jefferson County, the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme, the Villages of Cape Vincent and Chaumont, and the Thousand Islands and Lyme Central school districts. Property tax levy data for each taxing jurisdiction within the Project vicinity is presented in Table 3-35 for fiscal years ending in 2007 and 2006. For those items not included in the Jefferson County Sales and Use Tax Exemption (e.g., clothing, footwear, and items used to make or repair exempt clothing costing less the $110 per item or pair) a total sales tax of 7.75 percent is levied on purchases within the County (Jefferson County retains 3.75 percent). The current sales tax rate for Jefferson County is 7.75 percent,

3-178

001523

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

which includes a 4 percent state tax and 3.75 percent local tax (New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, 2006).
Table 3-35 Real Property Tax Levy per Taxing Jurisdiction Taxing Jurisdiction Jefferson County Town of Cape Vincent Town of Lyme Village of Cape Vincent Village of Chaumont Thousand Islands School District Lyme Central School District Real Property Tax Levy (2006) $38,887,429 $225,000 $150,151 $254,615 $68,782 $2,835,700 (Cape Vincent) $29,272 (Lyme) $37,056 (Cape Vincent) $2,623,012 (Lyme) Source: New York State Office of Real Property Services, 2008 Real Property Tax Levy (2007) $41,425,711 $229,000 $147,067 $256,396 $68,782 $2,902,959 (Cape Vincent) $32,505 (Lyme) $35,746 (Cape Vincent) $2,744,925 (Lyme)

Table 3-36 summarizes budgets for 2006 at the County and Town levels, including the Thousand Island and Lyme Central School Districts.
3.11.1.4 Property Values

In 2000, the median value of owner-occupied units in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme were $76,400 and $73,600, respectively. The median value of owner-occupied units in the Village of Cape Vincent was $70,900. The median values in all of these areas were above the median housing value for Jefferson County ($68,200), but were still moderate to low when compared to the median value for New York State ($148,700). The median housing value for the Village of Chaumont ($57,200) was $11,000 below Jefferson County’s median value (U.S. Census Bureau, 2006).
Table 3-36 County, Municipal, and School District Budgets, 2006 Total Revenue Total Revenue (with State and Total (Local) Federal Aid) Expenditure Taxing Jurisdiction Jefferson County $98,310,401 $145,688,058 $144,961,298 Town of Cape Vincent $2,290,288 $3,126,910 $2,926,527 Town of Lyme $1,367,056 $1,509,733 $1,450,299 Village of Cape Vincent $991,088 $1,023,132 $947,887 Village of Chaumont $0 $0 $0 Thousand Islands School $8,729,170 $16,430,753 $16,617,056 District Lyme Central School District $2,909,634 $5,969,079 $5,560,879 Source: New York State Office of the State Comptroller, 2006

Total Indebtedness $29,530,000 $4,511,256 $668,000 $1,574,680 not given $6,615,000 $4,385,006

3-179

001524

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.11.2 Potential Impacts

The Project would have both direct and indirect positive economic effects on participating individual landowners, Villages, Towns, the County, and several school districts. These effects would commence during construction and continue throughout the operating life of the Project. Short-term benefits of Project construction would include additional employment, income, and expenditures associated with construction of the Project. For example, construction workers would purchase food in local restaurants and may stay at local hotels or in nearby campgrounds. Long-term operation of the Project would generate significant additional revenues for the host communities through, among other things, payments made under a PILOT agreement, purchases of goods and services, and lease payments to participating landowners. The Project will provide about four to six full-time operational jobs, and likely result in some increased visitation to the Project Area by tourists interested in wind power. All of these results could have a beneficial effect on local businesses. The overall socioeconomic impact of Project construction and operation is discussed in detail below.
3.11.2.1 Population and Housing

Jefferson County and the Towns and Villages located in the Project Area experienced a moderate growth rate between 1990 and 2000. This trend likely would continue regardless of whether or not the proposed Project is built. The Project would not generate construction employment at a level that would significantly increase population in either the Towns or the County. Even though employment during the construction period would be significant (approximately 50 to 150 construction jobs), this employment is relatively short-term, and is not expected to result in workers permanently relocating to the area. For the duration of construction (approximately 7 to 10 months) there could be a temporary increase in local population and demand for temporary housing by out-of-town workers. However, this demand would be relatively modest, and could easily be accommodated by the availability of vacant housing in the affected Towns and surrounding communities. Beyond this relatively minor (and positive) short-term impact, Project construction would not have significant impact on population and housing. Based on the above housing information and high vacancy rate, there is likely an adequate supply of local housing and temporary accommodations in Jefferson County for the expected Project demand. This number of housing units would sufficiently accommodate construction workers. Few new permanent employees are anticipated for operation of the wind facility, therefore no long-term impacts on local housing are anticipated.

3-180

001525

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Approximately four to six full-time jobs would be created once the Project is fully operational. These employees would be expected to reside locally, which could translate into the purchase of a few homes and the addition of a few families to the surrounding communities. Based on vacancy rates in the Towns, there would be an adequate number of housing units available for purchase or rent. Although this represents a positive economic impact, long-term employment associated with the Project is not large enough to have a significant impact on local population or housing characteristics.
3.11.2.2 Economy and Employment

Based on construction employment figures at other wind power projects in New York, it is anticipated that construction of the St. Lawrence Windpower Project would employ a total construction workforce of approximately 200 workers. It is anticipated that about two-thirds of this anticipated workforce would be from the western New York labor market, which in light of the size of the labor force and the number of unemployed, can easily supply the required workforce. Local employment would benefit those in the construction trades, including equipment operators, truck drivers, laborers, and electricians. Project construction would require workers with specialized skills, such as crane operators, turbine assemblers, specialized excavators, and high voltage electrical workers. It is anticipated that the most of these specialized workers would come from outside of the Project Area and would remain only for the duration of construction. In addition to the direct jobs created during construction, this Project is expected to have an indirect impact on the local economy through the purchases of goods and services, which would support local businesses and perhaps result in the creation of some additional new jobs. With respect to tourism in the region, it is worth noting that other wind power projects in New York have resulted in a significant increase in visitation from tourists interested in the projects. This has resulted in increased local expenditures for goods and services, but these have not been quantified, and are probably fairly modest.
3.11.2.3 Municipal Revenues and Taxes

The proposed Project would significantly increase the revenues of each of the taxing jurisdictions in the Project Area. Annual PILOT payments would be negotiated, along with road use agreements. The Project would have a beneficial impact on municipal budgets and taxes because the taxing jurisdictions would receive additional annual revenue from the Project in the form of PILOT revenues, which would be necessarily distributed to the relevant taxing jurisdictions in a manner to be determined by the County IDA.

3-181

001526

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

During construction, the Project would not impact municipal budgets and taxes. Temporary construction workers would not create significant demand for municipal or school district services or facilities. These workers would not generate significant revenue through payment of property taxes. The Project would result in impacts to the local road system and this would have the potential to affect local highway department expenditures and budgets.
3.11.2.4 Property Values

Local residents often raise questions about the potential for utility-scale windfarms to affect residential property values. Property values result from the interaction of several variables, ranging from overall market conditions to property size and available community services. Studies have been undertaken in recent years to provide an assessment of transactional sales data at existing windfarms. The Renewable Energy Policy Project (REPP) conducted a comprehensive study of U.S. projects in 2003 (Sterzinger et al., 2003). The researchers compiled a database of real estate transactions adjacent to wind energy projects in the United States generating at least 10 MW that became operational between 1998 and 2001. Projects that became operational between 2001 and 2003 were not included in the study because they would not have had sufficient data at the time of the report to allow a reasonable analysis. Of the 27 projects that fulfilled the search parameters, data at 17 projects was either insufficient or unavailable. The resulting database included 25,000 records of property sales within five miles of ten projects, including two projects in Madison County, New York. The five mile threshold was selected because review of literature and field experience suggested that wind turbines have relatively little influence on the landscape’s overall scenic quality beyond that distance. The researchers further selected comparable communities to those hosting the wind energy projects as a control group for the study. Criteria used in selection of comparable communities included economic, demographic, and geographic attributes and trends intended to control for other variables that might affect residential housing values. The study examined the data using three methods: Case 1 considered changes in the viewshed and comparable community for the entire period of the study (approximately six years total); Case 2 considered how property values changed in the viewshed before and after the project became operational (approximately 3 years before and 3 years after); and Case 3 compared how property values changed in the viewshed and in the comparable community after the project became operational.

3-182

001527

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

The REPP study concluded that there is no statistical evidence to suggest that wind farms have a negative effect on property values. The results of the Case 1 analysis showed that property values increased faster in the project viewshed than in the comparable communities at eight of the ten projects. Results of the Case 2 analysis showed that property values increased faster after the projects became operational in nine of the ten viewsheds. Results of the Case 3 analysis showed that property values increased faster in the viewsheds than in the comparable communities after the projects became operational at nine of the ten projects. The two New York projects included in the REPP study showed these positive trends; in five of the six scenarios (Case 1, 2, and 3 analyses for both projects), the monthly average sales price grew faster or declined slower in the viewshed communities than in the comparable communities. Another quantitative study was conducted by Ben Hoen as a Master of Sciences thesis that analyzed transactional data for properties within five miles of the existing Fenner Wind Farm in Madison County, New York (Hoen, 2006). The purpose of the study was to analyze whether property values were affected by views of the wind farm. The study design included a field component to evaluate the visibility at each property. A total of three points per turbine was possible: one point if only the blade tip above the nacelle was visible, two points if the nacelle was also visible, and three points if the tower below the rotor swept area was also visible, for a maximum total of 60 points. The dataset included 280 residential home sales within five miles of the wind farm between 1996 and 2005, with the closest home in the sample located 0.27 miles away from the nearest turbine and 22 homes inside of a mile. The Hoen study found that there are is no statistically significant relationship between either proximity to or visibility of the windfarm and the sale price of homes. In additional, the analysis in the report did not find a relationship when concentrating on homes within a mile or that sold immediately following the announcement and construction of the windfarm. The study concluded that view of the windfarm does not produce either a universal or localized effect on property values. A more recent U.S. focused study, prepared by the Electricity Markets and Policy Group in the Energy Analysis Department at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, evaluated whether wind facilities affect local property values (Wiser and Hoen, 2007). This study investigated four sites in the northeast (two in New York and two in Pennsylvania) with a sample size of over 350 home sales for each site. It evaluated three categories of concerns: 1) Area Stigma, defined as “industrialization” of area leading to decreases in tourism and second home desirability, 2) Scenic Vista Stigma, defined as decreases in quality of scenic vistas from homes, and 3) Nuisance & Health Effects, defined as potential health/well being concerns of nearby residents.

3-183

001528

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Preliminary results of this study indicate that there is no statistical evidence that resale value of homes within 4 to 7 miles of a facility are adversely affected based simply on proximity, or that homes with a view of turbines have different values than homes without. In addition, studies of potential impacts of wind energy projects on property values in Northern New York have been conducted in connection with several environmental impact statements prepared to review other wind projects. These studies uniformly found that there is no valid basis on which to conclude that the presence of wind projects in the affected communities would have a significant adverse impact on property values in those communities (ESS Group, Inc, 2006; Towns of Ellenburg, Altona and Clinton. July 26, 2006; Towns of Chateaugay and Bellmont, 2007; and Tetra Tech, 2008). Given the results of the REPP (Sterzinger et al., 2003; Hoen, 2006; and Wiser and Hoen, 2007), and other studies, it is reasonable to conclude that the proposed Project will not adversely affect local property values. Furthermore, the additional revenue to the Towns from the Project may result in a beneficial effect on variables that influence property values such as lower taxes, improved local infrastructure, and community amenities and services.
3.11.3 Mitigation Measures

As described above, construction and operation of the proposed Project would not have a significant adverse impact on local population and housing, and would have a short-term beneficial impact on the local economy and employment. The negotiated PILOT agreement would provide a significant long-term benefit to the communities and school districts. Consequently, no mitigation is necessary to address these impacts. The only potential adverse impact to municipal budgets and taxes would be the impact of Project construction on local roads, and the need to repair or upgrade these roads to accommodate construction vehicles and higher activity. To mitigate this impact, any construction-related damage or improvements to State, County, or Town roads would be the responsibility of the Applicant, and would be undertaken at no expense to the municipalities.
3.12 Telecommunications

3.12.1 Affected Environment

Comsearch was contracted to evaluate the potential for the Project to impact existing telecommunication signals. Comsearch performed an analysis to evaluate the potential effect of the planned St. Lawrence Windpower Project in Jefferson County, New York on existing non-

3-184

001529

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Federal Government microwave telecommunication systems and off-air television stations within 100 miles, both in the United States and Canada (Appendix N).
3.12.1.1 Microwave Analysis

Microwave telecommunication systems are wireless point-to-point links that communicate between two sites (antennas) and require clear line-of-sight conditions between each antenna. Comsearch identified three microwave paths that intersect the Project Area (see graphics in Appendix N): WLQ373, WML409 and WPOS292. None of these paths were identified to have a potential conflict with any of the proposed turbine locations.
3.12.1.2 Television Analysis

Off-air stations are television broadcast signals that can be received directly on a television receiver from terrestrially located broadcast facilities. Rotating wind turbines can compete with the "direct wave" appearing at the antenna of a ground receiver. In some instances it is possible to create television signal distortion capable of making reception difficult (Evans, 2005). To determine if the proposed turbines would affect television reception in the area, Comsearch identified the off-air television stations within a 100-mile radius of the proposed Project (Appendix N), both in the United States and in Canada. Comsearch examined the coverage of the off-air TV stations and the communities in the area that could potentially have degraded television reception due to the location of the wind turbines. The stations that are most likely to affect Jefferson County and the vicinity would be those stations at a distance of 40 miles or less. Within this range, there are 32 licensed stations in the United States and 13 licensed stations in Canada (Appendix N). Of the 32 licensed stations in the United States, only nine are presently broadcasting. Four of the nine stations have limited coverage. One of stations, although licensed in the United States, is located in Canada. Two of the nine have digital signals. Digital signals are not subject to interference from intervening structures (NWCC, 2005). Therefore, there is a potential for two American off-air, full power analog TV stations to be affected by rotating wind turbines (Appendix N). Of the 13 Canadian stations licensed within the 40-mile area, only 8 produce television broadcast signals in the vicinity of the Project. Seven of these 8 stations have analog signals; the remaining station broadcasts digitally. Comsearch also determined that there are approximately the same number of Canadian television stations available in the area as American television stations. Without including low power

3-185

001530

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

television stations, there are a total of ten analog stations and two digital stations serving the Project Area.
3.12.1.3 AM Radio Analysis

In general, it is possible for a turbine to interfere with AM radio signals. If a turbine intercepts a low frequency radio wave from an AM broadcast antenna, it can "re-radiate" the signal with an arbitrary phase delay. This secondary radiator then becomes a radio frequency source that interferes with the primary signal, causing fading and noise in receivers tuned to the frequency (Evans, 2005). The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requires that studies be conducted to determine if a proposed development will affect existing AM radio broadcast stations. Specifically, a study is required when the proposed development is located within 0.6 mile (1.0 kilometer) of a non-directional broadcast station and/or within 1.9 miles (3.0 kilometers) of a directional broadcast station. Based on a Query of the FCC’s AM Radio Database (http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/amq.html), SLW determined that there are no AM broadcast stations located within these distances that would require an FCC study. This search was based on an area within 3.2 mile of the Project’s center. The nearest U.S. AM Radio stations are located in Watertown approximately 18 miles away and the nearest Canadian AM Radio station is located in Kingston approximately 13 miles away. SLW also determined that it is unlikely that the proposed turbines would interfere with AM radio signals.
3.12.1.4 National Telecommunications and Information Administration Notification

In the fall of 2008, SLW sent a written notification of the proposed project to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) of the United States Department of Commerce. Upon receipt of notification, the NTIA provides plans for the proposed project to the federal agencies represented in the Interdependent Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC), which include the Department of Defense (DoD), Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Justice (DOJ), and the FAA. The NTIA then identifies any project-related concerns during a 30-day review period. To date, no response has been received from the NTIA. SLW will report on the NTIA response in the Final EIS.
3.12.2 Potential Impacts 3.12.2.1 Operation

Microwave Communication Systems: Comsearch identified three (3) microwave paths that intersect the Project Area. None of these paths were identified to have a potential conflict with any of the planned turbine locations and the Project would not impact microwave communication systems.

3-186

001531

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Television Communication Systems: The television analysis report developed by Comsearch detailed information for each of the off-air television stations that occur within 100 miles of the Project. This information included the strength (power) of each broadcast, as well as the type of service provided (digital, analog, etc.). Comsearch concluded that although in some locations particular television channels may be distorted or lost once the wind turbines are operational, many of the other channels would continue to be received without degradation. However, the FCC's mandate to transition all off-air television broadcasts from analog signals to digital signals by January 1, 2009 would eliminate turbine-related interference problems as digital signals are not subject to interference from intervening structures (NWCC, 2005). As the Project will be in operation in 2010 it will have no impacts to off-air television stations. AM Radio Analysis: All proposed wind turbines within the Project are located at least 1.6 miles (1.0 kilometers) from a non-directional AM broadcast station and/or 4.8 miles (3.0 kilometers) from a directional AM broadcast station. Therefore, it is unlikely that the Project will interfere with existing AM radio transmissions. NTIA Notification: Should the NTIA identify Project-related concerns related to signal blockage following their 30-day review of the Project, SLW would relocate the appropriate project facilities. Therefore, impacts to the IRAC radio frequency transmissions are not anticipated. SLW will report on the NTIA response in the Final EIS.
3.12.3 Mitigation Measures 3.12.3.1 Operation

Microwave Communication Systems: The Project will have no impact on microwave communication systems. Therefore, no mitigation measures will be necessary. Television Communication Systems: The FCC’s mandated transition all off-air television broadcasts from analog signals to digital signals by January 1, 2009 would eliminate turbinerelated interference problems as digital signals are not subject to interference from intervening structures (NWCC, 2005). Since the Project will be in operation in 2010, it will not impact existing off-air television stations. No mitigation measures will be necessary. AM Radio Analysis: The Project will not impact existing AM radio transmissions. No mitigation measures will be necessary.

3-187

001532

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

NTIA Notification: Should the NTIA identify Project-related concerns related to signal blockage following their 30-day review of the Project, SLW would relocate the appropriate project facilities.
3.13 Safety and Security

This section addresses potential public safety concerns with respect to the Project and includes discussions of public health and safety issues associated with construction and operation of the Project, and measures to mitigate and avoid possible or anticipated impacts.
3.13.1 Affected Environment

Safety concerns associated with the construction of wind energy projects mirror the concerns of most large-scale construction projects. These concerns arise from, but are not be limited to, 1) transportation of equipment and materials using heavy construction equipment, 2) general constructions hazards associated with vertical energy projects (e.g., overhead hazards, open excavations, electrocution), and 3) spills of fuels and lubricants. The operation of wind energy facilities is in many ways safer for the public than other forms of energy or electricity production. The environmental pollution issues created by other types of energy production facilities (i.e., fuel transportation, stack smoke) are not created by wind energy projects. Because combustible fuel use is limited to facility maintenance, there are no emissions leaks or spills that could potentially pollute the surrounding landscape. During the operation of wind energy facilities, other, more unique, safety concerns, such as possible ice shedding, tower collapse, blade throw, stray voltage, fire and lightning strikes, sometimes arise. These potential concerns also are addressed in this section.
3.13.1.1 3.13.1.1.1 Construction Transportation of Equipment and Materials

Access to all construction sites will be controlled; however, delivery of equipment and materials to the construction site will occur up to six days a week during day light hours along public roads potentially in the vicinity of schools, clusters of homes and small business areas. These roads also will be used by emergency services. In addition, the vehicles that transport equipment and materials to the Project Site could be involved in accidents as they travel along roads in the Project Area.

3-188

001533

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.13.1.1.2

General Construction Hazards

These hazards include such issues as falling overhead objects, falls into open excavations, and electrocution. They are largely limited to construction personnel who will be working close to construction equipment and materials, and will be exposed to construction related hazards on a daily basis.
3.13.1.1.3 Spills of Fuels and Lubricants

Construction of the proposed Project will require the use of diesel and gasoline fuels for operating construction equipment and vehicles. The contractor will use fuel trucks for refueling cranes and large earth-moving equipment and fuel storage tanks. The fuel trucks will drive to the equipment and tank locations to refuel equipment. Some construction vehicles will refuel at nearby gasoline stations. Lubricating oils and cooling fluids would be present in construction vehicles and equipment. Small quantities of lubricating oils may also be stored at construction staging areas.
3.13.1.2 3.13.1.2.1 Operations Ice Shed

Ice shed may occur when ice builds up on the blade of a turbine and then breaks off and falls to the ground. While this is a potential safety concern, it should be noted that there has never been a reported injury from ice shed by wind turbines, despite the installation of more than 6,000 MW of wind energy worldwide (Morgan, Bossanyi, and Siefert, 1998). The ice that forms on a wind turbine's blades is relatively thin. Ice buildup on a turbine's blade changes its shape, reducing the lift-drag ratio and increasing surface friction and resulting in the blade losing its ability to develop speed (AWEA, 2006). Ice would be shed from blades as the temperature rises, and then the blades would begin to rotate at higher speeds.
3.13.1.2.2 Tower Collapse/Blade Failure

While there is the potential for a tower collapse or blade failure during the operation of wind energy projects, these events are extremely rare. Such collapses are potentially dangerous for both project personnel and the general public. Past incidents have generally been the result of manufacturing defects, poor maintenance, wind gusts that exceeded the maximum design load of the turbine structure, or lightning strikes (AWEA, 2006). Technological improvements and safety standards have made such occurrences rare in the industry.

3-189

001534

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.13.1.2.3

Stray Voltage and Electrical Shock

The term stray voltage generally refers to low levels of neutral-to-earth electrical currents that occur between two points on a grounded electrical system (Wisconsin Legislative Council, 2000). Stray voltage usually is the result of poorly connected or damaged wiring systems, corrosion, or damaged insulation materials. Wind power facilities have the potential to create stray voltage if the electrical system is both poorly grounded and located near underground or poorly grounded metal objects. The proposed Project’s collector system, like other electrical facilities, has the potential to create stray voltage to varying degrees based on factors such as operating voltage, geometry, shielding, rock/soil electrical resistively, and proximity of surrounding structures. Stray voltage from such facilities usually only occurs if two circumstances are simultaneously present: the system is poorly grounded; and it located in close to ungrounded or poorly grounded metal objects (fences, pipelines, buildings, etc.). Such defects in the installation of the Project’s collection system could result in low voltage/nuisance shocks detectable by humans within close range of the alternate/stray voltage pathway. Voltage drops in the collector system sufficient to harm human health will be sufficient to trip circuit breakers.
3.13.1.2.4 Fire

Due to their height, physical dimensions, and complexity, wind turbines may present response difficulties to local emergency responders should a fire occur within or near the structures. Storage and use of diesel fuels, lubricating oils, and hydraulic fluids within the Project creates the potential for fire or medical emergencies.
3.13.1.2.5 Lightning Strikes

Wind turbines are susceptible to lightning strikes due to their height and construction materials. Modern wind turbines include lightning protections systems, which generally prevent catastrophic blade failure.
3.13.1.2.6 Homeland Security

The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has developed a series of regulations that apply to the design and operation of Critical Energy Infrastructure.
3.13.1.2.7 Facility Access Security

The following is a discussion of the safety features associated with electrical equipment for the proposed Project and addresses the transformers associated with each turbine, and the electrical collection and transmission owner substations. 3-190

001535

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Turbine Transformers: Approximately 12,000 Volts of power will be generated from each wind turbine. Power generated within the nacelle is transmitted through drop cables which travel down the tower to an outdoor step-up transformer located on a concrete pad at the base of each tower base. The pad transformers are interconnected to underground cables that connect all of the turbines together electrically. Substation Equipment: Both substations are proposed to be located on private land. The onsite collection substation will be co-located with the O&M Building, which will occupy a total of approximately 11.5 acres. The interconnection substation will occupy less than one acre. An underground single-phase connection to the local electrical distribution line will provide a local source of substation service power to run the control houses and the associated protection and control systems. A continuous grounding grid will cover the substation footprint and extend beyond the station fence. The yards of each substation will be covered with uniform crushed. The plant electrical system will be designed and constructed in accordance with the guidelines of the National Electric Code (NEC), National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) and utility requirements.
3.13.2 Potential Impact 3.13.2.1 3.13.2.1.1 Construction Transportation of Equipment and Materials

The general public could be exposed to construction-related hazards due to the passage of large construction equipment on area roads and unauthorized access to the work site. Because construction activities will occur primarily on private land, and be well removed from adjacent roads and residences, exposure of the general public to construction-related risks/hazard is expected to be very limited. Further, in consultation with the New York State Department of Transportation, Region 7 and Town and County highway officials, the Applicant has selected a delivery route to minimize impacts to traffic on the local roads and surrounding communities as described in Section 3.4.2.
3.13.2.1.2 General Construction Hazards

Risk of construction related injury will be minimized through regular safety training and use of appropriate safety equipment. In addition, the Applicant has prepared an ERP (see Appendix B), in coordination with the Cape Vincent Fire Department, to define prevention and emergency response measures for hazardous materials spills, medical/fire/law enforcement, weather emergencies, and evacuation. This Plan and its procedures will apply to all wind farm personnel,

3-191

001536

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

contractors, and others who may be on he wind farm site during a fire, chemical release/spill, medical emergency, tornado/severe storms, or a bomb threat.
3.13.2.1.3 Spills of Fuels and Lubricants

Spills of fuels, lubricating oils, and mineral oil may occur as a result of vehicle accidents, equipment malfunction, human error, terrorism, sabotage, vandalism, or aircraft impact. As indicated above, the Applicant has prepared an ERP (see Appendix B) that addresses such risks. Spills, should they occur, will likely be confined to the Project Site. Pad-mounted transformers at the base of the towers will be filled at the factory and spills associated with.
3.13.2.2 3.13.2.2.1 Operations Ice Shed

Ice build-up on turbine blades would cause an imbalance, which would alert turbine sensors resulting in a complete shut down of the affected turbine. As previously noted, as the ice thaws it would typically fall straight to the ground, because the turbine would not be rotating. The distance traveled by a piece of thrown ice depends on a number of factors, including: the position of the blade when the ice breaks off, the location of the ice on the blade, when it breaks off, the rotational speed of the blade, the shape of the ice that is shed, and prevailing wind speeds. The risk of ice landing at a specific location dramatically decreases as the distance from the turbine increases. While a very remote potential exists for ice shed to cause personal or property injury, the sensors within the towers themselves greatly reduce these risks by shutting down the affected turbines as soon as they detect an imbalance. The setbacks from property lines, residences, and other structures incorporated into the design of the Project further mitigate the risk of harm from ice shed.
3.13.2.2.2 Tower Collapse/Blade Failure

International engineering standards are used to certify modern wind turbines from manufacture, through construction. The ratings include withstanding different levels of hurricane force winds and other criteria (AWEA, 2006, a, b, c, d). Modern wind turbines also include state-of-the-art braking systems, pitch controls, sensors, and speed controls which greatly reduce the risk of tower collapse and blade failure. The safety features installed on modern wind turbines greatly lower the chance of a catastrophic failure. While, turbine tower collapse or blade failure is a rare event, such incidents have occurred. The hazard zone for blade failure should be approximately that for ice throw. However, in an unlikely tower collapse or blade failure, setbacks from structures and roads will reduce the risk of damage to adjacent property or public roads.

3-192

001537

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.13.2.2.3

Stray Voltage

Stray voltage is preventable through the use of proper electrical installation and grounding practices. Certified electrical engineers would ensure that all electrical facilities are properly grounded and insulated to reduce the risk of stray voltage. Proper maintenance of all facilities would ensure that the wind energy project does not contribute to stray voltage within the Project Area.
3.13.2.2.4 Fire

Fire at operating wind turbines has been extremely rare over the several decades that turbines have been employed worldwide. However, as there are flammable materials such as lubricants in the turbine nacelle, there is a remote possibility that a turbine fire could occur.
3.13.2.2.5 Lightning Strikes

Lightning protection systems were first added to rotors in the mid-1990s. These protection systems are now a standard component of modern turbines. The protection systems can detect all lightning events. Should the system detect a problem, the turbine would be shut down automatically. In addition, a grounded wind turbine would channel lightning strikes that otherwise would be drawn to trees, silos, and other potentially ungrounded structures, thereby reducing the probability of local lightning strikes and associated property damage and fires.
3.13.2.2.6 Homeland Security

It is not anticipated that the proposed Project would be a target for any homeland security concerns. However, as the Project contains Critical Energy Infrastructure, SLW would design all facilities in accordance with guidance and regulations of the DHS. Energy facilities such as nuclear power plants, liquefied natural gas (LNG) receiving terminals, and natural gas pipelines are considered vulnerable targets for terrorist activity because of combined disruption of energy supply, potential associated loss of human life and property damage, and larger psychological impact such attacks could result in. Wind generating facilities do not present a good target for terrorist attacks since they consist of small individual generators, spaced relatively far apart, which cannot easily be damaged at the same time. Wind turbines are also relatively easy to replace compared to thermal power plants or LNG facilities. In addition, if a wind farm is damaged, there is no secondary threat to the public, such as those that can come from release of radioactive materials associated with nuclear plants and explosions associated with conventional power plants/infrastructure.

3-193

001538

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.13.2.2.7

Facility Access Security

Unrestricted access to electric equipment and supply substations by unauthorized personnel can result in theft, vandalism, accidents, injuries, and fatalities. In addition, uncontrolled access to substation could allow for sabotage which may cause blackouts.
3.13.3 Mitigation Measures 3.13.3.1 3.13.3.1.1 Construction Transportation of Equipment and Materials

In consultation with the New York State Department of Transportation, Region 7 and Town and County road officials, SLW has selected a delivery route to minimize impacts to traffic on the local roads and surrounding communities, and specifically avoiding route 12E. To further minimize safety risks to the general public, all over-sized vehicles will be accompanied by an escort vehicle and/or flagman to assure safe passage of vehicles on public roads. The exposure to the general public to any construction-related risks/hazard is expected to be very limited because construction activities will occur primarily on private land and be well removed from adjacent roads and residences. The anticipated impacts will be further minimized by extensive signage across the Project Site warning the general public of the ongoing construction activities. The general public will not be allowed on the construction site. After hours, vehicular access to active construction sites will be blocked by parked equipment or temporary fencing. Temporary construction fencing or other visible barrier will be placed around excavations that remain open during off hours. In addition, material safety data sheets (MSDS) for potentially hazardous construction materials will be provided to local fire and emergency service personnel. The contractor will also coordinate with these entities to assure that they are aware of where various construction activities are occurring, and avoid potential conflicts between construction activity and the provision of emergency services (e.g., road blockages, etc.).
3.13.3.1.2 General Construction Hazards

Contractors will comply with all Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, in addition to state worker safety regulations, regarding electricity, structural climbing, and other hazards, during construction of the wind farm. To minimize safety risks to construction personnel, all workers will be required to adhere to a safety compliance program protocol which will be prepared by the Applicant (or their representative) prior to construction. The safety compliance program will address appropriate health and safety related issues. Safety, environmental protection, and QA/QC inspections of the major facilities and equipment will also assure that the Project is constructed in a manner that minimizes risks to the public and project personnel. In addition, SLW will participate in the Dig Safely New York facilities protection

3-194

001539

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

system. Utility mark-out services will be performed prior to and during Project construction to mark underground facility locations.
3.13.3.1.3 Spills of Fuels and Lubricants

Fuel trucks will drive to the equipment and tank locations and will incorporate automatic shutoff devices to limit accidental spills. Some construction vehicles will refuel at nearby gasoline stations. In addition, the Applicant has prepared an ERP that addresses such risks (Appendix B).
3.13.3.2 3.13.3.2.1 Operations Ice Shed

The use of buffers from roads and property lines and public control measures would minimize the already low public safety risk of ice shed. Because of these setback distances to structures and public roads, the risks of ice throw are considered minimal in the Project Area. Wind turbine manufacturers have developed engineering controls that help to minimize safety risks associated with ice build up on wind turbine components. These controls include the following: Detection of ice by a nacelle mounted sensor; Detection of an imbalance caused by ice formation on the blades by the shaft vibration sensor; and Detection of measured wind speed below cut-in due to anemometer icing. Such effects of ice accumulation can be sensed by the turbine's computer (SCADA system) and result in the turbine being shut down until the most of the ice melts, at which time the turbine is manually restarted by the operator. As an additional backup, ice detectors would be installed at previously determined locations to notify maintenance personnel of icing conditions, which would allow for remote switch off of the turbine by the operator.
3.13.3.2.2 Tower Collapse/Blade Failure

The use of buffers from roads and property lines and public control measures will minimize the already low public safety risk associated with tower collapse or blade failure. The standard engineering design and protection systems incorporated into modern wind turbines would prevent and minimize problems that could lead to tower collapse or blade failure.
3.13.3.2.3 Stray Voltage

Stray voltage concerns would be addressed through proper electrical engineering design and grounding of Project electrical components.

3-195

001540

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.13.3.2.4

Fire

An Emergency Response Plan (ERP) has been developed for the Project, in coordination with the Cape Vincent Fire Department (Appendix B) to ensure the safety of company employees and local residents, visitors, and their property. Prior to the commencement of construction SLW will review the ERP in cooperation with local fire departments and discuss training and implementation of the Plan.
3.13.3.2.5 Lightning Strikes

The standard lightning protection system installed within the rotor blades would be used to prevent and minimize problems associated with lightning strikes.
3.13.3.2.6 Homeland Security

SLW would design all facilities in accordance with guidance and regulations of the DHS.
3.13.3.2.7 Facility Access Security

Turbine Transformers: Turbines transformers will be mounted on concrete pads and will generally be a grounded “Wye” type unit. All units will be compartment style, tamperproof, and self cooled. All turbine transformer cabinets will be locked. Substation Equipment: The outdoor electrical equipment associated with the substations will be installed on concrete foundations that are designed for the soil conditions at each substation site. Each substation will be installed within a graveled yard for weed control and to prevent “step and touch potentials” (i.e., contact with voltage from energized substation), and will include a chain link perimeter fence and an outdoor lighting system. In accordance with guidelines from Homeland Security, there will be a road gate to limit public access; the road will turn 90 degrees near the end so as not to terminate directly at the station fence or gate; a clear space of at least 10 feet will be maintained exterior to the fence, and there will be intrusion alarms. In addition, high voltage signage will be installed at the substation and elsewhere, as necessary.

3-196

001541

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

4.0 4.1

CUMULATIVE AND GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS Cumulative Impacts

This section evaluates the potential cumulative impacts that may arise from interactions between the Project and other projects that are under review for approval by local regulators, have been approved for development, and/or are planned for construction in the vicinity of the Project Area. Cumulative impacts occur when the individual impacts of one project interact with the impacts of another project in a manner which compounds or increases the extent of an impact that either project would have on its own. Cumulative impacts are most often the result of concurrent actions within the same location or in an overlapping larger impact area. These actions may vary from temporary uses associated with construction (i.e., construction traffic resulting from two or more projects being built at the same time) to more permanent impacts simultaneously affecting the same resource (i.e., cumulative visual impacts resulting from wind turbines from two or more projects within the same viewshed). Due to the height of the proposed turbine structures and the unique nature of their movement, cumulative impacts are most likely to result from development of other potential wind energy projects, rather than development of facilities more common to the landscape. However, other types of projects also could give rise to cumulative impacts depending upon their nature, location and schedule. Although it is difficult to determine where and how future projects will be developed and which future projects might contribute to cumulative impacts to area resources, the SEQR process requires that reasonably related cumulative impacts be evaluated where other projects have been specifically identified and either are part of a single plan or program, or sufficient nexus of common or interactive impacts warrant assessing such impacts together. No other projects are part of a single plan or program with the Project. Thus, there are no other “common plan” projects that must be reviewed. There are no existing wind energy projects within a 40-mile radius of the proposed St. Lawrence Windpower Project. As a result, cumulative impacts associated with existing wind projects also are not evaluated in this SDEIS. SLW and interested or involved agencies have identified four proposed wind energy projects within the vicinity of the Project to be considered as part of this cumulative analysis. These include the BP Alternative Energy North America, Inc. (BP) Cape Vincent Wind Power Project, the Upstate NY Power Corporation (Upstate Power) Hounsfield Wind Farm; the Atlantic Wind, LLC Horse Creek Wind Power Project; and the Canadian Renewable Energy Corporation (CREC) Wolfe Island Wind Project. These wind energy projects are in various phases of

4-1

001542

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

planning, development, and/or construction (see Table 4-1). Based upon consultation with the interested and involved agencies, SLW has determined that, other than these four proposed wind energy projects, there are no additional planned or proposed projects that appear likely to give rise to environmental impacts that would be cumulative to those of the Project. The following sections assess the extent to which potential impacts of the projects listed in Table 4-1 are expected to be cumulative with the impacts of the Project. Specific information about these projects was obtained through publicly available documentation such as DEISs, FEISs, and other public documents available from company websites. This cumulative impact analysis is based on the following general assumptions: The most recent construction schedules available are provided in Table 4-1, while proposed construction schedules may change, these dates are assumed for this analysis. All of the indicated projects will be constructed as proposed based on publicly available project information appearing in project permit applications and permit documents. 4.1.1 Soils, Topography and Geological Resources The impacts of all of the five projects will be additive, not cumulative or synergistic because of the distances between the projects and differences in their construction schedules. 4.1.2 Water Resources The Project was developed to avoid or minimize disturbance to wetland habitats to the extent practicable; however, some impacts to wetlands are unavoidable. As discussed in Section 3.2, the Project will temporarily affect 1.95 acres and permanently affect 0.33 acre, of wetlands. In addition, 0.34 acre of forested wetlands will be permanently converted to non-forested wetlands as a result of rights-of-way maintenance practices. Fifty feet of stream banks, associated with two stream crossings, will also be altered as a result of the proposed Project. The four other proposed wind farms will also affect wetlands; however, limited information was publicly available regarding the quantity of wetlands and surface water bodies that could be affected. The Cape Vincent Wind Farm estimates that there will be no permanent wetland impacts associated with the construction or operation of its permanent facilities, including wind turbines, electrical substation, and operations and maintenance facilities. Temporary impacts are anticipated to be associated with road and transmission line crossings; however, approximated impact acreages were not provided in that project’s DEIS. Wetland impacts for one of four potential 115kV transmission lines are estimated at 3.2 acres. Two of the 3.2 acres included forested cover types that would be permanently converted (ERM, 2007).

4-2

001543

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 4-1 Proposed Wind Projects - Jefferson County, New York and Frontenac County, Ontario
Location Project Status
2

Project Name Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme in Jefferson County, New York approximately 1.5 miles southeast of the St. Lawrence River and New York State Route 12E, The transmission line will extend about 9 miles southeast to an existing substation in the Town of Lyme. Town of Cape Vincent, Jefferson County, New York. Approximately two miles southeast of the Village of Cape Vincent and six miles northwest of the Village of Chaumont. Galloo Island, Town of Hounsfield, Jefferson County, New York. Approximately 12 miles west of Sacketts Harbor in Lake Ontario. Towns of Clayton and Orleans, Jefferson County, New York. Approximately five miles south-southeast of the Village of Clayton and three miles northeast of the Village of Chaumont. The Project boundary abuts the Towns of Brownville and Lyme between Perch Lake and the Chaumont River. Wolfe Island, the Township of Frontenac Islands, County of Frontenac, Province of Ontario. The City of Kingston is located north of the Project on the Canadian mainland. 5 miles west 9 miles east 17 miles south southwest 1.2 miles southeast (Contiguous to the St. Lawrence Windpower Project to the southeast) (this Project)

Number of Turbines

Approximate Distance of Project Boundary from St. Lawrence 1 Windpower Project

St. Lawrence Windpower Project

53

Project construction will occur in a single phase. Project construction scheduled to commence in Spring of 2010 and be completed by December 2010.

Cape Vincent Wind Power Project

140

Project construction is anticipated to occur in a single phase. It is scheduled to start in the spring of 2011 and be completed by December 31, 2011. The NYSDEC issued a Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft EIS on May 21, 2008. A public scoping session was conducted on June 17, 2008 and a Final Scoping Document was prepared on September 18, 2008. The Project was scheduled to be constructed in one phase, anticipated to commence in April 2008 and to finish in December 2008. In June 2008, Horse Creek Wind Farm announced that development on the project was suspended.

Hounsfield Wind Farm

84

Horse Creek Wind Power Project

62

Wolfe Island Wind Project

86

Construction was scheduled to commence in the first quarter of 2007, with a targeted in-service date of October 2008. As on November 2008 construction had commenced and will continue through the winter into 2009. A July 2009 completion date is assumed.

1

2

Distance calculated using a central point within project boundary of the Project and the closest point of each proposed boundary. Information obtained through publicly available information for each project.

4-3

001544

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Although no detailed information regarding wetland impacts is available for the Hounsfield Wind Farm, there are significant areas of wetlands and surface waters on and surrounding Galloo Island and construction of the proposed wind farm has the potential to result in adverse impacts to wetlands under NYSDEC and/or USACE jurisdiction (NYSDEC, 2008). No detailed wetland delineation has been conducted of the Horse Creek Wind Power Project. Based on an analysis of the preliminary Project layout and the approximated wetland boundaries, 12 acres of temporary wetland/stream impact are anticipated to occur due to project construction (not including impacts that may result from any public road improvements). The permanent footprint of access roads is anticipated to result in approximately 1.8 acres of permanent impacts to wetlands/streams (EDR, 2007). Information regarding specific acreages of impact associated with the Wolfe Island Wind Project was not obtainable. Provincially Significant Wetlands, Non-Provincially Significant Wetlands, and Unevaluated Wetlands were identified on the island as well as sixteen watercourses that would require permanent vehicle crossings (Stantec, 2007). Disturbances to wetlands and water bodies affect the functions and values (e.g., fish and wildlife habitat, flood protection and abatement, sediment retention, and biological diversity, among others [NYSDEC, 2008]), that these resources provide to surrounding areas. Temporary disturbances associated with construction of access roads, underground and overhead collection lines, and turbines will occur at the Project and at the other proposed wind farm development projects within the region. According to information that is publicly available, these projects have differing schedules (see Table 4-1) and impacts to wetlands will not be concurrent. Most of these wind generation facilities will cause localized and temporary effects to wetlands during construction; however, these effects would, for the most part, occur at different times for the five projects, and wetland functions and values would be restored following construction. Therefore, significant cumulative impacts from temporary disturbances associated with these five projects are not anticipated. Permanent disturbance to wetlands is regulated, both by state and federal agencies, which require avoidance and minimization, as well as compensatory mitigation for unavoidable disturbances. All wind projects considered in this cumulative effects analysis that would disturb wetlands are required to restore or improve functions and values of degraded wetlands through compensatory mitigation, resulting in a net increase in wetland acreage. To maintain ecological functions,

4-4

001545

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

wetland mitigation sites are usually required to be located in the same watershed in which the affected wetlands occur. Compensatory mitigation is typically implemented and functioning in advance of, or concurrent with, project impacts thus reducing temporal losses of functions and values as well as uncertainty regarding the success of offsetting project impacts. Because compensatory mitigation is anticipated to initiate during, and continue following, construction, wetland functions and values provided to the watershed are adequately maintained. Furthermore, compensatory mitigation works to prevent “no net loss” of wetlands, and is often implemented at greater than 1 to 1 replacement ratios, 2 to 1 in the case of the Project. Therefore, construction and operation of the planned wind generation facilities considered in this analysis is not expected to result in significant cumulative adverse impacts to wetlands. 4.1.3 Ecological Resources From a regional perspective, localized disturbances to wildlife and wildlife habitats are expected to occur during construction of all of the wind farms listed in Table 4-1. Temporal differences in project schedules will lessen the cumulative effects of temporary impacts to wildlife and wildlife habitats. Disturbances to wildlife and wildlife habitats associated with wind development are consistent with disturbances caused by agricultural and logging practices throughout the region. Permanent loss of wildlife habitats caused by development of these five projects is minimal relative to the habitat coverage in the region. Wildlife and wildlife habitat are common and regionally appropriate for all five projects. Significant cumulative adverse effects are not anticipated because none of the projects, when considered individually, are anticipated to cause significant impacts to wildlife or wildlife habitats and the projects, taken together, will not cause impacts that interact with or increase the extent of the impacts of other projects.
4.1.3.1 Birds and Bats

Construction of the projects listed in Table 4-1 is expected to affect birds and bats although none of the projects is expected to result in significant adverse effects to either group. In addition to the Project, avian and bat studies have been conducted for the Cape Vincent Wind Power Project, the Horse Creek Wind Power Project; and the Wolfe Island Wind Project. These studies and the associated environmental impact analyses indicate that birds and bats in the prospective project areas were common and widely distributed, and that bird and bat habitats affected by project construction represent a small percentage of the habitat available in surrounding areas. Displaced birds and bats would return to the project area soon after the completion of construction activities and construction related effects to birds and bats caused by one project are not expected to increase effects caused by other projects considered in this analysis. Temporal

4-5

001546

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

differences in project schedules will lessen the cumulative effects of temporary project impacts to birds, bats, and their habitats. Cumulatively, construction-related effects are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts to birds and bats. Operation of wind generation facilities is known to cause fatalities to birds. Mortality studies conducted at eastern wind facilities indicate fatality rates between 3 and 10 bird fatalities per turbine per year (Kerns and Kerlinger 2004; Nicholson 2002, 2003; Jain et al. 2007). At the Maple Ridge Wind Farm in Lewis County, New York, the closest wind project conducting postconstruction monitoring studies, the annual per turbine fatality rate was estimated between 3.1 and 9.6 birds (Jain et al. 2007). Based on the results from all eastern studies, migrant song birds represent approximately 60 to 80 percent of avian fatalities. Relative to other sources of avian mortality, avian-wind turbine collision is low. According to Erickson et al. (2001), collisions with buildings and automobiles result in high avian mortality in excess of 97 million and 60 million birds per year, respectively. Turbine collision mortality averages 2.3 bird deaths per turbine per year for 12 wind facilities located throughout the United States (National Wind Coordinating Collaborative, 2004) while mortality associated with wind projects in the eastern United States averaged 4.3 bird deaths per turbine per year. Migrant and Breeding Birds: Some migrant birds may be subject to turbine collisions. Survey results conducted for the Project and the Cape Vincent Wind Power, the Horse Creek Wind Power, and the Wolfe Island Wind projects indicated slightly above average total number of migrants, birds/hour and number of species but no significant adverse affects to migrant bird populations (see Section 3.3.4.2 Table 3-6). Similarly, the breeding bird surveys identified regionally common, disturbance-tolerant species. Localized reductions in these stable populations are not expected to cause significant adverse effects to breeding bird populations in the project areas. SLW utilized national and regional average estimates of avian mortality from post-construction monitoring studies of wind farms to evaluate potential avian mortality at individual wind farms. Based on the national average bird fatality per turbine per year as well as the eastern region bird fatality rate (2.3 and 4.3 birds per turbine per year, respectively [NWCC 2004]), estimated cumulative avian mortality from the five regional wind generation facilities is between 978 and 1828 birds per year (Table 4-2). As an alternate method for estimating potential cumulative avian mortality, fatality rates documented during the first year of post-construction monitoring at the Maple Ridge Wind Farm, located approximately 50 miles southeast of the Project, were used to provide a more local

4-6

001547

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

perspective. The Maple Ridge study documented avian fatalities between 3.1 to 9.6 birds per turbine per year (Jain et al., 2007). Applying these fatality rates, cumulative mortality for the five wind developments considered is estimated to be between 1,318 and 4,080 birds per year (Table 4-2). Results from the Maple Ridge Wind Farm indicate that 68 percent of identified passerine fatalities occurred in September and October, during the fall migration period (Jain et al., 2007). While some mortality is likely to occur, the cumulative loss of birds is unlikely to adversely affect migrant bird populations found in these areas as these numbers represent a small percentage of the regional migratory population. Therefore, cumulative significant adverse affects to migrating and breeding birds are not anticipated to result from operation of the five wind generation facilities considered in this evaluation.
Table 4-2 Estimated Cumulative Avian Mortality from Wind Generation Facilities in Northern New York
Estimated Bird Fatalities per Year Based on NWCC 2004 National Average 1 122 322 193 143 198 978 Estimated Bird Fatalities per Year Based on NWCC 2004 Eastern Average 2 228 602 361 267 370 1,828 Estimated Range of Bird Fatalities per year based on 1st Year Results of Maple Ridge Wind Farm 3 164 - 509 434 - 1344 260 - 806 192 - 595 267 - 826 1,318 - 4,080

Project

Number of Turbines

St. Lawrence Windpower Project Cape Vincent Wind Power Project Hounsfield Wind Farm Horse Creek Wind Power Project Wolfe Island Wind Project Total
1

53 140 84 62 86 425

National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (NWCC; 2004) reported national avian mortality rates of 2.3 birds per turbine per year (birds/turbine/year). Estimated rates of avian mortality in this table were derived by multiplying the number of turbines in each wind generation facility by the national average avian mortality rate.

NWCC (2004) reported average avian mortality rates in the eastern US region of 4.3 birds/turbine/year. Estimated rates of avian mortality in this table were derived by multiplying the number of turbines in each wind generation facility by the eastern regional average avian mortality rate. Maple Ridge Wind Farm post-construction monitoring occurred from June through November, 2006 using several methods. Depending on the method employed, average fatalities ranged from 3.1 to 9.6 birds/turbine/year (Jain et al. 2007). Ranges reported in this table, based on data from Maple Ridge, were estimated by multiplying the low and high average mortality rates per turbine per year by the number of turbines in each wind facility.
3

2

Raptors: WEST concluded that both migrant and breeding raptor use of the Project Area were low, and thus Project impacts to raptors would also be low. From a regional perspective, the five 4-7

001548

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

wind projects considered are not expected to cause significant cumulative adverse effects to breeding or migrant raptors. In general, mean raptor use of the region is low, based on migrating raptor and breeding bird surveys; therefore, direct raptor mortality is expected to be low. In addition, results from the first year of post-construction monitoring at Maple Ridge Wind Farm indicate fewer than 3 percent of all bird fatalities were raptors. Combined with low populations and low risk of expected mortality, no significant cumulative effects to raptors are expected from operation of the five wind energy project considered in this evaluation. Habitats used by raptors may be indirectly affected by wind project construction; however, raptors are expected to return to the area after temporary impacts cease, or relocate to nearby suitable habitats. For these reasons, no significant adverse effects are expected to occur as a result of construction or operation of the five wind energy facilities. Since construction is asynchronous, any temporary impacts are not expected to be cumulative. Bats: Operation of wind generation facilities is known to result in fatalities to bats, particularly to long-distance migrant tree bats of the Lasiurus genus. Based on data collected at three of the four other wind facilities considered in this analysis, operational impacts to resident bats are expected to be lower than to migratory bats. Fatality rates recorded at national and regional wind facilities can provide an estimate of cumulative bat mortality to be expected from operation of the five wind projects considered in this analysis; however, these values do not address seasonal trends or distinguish resident and migrant populations. Average fatalities of 3.4 and 46.3 bats per turbine per year have been reported by NWCC (2004) for U.S. national and eastern region wind facilities. Applying these rates to the number of turbines associated with the five projects the cumulative average annual bat fatality is estimated to be between 6,855 to 11,050 bats (Table 4-3). Annual average bat fatality estimates documented at Maple Ridge Wind Farm during first year monitoring efforts ranged between 15 to 24 bats per turbine, with 244 of 326 identified bat fatalities (75 percent) occurring in July and August (Jain et al., 2007). If patterns of bat fatality for the five regional wind facilities considered are consistent with those observed in the Maple Ridge Wind Farm, cumulative average annual bat fatality is estimated to be between 6,460 to 10,413 bats (Table 4-3). Although it is difficult to assess population-level impacts on bats because of the lack of regional population data, these predicted ranges of mortality are not anticipated to produce significant adverse effects to regional populations of bat species (Kunz et al., 2007). In addition to manmade factors such as the number, location, and type of turbines or other man-made structures, many natural factors also influence the impacts on regional bat populations. These factors include the number and type of species in an area, species behavior, topography, predators,

4-8

001549

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

disease (i.e., “white nose syndrome”), and weather. In itself, the migration period for bats can be a time of high mortality, mostly when it coincides with adverse weather and other random events (Griffin, 1970; Fleming and Eby, 2003). The ranges of bat mortality estimated to result from the wind projects is not expected to add significantly to the mortality caused by these other factors, or to alter the population dynamics. While cumulative effects to bats may occur due to increased development in the area, factors external to the five projects evaluated herein, such as “white nose syndrome,” are likely to have greater cumulative effects on bats than the five projects. The Applicant will conduct post-construction monitoring for birds and bats for a minimum period of 3 years to estimate direct impacts of the operating project in terms of mortality rates of birds and bats caused by collisions with wind turbines. These data will be provided to wildlife management agencies to better understand the implications of wind development on bird and bat populations, as well as to develop appropriate additional mitigation measures if impacts to bats significantly exceed the anticipated impacts. Cumulative impacts to Indiana bats are discussed separately in Section 4.1.3.2.
Table 4-3 Estimated Cumulative Bat Mortality from Wind Generation Facilities in Northern New York
Number of Turbines 53 140 84 62 86 Total
1

Project

Estimated Bat Fatalities per Year Based on NWCC 2004 National 1 Average 180 476 286 211 292 1,445

Estimated Bat Fatalities per Year Based on NWCC 2004 Eastern 2 Average 2,454 6,482 3,889 2,871 3,982 19,678

Estimated Range of Bat Fatalities per year based on 1st Year Results of Maple Ridge Wind 3 Farm 806 – 1,299 2,128 – 3,430 1,277 – 2,058 942 – 1,519 1,307 – 2,107 6,460 – 10,413

St. Lawrence Windpower Project Cape Vincent Wind Power Project Hounsfield Wind Farm Horse Creek Wind Power Project Wolfe Island Wind Project

425

National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (NWCC 2004) reported national average bat mortality rates for the 3.4 bats per turbine per year (bats/turbine/year). Estimated bat fatalities based on NWCC results were derived by multiplying the number of turbines by the reported national average.
2

NWCC (2004) reported bat mortality rates for the eastern US region of 46.3 bats/turbine/year. Estimated bat fatalities based on NWCC results were derived by multiplying the number of turbines by the reported eastern regional average. This estimate was used in the Marble River Wind Farm DEIS. Maple Ridge Wind Farm post-construction monitoring occurred from June through November 2006 using several methods. Depending on the method employed, average fatalities ranged from 15.2 to 24.5 bats/turbine/year) (Jain et al. 2007). Ranges reported in this table, based on data from Maple Ridge, were estimated by multiplying the low and high average mortality rates per turbine per year by the number of turbines in each wind facility.

3

4-9

001550

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

4.1.3.2 Threatened and Endangered Species

Listed plant, fish, reptile and amphibian species were not observed within the Project Site; however, suitable wetland habitat for these species was identified. Impacts to wetland or shoreline habitats suitable to these species and non-raptor avian species are avoided or minimized to the extent practical by the layout and design of the Project. Limited temporary disturbance or displacement of grassland avian species may occur. The risk to bald eagles and northern harriers from Project is not expected to be great due to low use and poor nesting habitat of the Project Area, and the low level flights and low soaring frequency, respectively. Based on available information and results of site surveys, it is assumed that Indiana bats may occupy areas near the project area from May through September. Development of the Project could indirectly affect the summer distribution of Indiana bats in Jefferson County by causing abandonment or movement of a known maternal colony located south of the proposed Project Area. However, maternal roosting areas move over time and Indiana bats, along with other bat species populations are expected to continue to use the Cape Vincent peninsula regardless of the proposed Project. Information regarding listed species within the proposed Hounsfield Wind Farm was not available. Potential impacts to threatened and endangered species for the Cape Vincent Wind Farm were identified to be limited to the Indiana bat. Individuals were recorded within 10 miles from the proposed project and foraging habit for the species was identified on-site. Based on the EIS, “further evaluation and consultation with USFWS and NYSDEC is on-going.” According to the DEIS for the Horse Creek Wind Farm, plant species and unique communities would be avoided during construction. Operational impacts to grassland avian species are expected to include occasional collision mortality and disturbance/displacement. Collision mortality for forest dwelling avian species was anticipated to be minimal due to limited placement of turbines in forested areas. Collision risk to raptors was not anticipated to be high. Species most at risk were anticipated to be those that forage in open country as opposed to individuals migrating through the area. Risks to water birds were deemed low as they do not forage in large numbers within the proposed wind farm area. Studies indicate that Indiana bats travel through and forage in areas where turbines would be constructed, and collision mortality could occur as a result of the Horse Creek project. However, the report indicated that “the level of mortality that could result from operation of the [project] is not anticipated to be biologically significant.”

4-10

001551

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

The Natural Heritage Information Center identified ten sensitive species within the proposed Wolfe Island Wind Project. These included six avian species and four plant species. In addition, the Ontario Herpetofaunal Summary listed two reptile/amphibian species within the vicinity of the proposed Wolfe Island Wind Project. Limited information was obtained regarding impacts to threatened and endangered species. Baseline studies including mist-net surveys for Indiana bats have occurred at SLW, the Cape Vincent wind project and the Horse Creek wind project, and have documented Indiana bat occurrence throughout the region (Woodlot Alternatives, 2006; Kerns et al., 2007b). The magnitude of cumulative effects on Indiana bats is difficult to measure. While cumulative effects to Indiana bats may occur as a result of increased growth and development in the area, unrelated catastrophic events, such as “white nose syndrome,” are likely to have greater cumulative effects on Indiana bats than the projects under review in this analysis or continued human encroachment on Indiana bat habitat. In general, rare species breeding habitat will be avoided by all of the projects; however, some foraging habitat may be affected. These effects would be localized and temporary because suitable adjacent habitats are readily available. Most of the wind generation projects considered in this analysis also identified potential habitats for state-protected species; those projects similarly concluded that although displacement and mortality might occur, direct and indirect effects would be localized and would affect few, if any, individuals. Each project concluded it would not cause significant adverse effects to state-listed species. As all projects are implementing techniques to reduce or avoid impact to listed species and development of these projects are occurring at different times, cumulative adverse effects to threatened and endangered species are not anticipated from the construction and operation of the wind generation facilities. 4.1.4 Transportation/Traffic Temporary increases to traffic volumes are expected as a result of the construction of the Project. The construction schedules of the Hounsfield Wind Farm and the Horse Creek Wind Power Project have not yet been determined. The construction periods for the Cape Vincent Power Project and the Wolfe Island Wind Project, do not overlap with construction of the Project (see Exhibit 4.1.1); therefore, no cumulative impacts to traffic and transportation routes are expected as a result of the Project. If construction schedules for the Hounsfield Wind Farm and Horse Creek Wind Power Project coincide with that of the Project, it is unlikely that similar transportation routes will be used

4-11

001552

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

because of the location of these projects relative to the Project. However, if construction schedules overlap and similar local transportation routes are used, coordination regarding use of proposed transportation routes would be undertaken by the involved project developers, NYSDOT, and local highway authorities to assure that the duration and extent of impact is minimized and that road repair/restoration work is accomplished at the appropriate time. Road traffic in the Project Area is currently below capacity and traffic conditions are light. During operation of the Project a limited number of trucks will access the Project Site as well as the other projects in the area for service and maintenance. The Cape Vincent Wind Power Project has not disclosed its estimated operational trip generation. However, because the wind projects typically generate very few trips during their operational periods, no adverse cumulative impact on traffic or local roads is anticipated to result from simultaneous operation of the Project and the Cape Vincent Wind Power Project.
Exhibit 4.1.1 Project Construction Schedules as Proposed 1
2008 2009 2010 2011 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec St. Lawrence Windpower Project Cape Vincent Wind Power Project Hounsfield Wind Farm - Schedule not determined Horse Creek Wind Power Project - Schedule not determined Wolfe Island Wind Project 1

All schedules are based on publicly available construction schedule information

4.1.5 Land Use and Zoning
4.1.5.1 Regional and Local Land Use Patterns

Construction and operation of the proposed projects in the Project Area will have minimal cumulative impacts to land use as the wind farms are generally consistent with the land use patterns within the region. Since the projects will be primarily located on agricultural and forested land, they are less likely to impact nearby residences/hamlets, villages, and recreation areas within each of the towns.

4-12

001553

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

4.1.5.2 Zoning and Other Applicable Laws

Compliance with local town laws regulating the development of wind farm projects will ensure that cumulative impacts on land are minimal. Construction and operation of these wind farm projects will be conducted in compliance with each Town’s local wind energy facility requirements and any conditions appearing in the local permits acquired for each of the projects.
4.1.5.3 Agricultural Land Use

Impacts to agricultural land would be greatest during construction of the projects because additional acreage will be required for workspace and movement of equipment and material. However, these projects have been located to minimize loss of active agricultural land and interference with agricultural operations in accordance with agriculture mitigation measures based on New York State Ag. & Markets guidelines for avoidance of impact, mitigation, and restoration of agricultural resources as described in Section 3.5.3.2. Operation of the projects will be compatible with agricultural land use and could have a longterm positive benefit to individual towns in both counties because setback requirements for wind turbines on agricultural land discourage encroaching non-agricultural uses. In addition, participating farmers can afford to continue farming operations on their property as a result of a reliable supplemental source of income provided by lease and royalty payments.
4.1.5.4 Future Land Use

The proposed Project should not interfere with future plans to develop land in the area for single family, residential, agricultural, or other uses permitted under the applicable zoning ordinances provided that the proposed future uses comply with applicable setback requirements established by each host municipality. 4.1.6 Utilities and Community Services The impacts of all of the five projects will be additive, not cumulative because: 1) the Project will inject new power into the regional grid at the Lyme Substation increasing the local electricity supply and system reliability; 2) the Project will not have significant adverse impacts on the demand for emergency services since existing services (e.g., police, fire, ambulance, and health care) have the personnel and equipment necessary to respond to emergencies that could occur during both construction and operation of the Project; 3) PILOT payments to be made by SLW will provide revenues for use by school districts.

4-13

001554

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

4.1.7 Cultural Resources Construction and operation of the Project will not have any impacts on archeological resources since the Project layout has been developed to avoid areas where archaeological resources are anticipated to be present. Since no Project-specific impacts are anticipated, the Project is not anticipated to contribute to any cumulative impacts on archeological resources that might be caused by planned development of the other four wind energy projects in the region. Construction of the Project will not have any direct impacts on architectural resources (e.g., through demolition of any NRHP-listed or NRHP-eligible buildings), and no potential direct impacts have been identified associated with the other four projects considered in this evaluation. However, during construction, each of these projects could have visual impacts on nearby NRHP-listed or -eligible properties. It is unlikely that these impacts will be significant due to their temporal nature. In addition, since the Project will not be under construction at the same time as the other four projects, there will be no cumulative effect to the historic architectural resources due to construction-related activities. Operation of each of the projects in the region will result in visual impacts on NRHP-listed and eligible properties within a 5-mile viewshed, the extent of the SHPO-determined viewshed for historic structures. The Applicant will review potential cumulative impacts with the lead agencies, the SHPO, and interested stakeholders, and the results of that review will be presented in the FEIS. 4.1.8 Visual Resources/Community Character The adjacent St. Lawrence Wind and Cape Vincent Projects will have viewshed areas that substantially overlap. Considering the extended view opportunities within the Rural Agricultural Landscape Unit covering much of the Town of Cape Vincent, an observer will likely view multiple turbines of both projects from numerous locations. The degree of impact will not similarly increase within the Village Center Landscape Unit where intervening structures, street trees and other local vegetation will screen most, if not all turbines from view. While owned and operated by individual entities, the distinction between projects will not be readily apparent to typical observers. The cumulative effect of the Cape Vincent Project would be perceived as the same as if the St. Lawrence Project were approximately three times its proposed size. Combined, the St. Lawrence and Cape Vincent Projects would encompass a majority of the land area of the Town of Cape Vincent. Views of the turbines would be dominant and widespread. Both Projects propose to utilize an existing National Grid substation in the

4-14

001555

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Town of Lyme. Developing a shared transmission ROW between the Cape Vincent and St. Lawrence Projects can mitigate cumulative impact from transmission lines. The 86-turbine Canadian renewable Energy Corporation Wolfe Island Wind Project is currently under construction. Wolfe Island, Ontario, is directly across the St. Lawrence River from the Village of Cape Vincent; approximately three miles northwest of the nearest Project turbine. Due to the presence of existing woodland and hedgerow vegetation there are few inland locations within the Town of Cape Vincent where Wolfe Island or the St. Lawrence River is presently visible. Views of the Wolfe Island Project from inland agricultural areas in and around the project site will likely be limited to glimpses of blade tips above the intervening tree lines at distances of more than three miles. Conversely, riverfront locations in the Village and Town of Cape Vincent will directly view the Wolfe Island Project across the St. Lawrence River. Simultaneous views of the Wolfe Island and the St. Lawrence Windpower Projects from coastal vantage points will be limited since, in all cases, the projects are located in opposite directions. Importantly, with primary views focused toward the River, the presence of the Wolfe Island Project creates a more direct impact on scenic river views from the U.S coastal area than does the St. Lawrence Windpower Project. Similarly, the Project will be directly visible from southeast coast and upland agricultural areas of Wolfe Island. Both projects will be visible from common on-water vantage points on Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River, albeit in different directions. The Horse Creek Wind Farm Project is approximately seven miles southeast of the St. Lawrence Windpower Project. At this distance should both projects be simultaneously visible, it is likely that turbines from the closer project would be viewed in the foreground and dominate the scene. Turbines from the more distant project would be viewed as part of the distant background where impact is significantly diminished. Long distance views would generally be restricted to elevated, open (agricultural) areas. It is possible that views from intermediate locations could occur. However, such views would be in opposite directions. Upstate Power proposes to install and operate up to 84 wind turbines on Galloo Island in the Town of Hounsfield. Galloo Island is situated in Lake Ontario more than five miles offshore. The Hounsfield project is approximately 13 miles southwest of the St. Lawrence Project. At this distance atmospheric and linear perspective will substantially diminish the clarity of view, often rendering turbine framework and rotating blades nearly indistinguishable. The presence of intervening islands and irregular coastline make views from common intermediate coastal vantage points unlikely. Where such vantage points exist, views will be in opposite directions.

4-15

001556

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Cumulative Summary: Cumulative project visibility does not increase aesthetic impact in a linear manner. For example, a view of 20 turbines is not twice as significant an impact as a view of 10 turbines. The first incidence of project visibility on an undeveloped landscape creates the greatest degree of aesthetic change. Installation of one wind energy project on an agricultural landscape changes the landscape’s character. Installation of a second equally sized project within the same viewshed is compatible with the character with the first project, resulting in a lesser impact on the aesthetic quality of the land than the original development. Turbines within multiple wind energy projects would typically be viewed within different distance zones. Turbines from the closer project would be viewed in the foreground and tend to be the dominant element within the scene. Turbines from a more distant project would be smaller in scale and less impacting as part of the distant background landscape. Should all projects currently proposed or under consideration be constructed, the area in an approximately 13-mile radius of the town of Cape Vincent would include over 350 utility scale wind generating turbines each likely exceeding 390 feet in height. While not continuously visible, wind-generating turbines would be would be dominant and widespread from local roadways, homes and various places of interest. Turbines would also be visible on the horizon from vantage points on Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River along approximately 50 miles of waterway, from Clayton west and south to Southwick State Park, Jefferson County. 4.1.9 Air Quality Cumulative impacts to air quality are not anticipated during construction of the Project due to the differing schedules as described in Section 4.4. However, there will be a cumulative positive impact from the operation of the Projects which will result in the avoidance of emissions to the air identified in Table 4-4. 4.1.10 Noise Cumulative noise impacts were assessed for Project construction and operation. In assessing cumulative effects of noise for the Project, the Project noise study area was extended to include BP’s proposed Cape Vincent Wind Project to the southeast of the Project, which could potentially impact the residences of concern. The three other wind energy development projects in Table 4-1 were determined to be sufficiently distant from the Project that they would not contribute to cumulative noise impacts to receptors within the Project study area.

4-16

001557

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 4-4 Estimated Emissions Reductions Resulting from the Projects Total Annual Reductions (tons/year) 1 Carbon dioxide Sulfur dioxide Nitrogen oxides (CO2) (SO2) (NOx) 73,085.4 313.4 86.7 193,055.9 827.8 229.0 247,111.6 1,059.6 293.2 121,349.4 520.3 144.0 181,840.3 779.7 215.7 816,442.6 3,500.9 968.6

Project St. Lawrence Windpower Project Cape Vincent Wind Power Project Hounsfield Wind Farm Horse Creek Wind Power Project Wolfe Island Wind Project Total
1

Based on USEPA’s Emissions and Generation Resource Integrated Database (EPA eGRID), assumes average output emission rates for upstate New York power generators are approximately equal to: SO2 at 3.00 pounds (lbs)/MWh, NOX at 0.83 lb/MWh, and CO2 at 699.63 lbs/MWh (EPA eGRID 2007 Version 1.0 Year 2005 Summary Tables).

The cumulative modeling analysis (Appendix L) demonstrates that a number of turbines in the adjacent Cape Vincent Wind Project are close enough that the sound levels at some residences between the two projects are likely to experience slightly higher sound levels than they otherwise would if the St. Lawrence Project existed in isolation. However, the predicted cumulative sound levels are expected to be in the order of 1-2 dBA over that of the St. Lawrence Project alone, which is a barely perceivable increase in terms of increased cumulative sound impacts. While addition of the BP turbines would clearly reshape the area within the 42 dBA impact threshold in many places, only a few non-participating residences that were formerly close to, but outside of, the 42 dBA contour would be inside of this area if the BP project were added. These residences or groups of residences are properties that are primarily affected by the St. Lawrence Project and where the noise from the adjacent project would be secondary. The actual change in sound exposure at these locations would be small due to this cumulative affect. The predicted sound levels with the St. Lawrence Windpower Project alone and with both projects at these four locations are summarized in Table 3-33 and also depicted in Exhibit 3.10.4 in Section 3.10. In general, a change of at least 3 dBA is normally required before any real difference in sound level begins to be perceptible, so these cumulative increases of 2 dBA or less at some residences in the Project Area are minor and do not represent a substantial, or particularly tangible, change in the potential impact from the Project when combined with the adjacent project. Essentially,

4-17

001558

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

whatever the reaction to noise might have been in response the St. Lawrence Project alone would occur to the same degree and extent if both projects were constructed. 4.1.11 Socioeconomics
4.1.11.1 Population and Housing

Construction and operation of the wind projects are not anticipated to have adverse cumulative affects on the population and housing in the area, and it is not anticipated that additional (new) housing will be required. Construction for the Wolfe Island Wind Farm started in November 2008 and will be completed in July 2009 before the Project will be built. Based on the known schedules for the other wind projects, the Project construction will not overlap and therefore not cause or contribute to cumulative impacts on population and housing.
4.1.11.2 Property Values

The proposed projects should not have a cumulative adverse impact on local property values. The sales data collected in existing wind farm markets indicates that the construction and operation of wind farms have no influence on property values. A recent U.S. focused study, investigating four sites in the northeast (two in New York and two in Pennsylvania) with a sample size of over 350 home sales for each site, evaluated whether wind facilities affect local property values (Wiser and Hoen, 2007). This study evaluated three categories of concerns: Area Stigma defined as “industrialization” of area leading to decreases in tourism and second home desirability, 2) Scenic Vista Stigma defined as decreases in quality of scenic vistas from homes; and 3) Nuisance & Health Effects defined as potential health/well being concerns of nearby residents. Preliminary results of this study indicate that there is no statistical evidence that homes within 4 to 7 miles of a facility are affected adversely based simply on proximity, or that homes with a view of turbines have different values than homes without.
4.1.11.3 Economy and Employment

Construction of the five projects will have cumulative benefits on the regional economy. The sustained construction over the next 3 years will result in the direct creation of a number of jobs. The five projects will also have indirect impacts on the local economy through the purchases of goods and services, which will support local businesses. In addition, local lease payments to participating landowners will enhance their ability to purchase additional goods and services. To the extent that these purchases are made locally, they will have a broader positive affect on the local economy.

4-18

001559

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Total construction cost for the four U.S. projects is estimated to be approximately $511 million. Approximately 15 to 18 percent of this total is the expected local share. Local share of annual operating and maintenance costs is estimated to range between $1.8 million and $2.5 million, providing an economic benefit to the region. While these figures are not known for the Wolfe Island Wind Project, direct and indirect project expenditures will result in cumulative significant economic benefits to the region during construction and operation of the projects.
4.1.11.4 Municipal Budgets and Taxes

The projects will have a cumulative beneficial impact on municipal budgets and taxes since the taxing jurisdictions will receive additional revenues from the projects in the form of PILOT revenues. 4.1.12 Telecommunications These impacts are additive and can be quantified by simply adding the total impacts quantities associated with each Project. 4.1.13 Safety and Security These impacts are additive and can be quantified by simply adding the total impacts associated with each Project. 4.2 Growth Inducing Impacts

Some proposed actions under the SEQR process have the potential to trigger further development by either attracting a significant local population, inviting commercial or industrial growth, or by inducing the development of similar projects adjacent to the built facility. The proposed SLW Project does not require a permanent work force greater than approximately four to six full-time employees, and therefore will not lead to significant, permanent growth in local population or housing. The temporary impacts associated with the construction workforce were discussed in Section 3.11. Although the Project’s operations phase work force will likely support the local economy through the purchase of goods and services, the type and level of expenditures are not anticipated to generate significant growth in the businesses that serve the proposed facility. As a result, secondary or indirect impacts associated with local growth are not anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed Project. The Project may result in improved local infrastructure which would better support unrelated economic development. Local roads used for component delivery routes would be improved to accommodate Project construction equipment. Improvements to these roads would accommodate heavier, larger vehicles once the Project is completed. In addition, the increased Project-related 4-19

001560

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

income to local governments may allow localities to create amenities to attract desirable economic development within the Project Area. These improvements and enhancements are considered Project benefits. The Project may enhance tourism traffic in the area, especially in the first few years of operation. Greater tourist traffic could generate business for local providers of gasoline, overnight accommodations, and restaurant services. Based on construction of other wind farms in New York State surrounding communities generally experience an increase in tourist traffic, but not to the extent that expansion of existing businesses or the establishment of new businesses have resulted. Certain communities such as the Town of Fenner, Madison County, New York have established a renewable energy education and visitor center aimed at sustaining wind farmrelated tourism. Participating farmers would receive economic benefits that would allow them to enhance their operations through better technology or expansion of available property and resources. The preservation of agricultural land and economic gain in the Project Area would provide these landowners alternatives to selling their farms for construction of residential tracts and subdivisions. The Project would also provide an additional revenue stream that could supplement their income in years of lower agriculture and farm yield. The St. Lawrence Windpower Project is proposed, in part, because of the existing wind resource and associated transmission facilities allow the action to be economically viable. Specifically, the availability of adequate wind and the presence of an existing transmission line in the Town of Lyme allows for generation and transmission of the Project’s electric output to the power grid. The availability of these resources/facilities has shown that other wind power projects will be proposed on adjacent properties. The construction of the Project will not encourage the development of additional wind power projects in the area. Since existing transmission lines have limited additional capacity, the Project may make future projects more expensive to develop if such development could only be accommodated by upgrading existing transmission lines.

4-20

001561

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

5.0

IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES

The proposed Project will result in the irreversible and irretrievable commitment of certain resources as described below. However, on the whole, the commitment of these resources will be justified by the many benefits that would result from implementation of the Project. Human and financial resources continue to be expended by SLW, the State of New York (i.e., various state agencies), Jefferson County, and the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme for the planning and review of the Project. This expenditure of human resources and money will continue to be required throughout the permitting and construction phases of the Project. The Applicant has entered into an agreement with the Town of Cape Vincent to compensate them for third-party costs incurred by the Town in its role as Lead Agency in the SEQRA review of the Project. Consequently, limited investment of local governmental economic resources will be required to complete review of the Project. Also any expended local resources will be regained exponentially in economic benefits to local government should the proposed Project be approved and implemented. The Project will also require a commitment of land for the life of the Project. Specifically, a total of 59.5 acres developed for wind turbine tower locations, access roads, transmission lines and substations will not be available for alternative purposes for the life of the Project. However, because the turbines/towers can be removed, the land used for the Project can be reclaimed for alternative use at some future date. Therefore, the commitment of this land to the Project is neither irreversible nor irretrievable. It is possible that at the end of the expected life of the Project, approximately 20 years, the wind turbines can be repowered with newer, more powerful and efficient wind turbines. Repowering would fall outside the scope of this review and would in any case only extend the use of land for a finite period of time. Various types of construction materials and building supplies will be committed to the Project. The use of these materials, such as gravel, concrete, steel, etc., will represent a long-term commitment of these resources, which would not be available for other projects. Energy resources will be irretrievably committed to the construction and operation of the Project. Fuel and electricity will be required during the manufacture and transportation of materials and components, during site preparation and turbine installation activities, and for the transportation of workers and materials to the Project site. Despite this, the energy resources expended to construct and operate the Project will be offset and represent a minuscule fraction of the clean, renewable energy generated by the Project. During the life of the Project, surface drainage patterns may be altered because of the added impervious surfaces associated with the Project. The Applicant will minimize such alterations

5-1

001562

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

by implementing BMPs as described in Section 3.1.3.1 and an environmental monitoring and compliance plan, and will attempt to restore the ground surface to pre-existing grade to the best of their ability through the implementation of Project restoration plan. As most of the Project site is agriculture, implementation agricultural protection measures in accordance with New York State Agriculture and Market guidelines as described in Section 3.5.3.2 will also avoid or minimize this alteration. Temporary loss of habitat can result in a redistribution of plants and animals that can be different than their pre-existing location and concentration. Wildlife takes or kills will be minimized by appropriate location of Project facilities, but some are still expected and will be offset by proposed Project mitigation.

5-2

001563

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

6.0

EFFECTS ON THE USE AND CONSERVATION OF ENERGY

The SLW Project will have significant, long-term positive impacts on the use and conservation of energy and natural resources particularly as a contributor to meeting state, federal and international energy policies and initiatives. When the Project is in operation, it will deliver approximately 79.5 MW of clean renewable energy at the point of interconnection to the electricity grid. The Project will accomplish this without having to produce, transport, store, or burn any fossil fuel in the process. Production of this clean, renewable energy will not create air or water pollution or add to greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This is enough electricity for over 26,500 homes in New York State (on an average annual basis). SEQRA mandates that new energy generating projects demonstrate that they satisfy energy generating capacity needs in a manner reasonably consistent with the most recent NY State Energy Plan. The 2002 NY State Energy Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement (NYSEP) (also see the March 2006 New York State Energy Plan Memorandum) incorporates energy policies designed to place New York at the forefront among states providing fairly priced, clean, and efficient energy resources. The SLW Project is consistent with the following major policy objectives of the NYSEP: 1) Enhanced energy and transportation infrastructure security; 2) Stimulating sustainable economic growth, technological innovation, and job growth in the New York energy sector; 3) Increasing energy diversity, including renewable based energy; 4) Promoting the achievement of a cleaner and healthier environment; and, 5) Ensuring equity, fairness, and consumer protections. The SLW Project will add to and diversify the state's sources of power generation. Greater use of renewable energy would displace use of other less desirable sources of electricity generation, such as fossil fuels that pollute the air and water and contribute to global warming. New York State wind generation offsets the equivalent of burning 3.4 million cubic feet of natural gas per day. Expanding wind energy generation facilities through projects like the SLW Project will increase natural gas conservation and modulate price spikes typically associated with fossil fuel supply. Furthermore, wind energy projects are considered less vulnerable to terrorist activity than fossil fuel- or nuclear-fired electric generating facilities because of the physical size and distribution of turbines across a project landscape. Also, if a wind energy project is damaged, there are no secondary threats to the public from those typical of nuclear (fallout) or conventional power plants (explosions, release of toxic materials). The New York State Energy Research Development Authority (NYSERDA) commissioned a study entitled The Effects of Integrating Wind Power on Transmission System Planning, Reliability and Operations (February 2005, the “NYSERDA Report”). The NYSERDA Report 6-1

001564

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

concludes, based on load and wind profiles from 2001 and 2002, that 65 percent of the electricity displaced by wind generation would come from natural gas, 15 percent from coal, 10 percent from oil and 10 percent from imports. The NYSERDA Report also found that 3,000 MW of wind energy would result in total annual New York wholesale electricity market variable cost reductions of over $400 million per year. Of this total, the SLW Project will be responsible for almost $15-20 million in benefits to energy consumers each year. In addition, the NYSERDA Report found that it is not necessary to start up additional traditional generation to back up wind generation. The New York Public Service Commission (NYSPSC) issued an Order approving a Retail RPS Policy on September 24, 2004. The Order presented the PSC's renewable energy policy. The Order identified targets and procedures to achieve an increase in renewable energy used in the State to at least 25 percent by the year 2013. The Project will facilitate compliance with this PSC order by providing over 79 MW of energy generation capacity. The Project adds to the diversification of the state’s sources of power generation and addresses increasing power demand through the use of a clean and renewable natural resource (wind). This Project will displace generation from some of the older and dirtier energy generation plants found in New York State. The SLW Project also supports compliance with Executive Order 111, issued by Governor George Pataki on June 10, 2001. The Executive Order requires all New York State agencies to purchase 10 percent of their electricity from clean, renewable sources. Wind power projects such as the SLW Project offset energy from other energy generating polluting sources. Electric generation is the leading industrial source of air emissions in New York State. Wind energy generating plants offset or decrease the amount of fuel being burned at other energy generating plants such as coal or natural gas. The NYSERDA study found that wind energy production in New York State displaces 4.1 million tons of carbon dioxide, 9,900 tons of sulfur dioxide, and 3,800 tons of nitrogen oxides that would be emitted by other energy generating plants. Wind energy does not require mining, drilling or transportation of fuel, nor does it generate radioactive or other hazardous wastes. To generate the same amount of electricity as a single 1.5 MW wind turbine for a lifespan of 20 years would require burning 80,000 pounds of coal or 126,000 barrels of oil. At a national level, the U.S. Department of Energy Draft Strategic Energy Plan (September 2006) promotes America’s energy security through reliable, clean, and affordable energy as its primary strategic theme. This Plan prioritizes reducing the growing national demand for fossil

6-2

001565

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

fuel based energy sources, many of which are imported from foreign countries, and promotes the development of alternative energy as a key means to reverse this long-term trend. At the international level, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (February, 2007) summarized the physical science basis for documented climate change. Based on broadening scientific evidence, this report concludes that “warming of the climate system is unequivocal” and that man-made greenhouse gases caused by fossil fuel based energy sources are a significant contributor to this increasing warming trend. In addition, such findings have prompted the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol to establish global emission reduction targets. Increasing the use of pollution-free renewable energy, such as wind energy, to replace existing sources that contribute polluting greenhouse gases is integral to achieving these established pollution reduction goals, thereby reducing global warming In today’s volatile energy market with an ever-increasing public demand for cleaner energy production, wind energy is a good hedge against pollution and inflation of electricity prices. Upon construction completion, wind energy provides a known cost of energy production that is not susceptible to changes in fossil fuel availability or transportation costs. Wind power reduces the demand for, and therefore the price of, natural gas and oil.

6-3

001566

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

7.0

ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

The following alternatives to the proposed action are described and evaluated in this section: no action, alternative project location, alternative energy production technologies, alternative turbine technology, alternative project design/layout, and alternative project size/magnitude. These alternatives offer a potential range and scope of development that could reasonably be undertaken by the Applicant for comparative analysis and consideration. The “no action” alternative, which is required for consideration under SEQRA, represents the environmental conditions that would exist if current land use and activities were to continue as is. In addition, several potential alternate routes for the electric transmission interconnection also are evaluated in this section.
7.1 No Action Alternative

SEQRA requires consideration of the “no action” alternative. In the case of the Project, the “no action” alternative assumes that the Project area would continue as active agricultural land, forest, and rural residential property. The “no action” alternative would have no impact on current land use or zoning. It would maintain environmental, socioeconomic and energygenerating conditions as they currently exist. If the “no action” alternative were selected, no wind energy generating facility and ancillary Project facilities would be built in the Project area. As a result, none of the minor environmental impacts associated with Project construction and operation would occur. Conversely, if the “no action” alternative were selected, no socioeconomic benefits would accrue to the area. The local economy and community would not benefit from income from construction jobs, lease payments to the landowners, annual tax revenues or PILOT payments. Also, if the “no action” alternative were selected, lands that would be protected by Project construction and operation might be lost to development projects that more negatively impact the local community and environment by destruction of land by housing and industry development. These types of development would be much more destructive of native grasslands and local agricultural production and would more severely impact natural resources such as available clean water and air, thereby, possibly impacting the popular tourist industry found in the area. In addition, if the “no action” alternative were selected, the benefits of adding 79.5 MW of clean, renewable energy to New York State's energy mix would be lost. There would be no offset of the State's reliance on fossil-fuel-fired generators, which contribute to acid rain, smog, greenhouse gases, and other environmental problems.

7-1

001567

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

If the “no action” alternative were selected, other Project benefits would also be lost, such as lost potential tourism to the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme. Consequently, given the short-term and relatively minor nature of anticipated impacts of the Project, and the significant economic benefits that the Project would generate, the “no action” alternative is not a preferred alternative.
7.2 Alternative Project Location

Under 6 NYCRR § 617.9(b)(5)(v)(g), site alternatives addressed in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) may be limited to parcels owned by, or under option to, a private project sponsor. SLW does not own, or have under option, parcels other than the ones that constitute the Project Site and the route for the transmission interconnection. Therefore, there is no requirement to evaluate any alternative Project locations other than the Project Site. Nonetheless, this section provides background information on SLW’s selection of the Project Site to facilitate understanding of the criteria that SLW employed. Alternative site location analysis occurs very early in the planning process for wind power projects. Because sites suitable for wind energy development in New York are limited, there is a great deal of competition among companies for potential development sites. In order to secure the right to develop in an area, a developer must obtain adequate land control and expend considerable funds in transmission, meteorological, and environmental studies. This requires a significant expenditure of limited financial and human resources. Therefore, a careful screening process is employed. The selection of wind farm locations is affected by several factors which allow a project to operate in a technically and economically viable manner. These factors include the following primary criteria: Adequate wind speeds to support a viable project; Proximity to a transmission line that can transport energy generated by a project; Ability to build a project in compliance with applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations; and Ability to build a project without significant adverse environmental and socioeconomic impacts. SLW’s evaluation demonstrated that the proposed Project Site satisfies all of these criteria: Adequate wind speeds to support an economic project: SLW evaluated the wind resource in the Project Area using computer models that combined wind resource data from meteorological towers in the Project Area, long-term weather data, topography, and

7-2

001568

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

environmental factors. This evaluation demonstrated that the wind resource in the Project Area is suitable to support an economically viable project. Wind turbines create turbulence, or wake, immediately downstream of the rotor. Wake can interfere with the operation of neighboring wind turbines, creating extra wear and tear, and decreasing their efficiency for producing electricity. Using computer models, SLW ensured that turbines were spaced correctly so as to avoid wake losses and turbulence and optimize energy creation. Proximity to a transmission line that can transport energy generated by a project: The Project would be interconnected with the 115 kV transmission line owned by National Grid in the Town of Lyme. The System Reliability Impact Study of the Project approved by the NYISO demonstrated that the transmission line and downstream interconnected transmission system are adequate to accept and reliably transport the energy generated by the Project. Ability to build a project in compliance with applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations: As demonstrated in this SDEIS and in SLW’s application to the Planning Board for site plan review, the Project will meet all of the following setbacks required by the Planning Board of Cape Vincent: o o o o 1,500 feet from the Village of Cape Vincent boundary line; 1,000 feet to a non-participating property line; 1,250 feet to a non-participating residence; and 750 feet to a participating residence.

The turbine buffers minimize the visual and sound effects of the turbines on local residences. The turbine locations were also selected to maintain a minimum buffer from existing road rightsof-way. The minimum buffer, as measured from the centerline of the tower foundation, is at least 615 feet from all roads. Ability to build a project without significant adverse environmental and socioeconomic impacts: As demonstrated in this SDEIS, the Project will not have significant adverse environmental or socioeconomic impacts, and, in fact, will have positive socioeconomic impacts. Few other areas in the State of New York have as strong and reliable wind as the mouth of the St. Lawrence River. This, in combination with the sparse population, and dominant agricultural and managed land use, make the Project Area in Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme suitable for development of a large-scale wind power project.

7-3

001569

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Various Project layout alternatives were considered and rejected during the Project siting process (see Section 7.4, below). The proposed Project layout (see Figure 2-1) is the result of an iterative meteorological, environmental, social, and engineering analysis of the best locations for Project facilities in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme. The current Project layout is sited so as to maximize the productivity of the proposed wind energy project by using the most energetic (windy) sites along with the land where wind turbines would have the least environmental or residential impact. Areas to the north and west are within prohibited municipal districts and a significantly greater extent of wetlands near the coast of Lake Ontario (west) and the St. Lawrence River (north), as well as greater population densities (Village of Cape Vincent) to the north. Thus, relocating the Project elsewhere within the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme would reduce its economic viability, and potentially increase its environmental and socioeconomic impacts.
7.3 Assessment of Alternate Electric Generation Technologies

The purpose of the proposed action is to create a commercial-scale wind-powered electricalgenerating facility which will provide a significant source of renewable energy to the New York power grid. An important component of that purpose is to be compliant with the Public Service Commission (PSC) "Order Approving Renewable Portfolio Standard Policy", issued on the 24th of September 2004. This Order calls for NYSERDA to purchase renewable energy attributes from qualifying facilities to spur an increase in renewable energy used in the state to 25 percent by the year 2013. SLW proposes to construct a facility that generates electricity by converting the energy in the wind to electricity. Such a facility is clearly a qualifying facility for the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), and therefore eligible to bid to receive payment from NYSERDA for up to 95 percent of the renewable energy attributes it produces. Other electric generating technologies are not reasonable alternatives to the Project because they would not fulfill the Project’s purpose of generating electric power through the use of wind energy. The types of wind turbine generators considered for this Project were all MW-class, threebladed, upwind designs with proven track records. These types of wind turbines have been the most reliable and commercially viable types for use in utility scale wind energy projects. Turbine sizes ranged from 1.5 MW with 77 meter rotor diameters to 3.0 MW and 100 meter rotor diameters. SLW rejected the turbines below 1.5 MW or above 3 MW due to limited availability in the marketplace, or unfavorable pricing/economics in the current timeframe. SLW also rejected turbine technologies other than three-bladed upwind designs because they either are largely unproven in commercial projects of similar output to the proposed Project (e.g., vertical axis turbines), or have poor track records in commercial use (e.g., downwind turbines). SLW chose the 1.5 MW Acciona AW-82/1500 turbines manufactured by Acciona Windpower, S.A.

7-4

001570

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Each turbine will consist of a 262-foot (80-meter) conical, tubular steel tower; a 269-foot (82meter) rotor consisting of three composite blades; and a nacelle, which houses the generator, gearbox, and power train as shown in Exhibit 2.5.1. The towers are slightly tapered, with diameter of approximately 20 feet at ground level. This turbine combines reduced sound impacts, while enabling full available potential transmission capacity given all the constraints The final choice of turbine was influenced by two additional factors: Cost of Energy – Various model turbines perform differently in different conditions. A project location's meteorological characteristics, such as wind speed, density, distribution and shear, is a critical factor in the selection of one type of turbine over another. The 82meter rotor, 1.5 MW turbine selected by SLW is well-adapted for the meteorological characteristics of the Project Site because it maximizes capture of the wind on the St. Lawrence site and therefore maximize energy production and efficiency. This turbine selection also optimizes the site’s production potential considering all other factors including setbacks and environmental constraints while minimizing the number of turbines required to achieve an economically viable level of production. The AW82 is also well suited to the site given its low voltage ride through capabilities. This characteristic enhances grid reliability compared to turbines that do not have this feature. Turbine Availability – Because of the recent public support for generating homegrown, clean, renewable energy, there has been a shortage of all MW class, three-bladed, upwind turbines, which has created uncertainties and/or long delays in the availability of particular turbine models. The selected Acciona turbine is commercially available within the time frame necessary to support the Project schedule.
7.4 Alternative Turbine Technology

The capacity to generate MWs is largely a function of rotor blade length, and productivity is directly related to the size of the rotor swept area. Longer bladed turbines are relatively more productive. Multi-megawatt class turbines also result in lower energy prices than sub-megawattclass turbines. As previously indicated, the 1.5 MW turbine was selected by SLW because it is well-adapted for the meteorological characteristics of the Project Site and generates enough energy to allow for an economically viable project. In terms of other Project components, the Project is using tubular steel, guyed-wire towers instead of lattice meteorological towers. These preferred structures are believed to reduce potential avian and bat collision impacts and have fewer visual and agricultural land impacts.

7-5

001571

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

7.5

Alternative Project Design/Layout

SLW has analyzed several different project configurations since submittal of the DEIS. Each version incorporated major or minor adjustments based on the criteria outlined below. While many criteria are evaluated in designing a project layout, the primary siting criteria considered included: Availability of adequate wind resource; Setbacks requirements for homes, structures, roads, property lines; Spacing between turbines to minimize turbulence effects and maximize power production; Compliance with agricultural protection measures; Avoidance of unstable land forms and other engineering constraints; Avoidance of environmental and cultural resources; Sensitivity to viewshed and noise issues; and Landowner preferences. Initial Project layout iterations were based on desktop analyses evaluating constraint information and wind resource data. These configurations contained significantly more turbines than the current layout and were refined after incorporating data from initial environmental field surveys and engineering constraints. Subsequent iterations of the layout addressed the results of wetland and stream delineations, meteorological modeling, setback requirements provided by the Cape Vincent Planning Board, additional data provided by environmental field surveys, and landowner acceptability. Subsequent iterations of the layout minimized environmental impacts or adjusted for engineering constraints, while striving to achieve energy efficiency and economic viability. The final revised Project layout represents the least environmental impacts of all the alternatives evaluated. Optimal turbine configuration for energy production has been modified by landowner agreements/considerations, public involvement, and recognition of the need to protect sensitive resources such as forest habitat, wetlands, and agricultural land. Movement of turbines in one location could result in increased impact in another location and/or reduced power generation. In the case of visual impact, removal or relocation of one to several individual turbines from a 53turbine layout is unlikely to result in a significant change in project visibility and visual impact from most locations. As a result, alternative project designs were likely to pose equal or greater risk of adverse environmental, engineering, or community acceptability impacts and thus were rejected.

7-6

001572

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

7.6

Alternative Project Scale and Magnitude

St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC has invested significant time and resources in determining the optimal project configuration. The current Project design consisting of 53 Acciona Windpower 1.5MW wind turbines minimizes potential environmental effects while maintaining an economically viable project. Initially, SLW proposed a larger project (96 turbines) and associated project components as described in the DEIS. As discussed throughout previous sections of this SDEIS, SLW has reduced the Project’s scale (53 turbines) to more effectively mitigate impacts on sensitive environmental, agricultural, and cultural resources, while achieving a reasonable balance with the desired energy production goals that ensure economic viability. The same factors that make the Project Site desirable were considered in siting individual turbines. Individual turbines were sited in a manner that sought to minimize or avoid adverse environmental impacts while maximizing the utilization of wind resources and, as a result, the commercial viability of the proposed Project. The proposed wind turbines and associated facilities on the site have been located so as to minimize loss of active agricultural land and/or interference with agricultural operations. Turbines have also been sited to minimize impacts to forests, wetlands, adjacent landowners and local municipal districts (e.g., Riverfront, Lake). The proposed Project layout has been designed to maximize use of the area’s high wind energy, while minimizing wake effects on downwind turbines and adverse environmental impacts. Location of turbines and associated facilities reflects input and recommendations provided by project ecological, visual, and noise consultants, as well as agency personnel who have visited the site (e.g., Cape Vincent Planning Board, New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets, NYSDEC, and USACE). The proposed layout represents the culmination of an iterative process that considers numerous constraints and results in a balance of energy production and environmental protection. The proposed 53-turbine alternative described in this SDEIS and the 96-turbine alternative described in the DEIS are summarized in Table 7-1. Overall, the construction, both temporary and permanent, and operational footprints for the 53-turbine alternative are smaller and would result in fewer environmental impacts. The 53-turbine alternative results in a 45 percent turbine density reduction and decreased impacts to wetlands, surface waters, water quality, grasslands, wildlife habitat, and viewshed. Further reductions in the Project’s electrical generation output would undermine the economic viability of the Project.

7-7

001573

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 7-1 Summary of Impacts
53-Turbine Alternative The Project area encompasses 7,849 acres. Construction of 53 turbine, 14.4 miles of gravel access roads, 37.1 miles of underground interconnect cables, 8.9 mile overhead transmission line, two electrical substations, and an operations and maintenance building may result in minor impacts to existing drainage patterns The Project area encompasses 9,000 acres. Construction of 96 turbine, 29 miles of gravel access roads, 44 miles of underground interconnect cables, 9 mile overhead transmission line, two electrical substations, and an operations and maintenance building may result in minor impacts to existing drainage patterns Possible temporary impacts (erosion/sedimentation) during construction could result from clearing and grading near streams and wetlands. Fifty-one (51) surface water bodies and nine (9) wetlands will be crossed by Project interconnect and transmission line. Construction and operation of the Project will result in: o temporary disturbance of 14.8 acres of wetlands o no permanent fill of wetlands o conversion of 9.2 acres of forested wetlands to nonforested wetland cover Minimal to no impact to groundwater quality. Construction may result in the development of 98 acres of agricultural land and 14 acres of forested land. Sixty-eight (68) acres of forested land in the 120-ft transmission line right-of-way will be converted to herbaceous and open shrub cover. Minor temporary impacts to wildlife associated with construction of the Project would be limited to clearing of forested habitat to widen the buffer corridor along the overhead transmission line right-of-way and within small portions of the lay-down area for 16 of the 96 turbines. There may be minor temporary impacts to bird nesting areas during construction by clearing and construction work in open nesting and foraging habitat. Approximately 82 acres (14 acres will be permanently cleared) of second growth deciduous forest would be cleared for Project components, which will result in temporary and permanent minor habitat loss for some forest-nesting avian species. Possible temporary impacts (erosion/sedimentation) during construction could result from clearing and grading near streams and wetlands. Two (2) surface water bodies and 42 wetland, will be crossed by Project interconnect and transmission line. Construction and operation of the Project will result in: o temporary disturbance of 1.67 acres of wetlands o permanent fill of 0.33 acres of wetlands o conversion of 0.34 acres of forested wetlands to nonforested wetland cover Minimal to no impact to groundwater quality. Construction may result in the development of 41 acres of agricultural land and 0.6 acres of forested land. Seventeen (17) acres of forested land in the 100-ft transmission line right-of-way will be converted to herbaceous and open shrub cover. Minor temporary impacts to wildlife associated with construction of the Project would be limited to clearing of forested habitat to widen the buffer corridor along the overhead transmission line right-of-way and within small portions of the lay-down area for 6 of the 53 turbines. There may be minor temporary impacts to bird nesting areas during construction by clearing and construction work in open nesting and foraging habitat. Approximately 17 acres (<1 acre will be permanently cleared) of second growth deciduous forest would be cleared for Project components, which will result in temporary and permanent minor habitat loss for some forest-nesting avian species. 96-Turbine Alternative No Action No impacts expected.

Resource Geology, Topography, and Soils

Water/Wetland Resources

No impacts expected.

Biological Resources

No impacts expected.

7-8

001574

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 7-1 Summary of Impacts
53-Turbine Alternative Displacement of mobile wildlife to adjacent undisturbed areas. Avian mortality is likely to be in the range of 122 to 509 birds/ year. Raptor mortality is likely to be in the range of 1 and 15 raptors/year. Bat mortality is likely to be in the range of 180 to 2,454 bats/ year. Individual Indiana and small-footed myotis bats or colonies have been documented within approximately 15 miles of the proposed Project. Displacement of mobile wildlife to adjacent undisturbed areas. Avian mortality is likely to be in the range of 221 to 922 birds/ year. Raptor mortality is likely to be in the range of 7 to 28 raptors/year. Bat mortality is likely to be in the range of 326 to 4,445 bats/ year. Individual Indiana and small-footed myotis bats or colonies have been documented within approximately 15 miles of the proposed Project. Traffic delays and road closures due to transportation improvements or construction traffic. Construction is anticipated to be completed in 15 to 18 months. Potential impacts to traffic and the transportation system limited to activities that would occur during only. Transportation infrastructure improvements required to accommodate construction needs. Temporary relocation of overhead lines and other facilities may be required to accommodate oversize vehicles used during the construction of the Project. Traffic may increase over local roads during construction. Fugitive dust from Project construction activities is possible. One hundred two (102) working farms and 75 percent of the area is designated as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance. Temporary disturbance of 191 acres of agricultural land and permanent conversion of 98 acres of agricultural land; however, set back constraints preserve surrounding land use for the life of the Project. Construction and operation of the Project could affect NRHP archaeological resources. Turbine tip height of 425 feet. Visual effects that may result in a change to the local rural setting and/or character. One or more proposed turbines will be visible from No impacts are expected. Traffic delays and road closures due to transportation improvements or construction traffic. Construction is anticipated to be completed in 9 months. Potential impacts to traffic and the transportation system limited to activities that would occur during construction only. Transportation infrastructure improvements required to accommodate construction needs. Temporary relocation of overhead lines and other facilities may be required to accommodate oversize vehicles used during the construction of the Project. Traffic may increase over local roads during construction. Fugitive dust from Project construction activities is possible. Sixty (60) working farms and 60 percent of the area is designated as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance. Temporary disturbance of 425 acres of agricultural land and permanent conversion of 41 acres of agricultural land; however, set back constraints preserve surrounding land use for the life of the Project. Construction and operation of the Project will not affect NRHP archaeological resources. Turbine tip height of 390.5 feet. Visual effects that may result in a change to the local rural setting and/or character. One or more proposed turbines will be visible from 96-Turbine Alternative No Action

Resource Biological Resources (continued)

Transportation

Land use and zoning

Land in Project area would be subject to other types of development.

Cultural and Visual Resources

No impacts expected.

7-9

001575

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 7-1 Summary of Impacts
53-Turbine Alternative approximately 68 percent of the five-mile radius study area. Fifty-six (56) visually sensitive resources have a potential view of the proposed Project. One hundred eighty-six (186) residences located within 10 rotor diameters could experience some degree of shadow flicker. None of the 186 studied shadow receptors would be affected more than 30 hours per year. Required aviation warning lights (USDOT – FAA) on the turbines could present a potential adverse visual impact from some viewing locations. In some open elevated areas within the landscape, it is possible that large portions of the Project would be visible. Temporary minor adverse impacts to air quality may result from the operation of construction equipment and vehicles. It is estimated that annual reductions of air pollutants would be 87 tons of nitrogen oxides and 313 tons of sulfur dioxides. The proposed project will offset approximately 73,085 tons of carbon dioxide annually. The proposed Project would generate noise during and after construction Construction noise would include noise generated during the transport of project materials and equipment, and the installation of project components. Construction activities at turbine sites will result in sound levels substantially below 80 dBA at any homes due to the setback distance of at least 1,000 feet. During operation, three (3) residences would have a nominal Project sound level slightly above the potential impact threshold of 6dBh over the estimated ambient 42 dBA There are no impacts to television signal coverage during Project construction and operation. It is unlikely that the Project would impact government communications. Temporary minor adverse impacts to air quality may result from the operation of construction equipment and vehicles. It is estimated that annual reductions of air pollutants would be 669 tons of nitrogen oxides and 236 tons of sulfur dioxides. The proposed project will offset approximately 158, 576 tons of carbon dioxide annually. The proposed Project would generate noise during and after construction Construction noise would include noise generated during the transport of project materials and equipment, and the installation of project components. During operation, approximately 48 residences would have a nominal Project sound level slightly above the potential impact threshold of 6dBh over the estimated ambient 42 dBA 96-Turbine Alternative approximately 67 percent of the five-mile radius study area. Sixty-seven (67) visually sensitive resources have a potential view of the proposed Project. One hundred ninety-seven (197) residences located within 10 rotor diameters could experience some degree of shadow flicker. Thirty-five (35) of the 197 studied shadow receptors would be affected more than 30 hours per year. Required aviation warning lights (USDOT – FAA) on the turbines could present a potential adverse visual impact from some viewing locations. In some open elevated areas within the landscape, it is possible that large portions of the Project would be visible. No Action

Resource Cultural and Visual Resources (continued)

Air Quality

No impacts expected; however, no benefits would be realized.

Noise

No impacts expected.

Telecommunications

There are no impacts to television signal coverage during Project construction and operation. It is unlikely that the Project would impact government communications.

No impacts expected.

7-10

001576

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 7-1 Summary of Impacts
53-Turbine Alternative There is a remote possibility that ice shed from turbines could cause personal or property injury. There is a remote possibility that tower collapse or turbine failure could cause personal or property injury. Potential to create stray voltage if the electrical system is both poorly grounded and located near underground or poorly grounded metal objects. Due to height and materials used to construct, the wind turbines are susceptible to lightning strikes. The Project, by the nature of the physical dimensions, may present response difficulties to local emergency responders should a fire occur within a structure. Storage and use of diesel fuels, lubricating oils, and hydraulic fluids within the Project boundary may create the potential for fire or medical emergencies. There is a remote possibility that ice shed from turbines could cause personal or property injury. There is a remote possibility that tower collapse or turbine failure could cause personal or property injury. Potential to create stray voltage if the electrical system is both poorly grounded and located near underground or poorly grounded metal objects. Due to height and materials used to construct, the wind turbines are susceptible to lightning strikes. The Project, by the nature of the physical dimensions, may present response difficulties to local emergency responders should a fire occur within a structure. Storage and use of diesel fuels, lubricating oils, and hydraulic fluids within the Project boundary may create the potential for fire or medical emergencies. 96-Turbine Alternative No Action No impacts expected.

Resource Safety and Security

7-11

001577

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

7.7

Alternative Transmission Line Routing

The following routing alternatives for the 115 kV transmission line have been evaluated: Placement within the abandoned railroad ROW Placement adjacent to the abandoned railroad ROW Underground placement of the 115 kV line in sensitive resources All alternatives originate at a collector substation located on Swamp Road and would connect to an existing substation in the Town of Lyme, owned and operated by National Grid. The point of interconnect would be located on the east side of County Road 179. All alternatives would also require crossing the Chaumont River. Most transmission lines have three conductors. Aboveground conductors are un-insulated bundles of wire suspended on poles or towers. Separation between lines ranges between four to 24 feet depending on line voltage. Open air circulating between and around the conductors cools the wires and dissipates the heat that is generated by the current passing through the conductors. The air also prevents power from flashing over to ground eliminating the need for insulation. Underground transmission lines are generally placed in pipes, ducts, or conduits buried in the earth, and typically are placed four to five feet underground. In place of natural air circulation and spacing, other methods are used to insulate the conductors from their surroundings and each other, and to dissipate heat. There are several types of underground transmission lines. They are classified by the need for piping and the type of insulation. The main types are: High-pressure, fluid-filled pipe (HPFF) High-pressure, gas-filled pipe (HPGF) Self-contained fluid-filled (SCFF) Cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) High pressure fluid-filled (HPFF) types are the most common in the United States. Selfcontained fluid filled (SCFF) types are the least common and least likely to be used in northern New York due to climate. There are different advantages and disadvantages for underground transmission lines. When compared with overhead transmission lines, underground lines produce fewer post-construction impacts. However, in general, as compared to overhead lines, underground lines have greater construction impacts, cost significantly more, and have operational limitations.

7-12

001578

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

7.7.1

Alternative 1 – Above Ground Placement within the abandoned railroad ROW

This alternative consists of an approximately 9-mile, 100-foot wide construction ROW and a 17foot wide permanently maintained ROW. The transmission line will be constructed in an existing abandoned railroad ROW for approximately 7.5 miles, 85 percent of its entire length. At the hamlet of Chaumont, the route turns to the northeast, approximately 750 feet north Old Town Spring Road for approximately 0.5-mile before turning southeast and crossing the Chaumont River. The entire length of this alternative is above ground. Exhibit 7.7.1 shows the route for Alternative 1. The construction right-of-way will be cleared and grubbed. The construction right-of-way will serve as access for construction vehicles. Additional access to the work area will include use of existing farm roads and drives. Single trees or small clusters of trees within the proposed ROW will be avoided and will not require removal. Tree clearing adjacent to the transmission line will be limited to “danger trees” associated with the electric transmission line conductors. “Danger trees” adjacent to the transmission line that pose a threat to the reliability of the overhead line include trees that could fall or strike the conductors and take the transmission line out of service. These trees will be selectively cut by hand (i.e., non-mechanized clearing) to avoid heavy equipment access and adverse impacts to adjacent wetlands. An existing Development Authority of the North Country (DANC) water line (the Western Jefferson County Regional Water Line) is located within the existing abandoned railroad ROW. The above ground siting of the transmission line will use setbacks from the water line to avoid disruption. The Applicant will work with DANC to identify exact locations of the water line, weight restrictions for working on and around the water line and appropriate setbacks. The setbacks will be based on several factors including industry standards and DANC requirements. Siting will also consider OHSA requirements for working setbacks around transmission lines in the event DANC needs to work on the water line during the operation of the wind farm.
7.7.2 Alternative 2 – Above Ground Placement adjacent to the abandoned railroad ROW

This alternative consists of an approximately 9-mile, 100-foot wide construction ROW constructed approximately 200 feet from the existing abandoned railroad ROW. Approximately two-thirds of the ROW would be north of the abandoned railroad ROW and one-third would be south of the abandoned railroad ROW. The route would cross the abandoned railroad ROW at Merchant Road (a.k.a. Gibbons Road). At the hamlet of Chaumont, the route turns to the northeast, approximately 750 feet north Old Town Spring Road for approximately 0.5-mile

7-13

001579

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

before turning southeast and crossing the Chaumont River. The permanently maintained ROW will be 17 feet wide. The entire length of this alternative is above ground. Exhibit 7.7.2 shows the route for Alternative 2.
Exhibit 7.7.1 - Alternative 1 – Above Ground Placement Within the Abandoned Railroad ROW

7-14

001580

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Exhibit 7.7.2 - Alternative 2 – Above Ground Placement Adjacent to the Abandoned Railroad ROW

7-15

001581

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

7.7.3

Alternative 3 – Underground placement of the 115 kV line in sensitive resources

This alternative consists of an approximately 9-mile, 100-foot wide ROW constructed approximately 200 feet from the existing abandoned railroad ROW. Approximately two-thirds of the ROW would be north of the abandoned railroad ROW and one-third would be south of the abandoned railroad ROW. The route would cross the abandoned railroad ROW at Merchant Road (a.k.a. Gibbons Road). At the hamlet of Chaumont, the route turns to the northeast, approximately 750 feet north Old Town Spring Road for approximately 0.5-mile before turning southeast and crossing the Chaumont River. The permanently maintained ROW will be 17 feet wide. Unlike the adjacent alternative (Alternative 2), approximately 2.3 miles of this alternative would be placed underground to avoid sensitive resources (i.e., surface water bodies and wetlands, and Ashland Wildlife Management Area). Exhibit 7.7.3 shows the route for Alternative 3.
7.7.4 Comparison of Alternatives

Alternative 1 (above ground placement within the abandoned railroad ROW) is the environmentally preferred alternative. As discussed in Table 7-2, impacts to Geology, Topography, and Soils; Transportation; Land Use and Zoning; Air Quality; Noise; Telecommunications; and Safety and Security will be similar for the three alternatives considered. However, Alternative 1 avoids or minimizes adverse environmental impacts, to the maximum extent practicable, to Biological Resources and Archeological Resources. The least amount of forested cover will be temporarily disturbed and permanently converted to shrub/herbaceous cover under Alternative 1, because even though an underground line (Alternative 3) is hidden from view, its ROW must be cleared and maintained in an unforested state. Alternative 1 will also result in fewer impacts to surface water bodies and wetlands than Alternative 2. While Alternative 1 may result in slightly greater impacts to water bodies than Alternative 3, Alternative 3 leaves the potential for unanticipated discharges into the Chaumont River due to fluid or sealant seepage/blowout through fractures during directional drilling; in addition, the Project’s proposed mitigation will result in a net positive impact on wetland acreage. Visual impacts will be similar for Alternatives 1 and 2 and reduced for those underground portions of the ROW. No impacts to archeological sites are anticipated for Alternatives 1 and 2; however, there is the potential for disturbance of sites in the underground segments of the transmission line. In addition, Alternatives 1 or 2 are the only economically feasible alternatives since underground lines are considerably more costly and environmentally invasive than overhead lines. As a rule of thumb, the installed cost for 115 kV underground line will be about four to six times more than 115 kV above ground line.

7-16

001582

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Exhibit 7.7.3 - Alternative 3– Underground Placement of the 115 kV line in Sensitive Resources

7-17

001583

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 7-2 Summary of Electrical Transmission Routing Impacts
Alternative 1 Preferred – Above Ground Transmission Line in Abandoned Railroad ROW Nine (9)-mile overhead transmission line and electrical substations may result in temporary erosion and sedimentation, and minor impacts to existing drainage patterns. Nine (9)-mile overhead transmission line and electrical substations may result in temporary erosion and sedimentation, and minor impacts to existing drainage patterns. Possible temporary impacts (erosion/ sedimentation) during construction could result from clearing and grading within ROW Seven (7) streams, 20 wetlands, one pond will be crossed by the transmission line. Construction and operation of the transmission will temporarily affect 11.8 acres of wetlands. Approximately 4.2 acres of forested wetlands will be permanently converted to non-forested wetland cover. Negligible impact to groundwater quality Approximately 27 acres of second growth deciduous forest would be cleared for ROW, resulting in temporary and permanent minor habitat loss for some forest-nesting avian species. Five (5) acres of forested land in the 100-ft transmission line ROW will be converted to open shrub cover. Minor temporary displacement of wildlife associated with clearing within the ROW. Possible minor temporary displacement of nesting birds during construction in open nesting and foraging habitat. Possible temporary impacts (erosion/ sedimentation) during construction could result from clearing and grading within ROW Seven (7) streams, 20 wetlands, one pond will be crossed by the transmission line. Construction and operation of the transmission will temporarily affect 1.7 acres of wetlands. Less than one acre (0.34 acre) of forested wetlands will be permanently converted to non-forested wetland cover. Negligible impact to groundwater quality Approximately 17 acres of second growth deciduous forest would be cleared for ROW, resulting in temporary and permanent minor habitat loss for some forest-nesting avian species. Less than one acre (0.34 acre) of forested land in the 100-ft transmission line ROW will be converted to open shrub cover. Minor temporary displacement of wildlife associated with clearing within the ROW. Possible minor temporary displacement of nesting birds during construction in open nesting and foraging habitat. Alternative 2 Above Ground Transmission Line Adjacent to Abandoned Railroad ROW Alternative 3 Underground Transmission Line Nine (9)-mile transmission line, with 6.7 miles above ground and 2.3 miles underground and electrical substations will result in displacement of soils during excavation and maintenance of horizontal bore. Possible temporary impacts (erosion/ sedimentation) during construction could result from clearing and grading near streams and wetlands. Wetland and stream impacts avoided. Negligible impact to groundwater quality Potential for discharges into the River, due to fluid or sealant seepage/blowout through fractures

Resource

Geology, Topography, and Soils

Water/Wetland Resources

Biological Resources

Approximately 18 acres of second growth deciduous forest would be cleared for ROW, resulting in temporary and permanent minor habitat loss for some forest-nesting avian species Three (3) acres of forested land in the 100-ft transmission line ROW will be converted to open shrub cover. Minor temporary displacement of wildlife associated with clearing within the ROW. Possible minor temporary displacement of nesting birds during construction in open nesting and foraging habitat.

7-18

001584

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 7-2 Summary of Electrical Transmission Routing Impacts
Alternative 1 Preferred – Above Ground Transmission Line in Abandoned Railroad ROW Individual Indiana and small-footed myotis bats or colonies have been documented within approximately 15 miles of the proposed transmission line and clearing of forested habitat may also remove potential roosting summer roosting habitat. Individual Indiana and small-footed myotis bats or colonies have been documented within approximately 15 miles of the proposed transmission line and clearing of forested habitat may also remove potential roosting summer roosting habitat. Improvements to local roads and intersections may be required to accommodate oversize vehicles used during the construction of the ROW. Traffic may generally increase over local roads during construction. Fugitive dust from Project construction activities is possible. Placement of approximately 8.6 miles of ROW in Agricultural and Rural Residence District, and approximately 0.3 miles in Resort District Placement of approximately 0.41 miles of ROW within state designated Coastal Zone. SLW has not secured property agreements for this route. Approximately 9 miles above ground. Placement of approximately 150 wooden monopole structures, approximately 68 to 75 feet in height. From some vantage points the proposed transmission line will be visible in the distance across open fields. The proposed transmission line will be visible from the Chaumont River, the Ashland Flats Wildlife Management Area, Improvements to local roads and intersections may be required to accommodate oversize vehicles used during the construction of the ROW. Traffic may generally increase over local roads during construction. Fugitive dust from Project construction activities is possible. Placement of approximately 8.6 miles of ROW in Agricultural and Rural Residence District, and approximately 0.3 miles in Resort District. Placement of approximately 0.41 miles of ROW within state designated Coastal Zone. SLW has secured property agreements for this route. Approximately 9 miles above ground. Placement of approximately 150 wooden monopole structures, approximately 68 to 75 feet in height. From some vantage points the proposed transmission line will be visible in the distance across open fields. The proposed transmission line will be visible from the Chaumont River, the Ashland Flats Wildlife Management Area, Alternative 2 Above Ground Transmission Line Adjacent to Abandoned Railroad ROW Alternative 3 Underground Transmission Line Individual Indiana and small-footed myotis bats or colonies have been documented within approximately 15 miles of the proposed transmission line and clearing of forested habitat may also remove potential roosting summer roosting habitat. Improvements to local roads and intersections may be required to accommodate oversize vehicles used during the construction of the ROW. Traffic may generally increase over local roads during construction. Fugitive dust from Project construction activities is possible. Placement of approximately 8.6 miles of ROW in Agricultural and Rural Residence District, and approximately 0.3 miles in Resort District Placement of approximately 0.41 miles of ROW within state designated Coastal Zone. SLW has not secured property agreements for this route. Approximately 6.7 miles above ground. Placement of approximately 120 wooden monopole structures, approximately 68 to 75 feet in height. From some vantage points the proposed transmission line will be visible in the distance across open fields. Avoids visual impacts over the Chaumont River, and within the Ashland Flats Wildlife Management Area.

Resource

Biological Resources (continued)

Transportation

Land Use and Zoning

Cultural and Visual Resources

7-19

001585

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 7-2 Summary of Electrical Transmission Routing Impacts
Alternative 3 Underground Transmission Line The proposed transmission line will be visible from the Bay Breeze Golf Links near the hamlet of Chaumont Potential disturbance of archeological sites within 2.3 mile underground segment. Temporary minor adverse impacts to air quality may result from the operation of construction equipment and vehicles. Temporary noise during construction. No anticipated impacts Storage and use of diesel fuels, lubricating oils, and hydraulic fluids within the Project boundary may create the potential for fire or medical emergencies. Installed cost for 115kV underground will be about four to six times more than 115kV above ground.

Resource

Cultural and Visual Resources (continued)

Alternative 1 Preferred – Above Ground Transmission Line in Abandoned Railroad ROW and the Bay Breeze Golf Links near the hamlet of Chaumont. Consistent with surrounding area transmission lines No impacts to archeological sites. Temporary minor adverse impacts to air quality may result from the operation of construction equipment and vehicles. Temporary minor adverse impacts to air quality may result from the operation of construction equipment and vehicles. Temporary noise during construction. No anticipated impacts Storage and use of diesel fuels, lubricating oils, and hydraulic fluids within the Project boundary may create the potential for fire or medical emergencies. Installed cost for 115kV above ground will be about four to six times less than 115kV underground Temporary noise during construction. No anticipated impacts Storage and use of diesel fuels, lubricating oils, and hydraulic fluids within the Project boundary may create the potential for fire or medical emergencies. Installed cost for 115kV above ground will be about four to six times less than 115kV underground

Alternative 2 Above Ground Transmission Line Adjacent to Abandoned Railroad ROW and the Bay Breeze Golf Links near the hamlet of Chaumont. Consistent with surrounding area transmission lines No impacts to archeological sites.

Air Quality

Noise

Telecommunications

Safety and Security

Cost

7-20

001586

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Burying the transmission line within the abandoned railroad bed presents the greatest potential for impacts to the water line because of trench digging. The placement of transmission lines underground requires specific engineering construction measures to ensure the safe and reliable operation of the line. Because a single transmission line circuit requires three wires, each must be installed in an individual pipe or conduit. The three pipes are encapsulated in thermal concrete and surrounded by special thermal backfill materials. These facilities require significant trenching of at least five feet in depth and width. In addition, rocky ledges on the railroad bed near Burnt Rock Road and other places closer to Cape Vincent would likely require blasting to bury a transmission line. Blasting adjacent to the DANC water line poses public safety challenges that the Project will not be able to overcome. In addition, because the repair of failed underground lines can be costly, environmentally disruptive and time-intensive, underground construction design often includes the installation of a spare pipe that can be used to replace a damaged cable or pipe without reopening the entire trench. The underground design also must accommodate a dedicated fiber optic cable for operation of line protection and control devices, which protect the system during faults and other anomalies. While there are aesthetic benefits of placing transmission lines underground, those benefits are offset by other drawbacks. In addition to cost, a key difference between underground and overhead lines relates to repairs. It typically takes more time to locate, diagnose a problem and repair an underground transmission line. The difference in repair time can take up to weeks or months for underground repairs compared to hours or days for overhead lines. The increased cost of installation, maintenance and repair combined with the more environmentally invasive and disruptive consequences of installing larger trenches and conduits along the entire route of the line make the underground alternative both unreasonable and infeasible, given SLW’s capabilities and objectives, and environmentally less preferable compared to installation of overhead facilities.

7-21

001587

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

8.0

LIST OF PREPARERS

This Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement has been developed pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (6 NYCRR 617) under the direction of the Applicant, St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC, with input from the following list of preparers. The Applicant’s lead consultant, Tetra Tech EC, Inc., was responsible for many of the SEQRA required elements of the document.

Tetra Tech EC, Inc. 1000 The American Road Morris Plains, New Jersey 07950 Richard Delahunty Senior Scientist and Project Manager (973) 630-8402 Joseph Fischl Senior Ecologist and SEQRA Technical Lead (973) 630-8385 Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 2003 Central Avenue Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001 David Young (307) 634-1756

Acciona Energy North America Corporation 5 School Street Coxsackie, New York 12051 Blayne Gunderman Environmental Manager, East Coast (518) 588-4672

Saratoga Associates, Inc. 443 Broadway Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 Matt Allen, RLA Associate Principal (518) 587-2550 Hessler Associates, Inc. 3862 Clifton Manor Place, Suite B Haymarket, Virginia 20169 USA David M. Hessler, P.E., INCE Principal Consultant (703) 753-1602 Comsearch 19700 Janelia Farms Boulevard Ashburn, Virginia 20147 Les Polisky Project Manager (703) 716-5500

TRC Environmental Corporation Boott Mills South 116 John Street Lowell, MA 01852 Steven P. Damiano (978) 970-5600 Nixon Peabody, LLP 677 Broadway 10th Floor Albany, NY 12207 Richard M. Cogen Partner (518) 427-2665

8-1

001588

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

9.0

REFERENCES

American Wind Energy Association, 2006a. Website a. Wind Energy Fact Sheets: Comparative Air Emissions of Wind and Other Fuels, Wind Energy and Noise, Wind Power Myths vs. Facts. Accessed April 2006. http://www.awea.org/pubs/ factsheets.html. American Wind Energy Association, 2006b. Wind Energy and Climate Change. Website b. Accessed April 2006. http://www.awea.org/policy/ccwp.html. American Wind Energy Association, 2006c. Wind Energy and the Environment. Website c. Accessed April 2006. http://www.awea.org/faq/. American Wind Energy Association, 2006d. Small Wind in New York. Website d. Accessed November 28, 2006. http://www.awea.org/smallwind/newyork.html. Arnett, E.B., W. K. Brown, W.P. Erickson, J.K. Fiedler, B.L. Hamilton, T.H. Henry, A. Jain, G.D. Johnson, R.R. Koford, C. P. Nicholson, T. J. O’Connell, M.D. Piorkowski, and R.D. Tankersley, Jr. 2008. Patterns of Bat Fatalities at Wind Energy Facilities in North America. J. Wildl. Manage. 72:61–78; 2008. Arnett, E.B., W.P. Erickson, J. Kerns, and J. Horn. 2005. Relationships Between Bats and Wind Turbines in Pennsylvania and West Virginia: An Assessment of Fatality Search Protocols, Patterns of Fatality, and Behavioral Interactions with Wind Turbines. Final Report prepared for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative. Bat Conservation International, Austin, TX. June 2005. Avery, M., Springer, P.F., & Cassel, J.F. 1976. The effects of a tall tower on nocturnal bird migration - A portable ceilometer study. Auk, 93, 281-291. Avian Power Line Interaction Committee. 2006. Suggested Practices for Avian Protection on Power Lines: The State of the Art in 2006. Edison Electric Institute. Washington, D.C. Barclay, R. M. R. & Kurta, A. 2007 Ecology and behavior of bats roosting in tree cavities and under bark. In Bats in forests: conservation and management (ed. M. J. Lacki, J. P. Hayes & A. Kurta), pp. 17-59. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press. Blehert, David S., Alan C. Hicks, Melissa Behr, Carol U. Meteyer, Brenda M. Berlowski-Zier, Elizabeth L. Buckles, Jeremy T. H. Coleman, Scott R. Darling, Andrea Gargas, Robyn Niver, Joseph C. Okoniewski, Robert J. Rudd, Ward B. Stone. 2008. Bat White-Nose Syndrome: An Emerging Fungal Pathogen? Science. 1095-9203 (online). Building Code of New York State, 2002. International Code Council and New York State Department of State. Cadwell, D.H, 1991. Surficial Geology of New York-Adirondack Sheet, New York State Geological Survey. Map and charts series no: 40. Census of Agriculture, 2006. National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2002 Census of Agriculture. Accessed November 28, 2006. http://www.nass.usda.gov/Census_of_ Agriculture/index.asp.

9-1

001589

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Detect, Inc., 2005. Assessment of the Data from the Avian Radar Survey at the Proposed Town of Orleans Wind Turbine Project Site, 2005 Orleans, Massachusetts. Prepared for: Massachusetts Technology Collaborative. December 26, 2005. Edinger, G.J., D.J. Evans, S. Gebauer, T.G. Howard, D.M. Hunt, and A.M. Olivero (editors). 2002. Ecological Communities of New York State. Second Edition. A revised and expanded edition of Carol Reschke's Ecological Communities of New York State. (Draft for review). New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY. EDR, 2007. Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement for the Horse Creek Wind Farm. Erickson, W.P., G. D. Johnson, D. P. Young, Jr., M. D. Strickland, R.E. Good, M. Bourassa, K. Bay. 2002. Synthesis and Comparison of Baseline Avian and Bat Use, Raptor Nesting and Mortality Information from Proposed and Existing Wind Developments. Publication prepared for Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon. Erickson, W.P., G.D. Johnson, M.D. Strickland, D.P. Young, Jr., K.J. Sernka, and R.E. Good. 2001. Avian Collisions with Wind Turbines: A Summary of Existing Studies and comparisons to Other Sources of Avian Collision Mortality in the United States. National Wind Coordinating Committee (NWCC). 62 pp. ERM, 2007. Draft Environmental Impact Statement, BP Alternative Energy, Cape Vincent Wind Power Project, December 7, 2007. ESS Group, Inc., March 30, 2006. Draft Environmental Impact Statement Marble River Wind Farm Clinton and Ellenburg, New York. Evans, R.E., 2005. Wind Turbines and Radio Frequency Interference. North American Windpower. November 2005, pp. 16 -18. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 1992. FEMA Map Service Center. Town of Cape Vincent, Jefferson County, NY., Flood Insurance Rate Map No: 01-06, Community No: 361062C, Map Dated; June 02, 1992, http://www.msc.fema.gov. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 1993, FEMA Map Service Center. Town of Lyme, Jefferson County, NY., Panel 41 of 50 and 50 of 50, Community No: 360343 0041C and 360343 0050C, Map Dated; September 02, 1993, http://www.msc.fema.gov. Fleming, T.H., and P. Eby. 2003. Ecology of bat migration. Pp. 156-208 in Bat Ecology, T.H. Kunz and M.B. Fenton, eds. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Griffin, D.R. 1970. Migrations and homing of bats. Pp. 233-264 in Biology of Bats, Vol. II, W.A. Wimsatt, ed. New York: Academic Press. Gutierrez, F., A.H. Cooper, and K.S. Johnson, 2008. Identification, prediction, and mitigation of sinkhole hazards in evaporate karst areas. Environmental Geology, 53:1007-1022. Gwin, Stephanie E., Mary E. Kentula, and Paul W. Shaffer. 1999. Evaluating the Effects of Wetland Regulation Through Hydrogeomorphic Classification and Landscape Profiles. Wetlands 19(3):477489.

9-2

001590

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Hawk Migration Association of North America, 2006. Hawkcount! [Online]. http://www.hawkcount.org [December 21, 2006]. Hicks, A. 2008. White Nose Syndrome, Background and Current Status. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 3/30/08 Update. Higgins, K.F., R.E. Usgaard, and C.D. Dieter. 1996. Monitoring seasonal bird activity and mortality at the Buffalo Ridge Windplant, MN. Kennetech Windpower, Inc., Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, South Dakota State Univ., Brookings, South Dakota. Hoen, Ben. 2006. Impacts of Windmill Visibility on Property Values in Madison County, New York. Bard College. Accessed on January 14, 2008. Available online at: http://www.aceny.org/pdfs/misc/Property%20Value%20Study%20Full%20Text5_24_06.pdf. Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, and L. Slbodnik. 2007. Annual report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project: Postconstruction bird and bat fatality study - 2006. Final Report. Prepared for PPM Energy and Horizon Energy and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the Maple Ridge Project Study. Curry and Kerlinger, LLC; Syracuse NY. 76 pp Jain, A., P. Kerlinger, R. Curry, and L. Slobodnik. 2008. Annual report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project: Postconstruction bird and bat fatality study – 2006. Final report. Prepared for PPM Energy and Horizon Energy and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the Maple Ridge Project Study. Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department, 2006. Jefferson County, New York Sheriff’s Department. Accessed November 27, 2006. http://www.co.jefferson.ny.us/jefflive.nsf/ sheriff. Johnson, G. D., W.P. Erickson, M.D. Strickland, R.E. Good, and P. Becker, 2000. Avian and Bat Mortality Associated in the Initial Phase of the Foote Creek Rim Windpower Project, Carbon County, Wyoming: November 3, 1998-October 31, 1999. Report to SeaWest Energy Corp. and Bureau of Land Management. A Review of Bird Mortality at Wind Development in the United States. Johnson, G.D, 2005. A Review of Bat Mortality at Wind Energy Developments in the United States. Bat Research News 46:45-49. Kerns, J., and P. Kerlinger, 2004. A study of bird and bat collision fatalities at the Mountaineer Wind Energy Center, Tucker County, West Virginia: Annual report for 2003. Prepared for FPL Energy and Mountaineer Wind Energy Center Technical Review Committee. Kerns, J.J., Young Jr., D.P., Nations, C.S., and Poulton, V.K. 2007. Avian and bat studies for the proposed St. Lawrence Windpower Project, Jefferson County, New York. Final report prepared for St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC., Washington, DC. Koford, R., A. Jain, G, Zenner, A. Hancock. 2005. Avian Mortality Associated with the Top Of Iowa Wind Farm. Progress Report, Calendar Year 2004. Technical report. Iowa Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and Iowa Department of Natural Resources. Kunz, T.H., E.B. Arnett, W.P. Erickson, A.R. Hoar, G.D. Johnson, R.P. Larkin, M.D. Strickland, R.W. Thresher, and M.D. Tuttle. 2007. Ecological impacts of wind energy development on bats: Questions, research needs and hypotheses. Front. Ecol. Environ.

9-3

001591

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Kushlan, James, A., Melanie J. Steinkamp, Katharine C. Parsons, Jack Capp, Martin Acosta Cruz, Malcolm Coulter, Ian Davidson, Loney Dickson, Naomi Edelson, Richard Elliot, R. Michael Erwin, Scott Hatch, Stephen Kress, Robert Milko, Steve Miller, Kyra Mills, Richard Paul, Roberto Phillips, Jorge E. Saliva, Bill Sydeman, John Trapp, Jennifer Wheeler, and Kent Wohl. 2002. Waterbird Conservation for the Americas: The North American Waterbird Conservation Plan, Version 1. Waterbird Conservation for the Americas. Washington, DC, U.S.A. 78 pp. Isachsen,Y.W, E.Landing, J.M.Lauber, L.V.Rickard, W.B.Rogers (editors), 2000. Geology of New

York: A Simplified Account, Second Edition. Educational Leaflet No. 28. 284 pp., 169 figs., 4 pls.(Geologic Highway Map). 2000
Larkin, Ronald P., and Barbara A. Frase. 1988. Circular paths of birds flying near a broadcasting tower in cloud. Journal of Comparative Psychology 102:90-93. Leddy, K.L., K.F. Higgins, and D.E. Naugle, 1999. Effects of Wind Turbines on Upland Birds in Conservation Reserve Programs. Wilson Bulletin 1111(1):100-104. Lighthouses of Jefferson County, 2006. Lighthouses of Jefferson County, New York. Accessed November 28, 2006. http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Meadows/3702/jefflights2. html. Losito, M.P., 1993. Breeding ecology of female mallards in the St. Lawrence Valley, northern New York. Ph.D Dissertation, St. Univ. of New York, Syracuse. 110pp. McDowell,W.E., 1989, Soil Survey of Jefferson County, New York. United States Department of Agriculture, Soils Conservation Service, in cooperation with Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station. Morgan, C., Bossanyi, E., and Seifert, H., 1998. Assessment of Safety Risks Arising from Wind Turbine Icing. Proceeding of the International Conference, Wind Energy Production in Cold Climate, BOREAS IV, held at Hetta, Finland, March 31–April 2. Published by Finnish Meteorological Institute. Accessed November 27, 2006. http://virtual.vtt.fi/virtual/arcticwind/boreasiv/assessment_of_safety.pdf. Morrison, M., W. Block, M.D. Strickland, and W.L. Kendall. 2001. Wildlife study design. Springer. New York. 210pp National Audubon Society, 2002. The Christmas Bird Count Historical Results [Online]. http://www.audubon.org/bird/cbc [December 20, 2006]. National Wind Coordinating Committee (NWCC), 2005. Technical Considerations in Siting Wind Developments. Accessed April 2006. http://www.nationalwind.org/ Nelson, H.K. and R.C. Curry. 1995. Assessing avian interactions with windplant development and operations. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf., 60:266-287 New York Natural Heritage Program, 2006. Letter dated December 12, 2006 from Tata Seoane, Information Services, NY Natural Heritage Program to Jennifer Vitella, Biologist, Tetra Tech EC, Inc.

9-4

001592

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2000. Assessing and Mitigating Visual Impacts, Program Policy. Albany, NY. July 31, 2000. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2001. Assessing and Mitigating Noise Impacts, Program Policy. Albany, NY. February 2, 2001 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2004. New York State Water Quality Section 305b Report - 2004. Appendix A - Watershed/Basin Water Quality Summaries. Accessed 4 December 2006. http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/ dow/bwam/305b/appa.pdf New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2006a. 2005 Annual New York State Air Quality Report - Ambient Air Monitoring System. Albany, NY. Accessed November 2006. www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dar/baqs/aqreport/ New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2006b. Mined Land Database, Accessed 6 December, 2006. http://www.dec.state.ny.us. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2006c. Endangered Species Program. Bald Eagles in the Saint Lawrence River Region. Accessed 13 December 2006. http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/endspec/eaglestl.html New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2006d. http://www.acris. nynhp.org/guide.php. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 2008. State Environmental Quality Review, Positive Declaration, Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft EIS, Determination of Significance, Name of Action, Hounsfield Wind Farm, May 21, 2008. Accessed November 18, 2008. http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/permits_ej_operations_pdf/hounsfieldposdec.pdf New York State Department of Health, 2006a. Jefferson County Emergency Medical Services. Accessed November 27, 2006. http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/ems/counties/ jefferson.htm. New York State Department of Health, 2006b. Jefferson County Hospitals. Accessed November 27, 2006. www.hospitals.nyhealth.gov. New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, 2006. Sales and Use Tax Exemption of Clothing, Footwear, and Items Used to Make or Repair Exempt Clothing. March 29. Accessed on November 27, 2006. http://www.tax.state.ny.us/pdf/memos/sales/m06 6_1s.pdf. New York State Department of Transportation, 2003 Traffic Volume Report for Jefferson County, Accessed on December 10, 2008, https://www.nysdot.gov/divisions/ engineering/technicalservices/hds-respository/jeffersontvbk.pdf. New York State Education Department, 2006a. Overview of School Performance in English Language Arts, Mathematics, and Science and Analysis of Student Subgroup Performance for Thousand Island Central School. April. Accessed November 27, 2006. http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/repcrd2005/overview-analysis/220701040000.pdf.

9-5

001593

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

New York State Education Department, 2006b. Overview of School Performance in English Language Arts, Mathematics, and Science and Analysis of Student Subgroup Performance for Lyme Central School. April. Accessed November 27, 2006. http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/repcrd2005/overviewanalysis/221301040000.pdf. New York State Energy Planning Board, June 2002. Energy Plan. Accessed April 2006. http://www.nyserda.org/ Energy_Information/energy_state_plan.asp New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation, 2006. State Parks. Accessed November 27, 2006. http://nysparks.state.ny.us/parks/.http://nysparks. state.ny.us/parks/. New York State Office of Real Property Services, 2006. New York Office of Real Property Services Municipal Profile. Accessed on November 28, 2006. http://www.orps. state.ny.us/cfapps/MuniPro/index.cfm. New York State Office of the State Comptroller. 2006. Financial Date for Local Governments: Counties, Towns, Villages, and Schools (Level 1). Accessed October 9, 2008 at http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/datanstat/findata/index_choice.htm. New York State Police, 2006. Troop D Information. Accessed November 27, 2006. http://www.troopers.state.ny.us/Contact%5FUs/Troop%5FInformation/Troop%5FD/. New York State Public Service Commission – Renewable Portfolio Standard, 2006. Accessed April 2006. http://www.dps.state.ny.us/03e0188.htm Nicholson, C.P. 2002. Buffalo Mountain Windfarmbird and bat mortality monitoring report: October 2000 – September 2001. Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee. Nicholson, C.P. 2003. Buffalo Mountain Windfarmbird and bat mortality monitoring report: October 2001 – September 2002 . Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee. North American Water Management Plan (1986), Partners in Flight (1990), U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan (2001) and the North American Waterbird Conservation Plan (2002). Northern Ecological Associates, Inc. 1994. Waterfowl and grassland bird surveys in sheetwater wetlands and adjacent farmlands in the St. Lawrence focus area of northern New York state. U.S. Fish and Wildlife. Service, Hadley, MA. 44pp. NWCC (National Wind Coordination Collaborative). 2004. Wind Turbine Interactions with Birds and Bats: A Summary of Research Results and Remaining Questions. NWCC Fact Sheet, 2nd Edition. Accessed from http://www.nationalwind.org/publications/wildlife.htm on Dec. 12, 2008. Osborn, Robert G., Charles D. Dieter, Kenneth F. Higgins, and Robert E. Usgaard. 1998. Bird flight characteristics near wind turbines in Minnesota. Am. Midl. Nat. 139:29-38. Pashley, D.N., C.J. Beardmore, J.A. Fitzgerald, R.P. Ford, W.C. Hunter, M.S. Morrison, K. V. Rosenberg, 2000. Partners in flight: conservation of the land birds of the United States. American Bird Conservancy. The Plains, VA. 91 pp.

9-6

001594

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Payne, H.H. and R.W. Cochran. 1972. Ecological Survey Report of the Cape Vincent Area. The Central New York Chapter of the Nature Conservancy. Richard, L.V. and D.W. Fischer, 1970. Geologic Map of New York, New York State Museum and Science Service, Albany, NY, Adirondack Sheet Map and Chart series no: 15. Rosenberg, K.V., 2001. Partners In Flight Landbird Conservation Plan: Bird Conservation Region 13 – Lower Great Lakes/St.Lawrence Plain. Draft. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY. 12pp. Ruedemann, R., H.P. Crushing, H.L. Fairchild, C.H. Smyth Jr., 1908. Museum bulletin 145, Geology of The Thousand Islands Region, Alexandria Bay, Cape Vincent, Clayton, Grindstone and Theresa. New York State Museum/Geologic Survey, Albany, New York. Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon, 2005. The North American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis 1966 - 2005. Version 6.2.2006. USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD [December 20, 2006]. Stantec, 2007. Wolfe Island Wind Project Environmental Review Report, Stantec Consulting Ltd., November 2007. Staudenmayer, T., 2006. Personal communication between Terry Staudenmayer, Zoning Board of Appeals Chairperson, Town of Lyme and Shaun Brooks, Tetra Tech EC. November 28, 2006. Sterzinger, George, Fredric Beck, and Damian Kostiuk. 2003. The Effect of Wind Development on Local Property Values. Renewable Energy Policy Project. May. Accessed on October 9, 2008. Available online at: http://www.repp.org/articles/static/1/binaries/wind_online_final.pdf. Tetra Tech EC, Inc. February 2008. Draft Environmental Impact Statement Proposed Jericho Rise Wind Farm Project Town of Bellmont, Town of Chateaugay, Franklin County, New York. Tetra Tech EC, Inc. 2007. Draft Phase 1A Cultural Resources Investigation, St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project, Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme, Jefferson County, New York. Prepared by Tetra Tech EC, Inc., Morris Plains, NJ. Prepared for St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC., Cape Vincent, NY. Tetra Tech EC, Inc. January 2007. Draft Environmental Impact Statement Proposed St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project, Towns of Cape Vincent & Lyme, Jefferson County, New York. The Barre Montpelier Times Argus Newspaper, 2006. Lightning strike wrecks Searsburg turbine blade. Accessed April 2006. http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/ 20060222/NEWS/602220326/1003/NEWS02. February 2006. Town of Cape Vincent Zoning Law, 1989. Zoning Law: Amended in 1991, 1993, and 1998. Amended in 2006 to Recognize Wind Power Facilities. Town of Lyme, 1989. Town of Lyme Zoning Ordinance. Portions amended in 1997, 1993, and 1989. Towns of Chateaugay and Bellmont, Franklin County, New York. August 2007. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Noble Bellmont Windpark and the Noble Chateaugay Windpark.

9-7

001595

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Towns of Ellenburg, Altona and Clinton. July 26, 2006. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Noble Clinton I Windpark. U.S. Census Bureau, 2006. Towns/Villages of Cape Vincent and Lyme in Jefferson County, New York American Fact Finder. Accessed on November 28, 2006. http://factfinder. census.gov/home/saff/main.html?_lang=en U.S. Deparmtent of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO) for Jefferson County, NY. Available for download at: http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. November 2005. Technical Note: Development of Obstruction Lighting Standards for Wind Turbine Farms (DOT/FAA/AR-TN05/50). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. March 23, 2006a (Last Updated). Region II Sole Source Aquifers. http://www.epa.gov/region02/water/aquifer/ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. October 3, 2006b (Last Updated). Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) – Jefferson County, New York. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008 (Last Updated). Green Book Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants. www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/. Accessed 12/12/08. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1986. North American Waterfowl Management Plan. A Strategy for Cooperation. 19pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2001. U. S. Shorebird Conservation Plan, second edition - May 2001. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2005. National Wetlands Inventory. 12 December 2006. http://wetlandsfws.er.usgs.gov/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2006. Environmental Assessment for the St. Lawrence Wetland and Grassland Management District. Prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Saint Lawrence Wetland and Grassland Management District, U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Refuge Planning and Ducks Unlimited, Great Lakes/Atlantic Region. 64pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. St. Lawrence Wetland and Grassland Management District. ONLINE. Available: http://library.fws.gov/Refuges/St_Lawrence.pdf [10 Oct 2008] U.S. Geological Survey, 1992. National Land Cover Database. http://landcover.usgs.gov/ natllandcover.php. U.S. Geological Survey, 2000. Estimated Use of Water in the United States County-Level Data for 2000. http://water.usgs.gov/watuse/data/2000/index.html. U.S. Geological Survey, 2006. November 15, 2006 (Last Updated). New York – Jefferson County realtime water information. http://ny.cf.er.usgs.gov/nywin/county.cfm? countyCode=045 U,S, Geological Survey, 1958a. Cape Vincent North 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Map, New York Quadrangle, Photo Inspected 1980, 1958.

9-8

001596

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

U.S. Geological Survey, 1958b. Cape Vincent South 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Map, New York Quadrangle, Photo Inspected 1980, 1958. U.S. Geological Survey, 1958c Chaumont 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Map, New York Quadrangle, 1958. U.S. Geological Survey, 1958d St. Lawrence 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Map, New York Quadrangle, 1958. U.S. Geological Survey. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. 2001. North American Breeding Bird Surveys. Instructions for Conducting the North American Breeding Bird Survey. http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/participate/instructions.html#WHEN%20TO%20RUN Village of Cape Vincent, 2005. Active Programs. Accessed December 11, 2006. http://www.capevincent.org/village/activeprograms.asp. Wells, D.L. 2000. Landbird conservation in the St. Lawrence Plain: the distribution and grassland, shrubland, and forest-dwelling species in continuously changing landscape. U.S. Fish and Wildlife. Service. Richville, NY. 25pp. Wisconsin Rural Energy Management Council, 2000. Wisconsin Legislative Council Information Memorandum. Accessed April 2006. http://www.legis.state.wi.us/ lc/jlc00/im00_13.pdf Wiser, R and B. Hoen. 2007. Do Wind Facilities Affect Local Property Values? Preliminary Results From A Multi-Site Analysis. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/pdfs/workshops/2007_summit/wiser.pdf. Accessed 12/19/2008. Woodlot Alternatives. 2006. Summer 2006 Indiana Bat Surveys at the Proposed Clayton Wind Project in Clayton, New York, Draft Report. Yarnall, G., 2002. Jefferson County Agricultural and Farmland Protection Plan. Agriculture Plan compiled by George Yarnall. Accessed November 27, 2006. http://www.co.jefferson. ny.us/pdfs/farmprot.pdf. Zhou, W., and B.F. Beck, 2005. Roadway construction in karst areas: management of stormwater runoff and sinkhole risk assessment. Environmental Geology, (47):1138-1149.

9-9

001597

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 1-1 (Sheet 1 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Physiography, Geology, and Soils Potential Impact Erosion and sedimentation construction. Proposed Mitigation A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be developed and implemented for the construction period. A Dust Control Plan will be developed and implemented. A SWPPP will be developed and implemented for the operational period. SLW will follow NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets Guidelines for Siting and Constructing Wind Farms. Applicable soil protection, erosion control and soil restoration measures will be included in the final construction documentation and plans for the contractor(s) and subcontractor(s). Geotechnical studies will be conducted prior to final engineering design. A Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan (SPCCP) will be developed and implemented. A SWPPP will be developed and implemented for the construction period. Appropriate best management procedures will be used to prevent spills, limit quantities of hazardous materials used on site, and the implementation of the Emergency Response Plan. Impacts will be avoided through pre-construction surveys and studies and re-location of turbines, if necessary. Clearing near surface waters will be kept to a minimum to prevent significant disturbance to the habitats associated with surface waters; A SWPPP will be developed and implemented for the construction period. The installation of environmentally friendly culvert types (i.e., bottomless or arched culverts with a gravel base). Crossings of the Chaumont River and other streams and tributaries will be accomplished by overhead spanning. Poles will be located greater than 50 feet from both sides of the Chaumont River and other streams and tributaries. Cable between these utility poles will be strung in a manner that will not require construction equipment to drive through shallow surface water bodies. Wetland areas and open waters temporarily affected during the construction will be restored to pre-construction contours and re-vegetated with native (non-invasive) plant material or seeds immediately following the completion of regulated activities at each site. SLW will develop a Wetland Mitigation Plan to compensate for unavoidable permanent impacts to wetlands and proposes to compensate for the unavoidable permanent fill of wetlands using a 2:1 mitigation ratio.

during

Construction traffic could also create airborne dust. The proposed Project, once built, could potentially cause a minor alteration to existing drainage patterns. Impacts to agricultural soils during construction and operation

Shallow bedrock and other geologic challenges (e.g., karst and problematic soils) could be encountered during construction. Release of hazardous substances associated with construction or operation. Water Resources Soil erosion during construction could impact ground water. Spills associated with operation of construction equipment (i.e. diesel and gasoline fuels, lubricating oils, and cooling fluids). Potential water table reduction or pathway alteration due to dewatering. Potential temporary impacts during construction could result from clearing and grading near stream banks. Construction and operation of the Project will result in two surface water body crossings by Access Roads and Interconnects Construction and operation of the Project will result in seven surface water body crossings by the Overhead transmission line.

Streams, Rivers, and Lakes

Construction and operation of the Project will temporarily affect 1.67 acres of wetlands; and result in the placement of 0.33 acres of fill in wetlands and the conversion of 0.34 acres of forested wetlands to non-forested wetland cover.

1-7

001598

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 1-1 (Sheet 2 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Vegetation Potential Impact Clearing for construction may temporarily impact abundant vegetation communities. Proposed Mitigation Clearing of vegetation will be minimized in areas that are ecologically sensitive, such as forested uplands, forested wetlands and the banks of creeks crossed by the overhead transmission line. All temporary disturbances will be restored. SLW has prepared an Invasive Species Management Plan to ensure that all disturbed areas will be returned to a native vegetative state once construction is complete. The Project was designed to avoid significant impact to wildlife. Project infrastructure is sited away from high quality wildlife habitat and forested clearing has been minimized.

Potential for the introduction of invasive species into areas disturbed during construction activities. Non-bat Mammals Minor, temporary displacement of individuals and disturbance of wildlife habitat will be limited to the construction right-of-way and adjacent areas. Forested habitat will be cleared within portions of the laydown areas at 6 turbines sites and along limited portions of the overhead transmission line right-ofway. Bat collision with wind turbines is a potential impact.

Bats

Migrating Birds

During operation of the Project, there is the potential that migratory birds could collide with wind turbines.

Breeding Birds

Construction and operation of the proposed Project will likely result in minor, temporary impacts to breeding birds. During construction, clearing and work activities in open habitats will temporarily displace nesting and foraging individuals from the work area and suitable adjacent habitats. Approximately 17 acres of second growth deciduous forest will be cleared for Project components, which could result in temporary and permanent minor habitat loss for some forest-nesting avian species.

Post-construction monitoring studies will be implemented to estimate the mortality and habitat displacement experienced by bats as a result of the Project, to verify the environmental impacts estimated by pre-construction studies, and to provide supporting value to the overall conservation measures that will ultimately benefit the species or population. Conservation measures including Project design, seasonal restrictions on tree clearing and formal consultation with the USFWS, USACE, and NYSDEC will be implemented before or during construction to avoid and minimize potential Indiana bat mortality during construction and operation of the Project. SLW has selected the proposed Project layout to minimize impacts to sensitive Potential impacts associated with migratory bird collision with wind turbines have been mitigated by maximum turbine spacing, placing electrical collection lines between turbines and the collector substation underground rather than above ground, and implementing the minimum FAA safety lighting requirements. SLW will also implement a post-construction avian fatality monitoring program. The proposed Project will encourage continued farming activities in the area by supplementing area farmers’ income. This will also result in the maintenance of open grassland habitats since the regional climate favors traditional late season harvest which is beneficial for grassland birds. Areas associated with grassland species nesting will be avoided until after the breeding season. Mitigation is not necessary because conversion of forest habitat in the Project Area will benefit birds that nest and forage in open habitats which are relatively more important in the region. Mitigation for habitat loss has been performed by sighting Project components to minimize disturbance and restoring all temporarily disturbed areas.

1-8

001599

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 1-1 (Sheet 3 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Potential Impact There is a low potential risk that local breeding birds could collide with the wind turbines. Impacts at the St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project will be similar to other wind projects; therefore, avian mortality is likely to range between 122 to 509 birds/year Impacts to wintering birds, in particular waterfowl, are likely to be minimal. Proposed Mitigation SLW is studying potential avian impact at the Project site. The Project site is anticipated to pose a low risk to breeding birds. SLW will fund an operational (post-construction) monitoring program to estimate direct and indirect impacts of the wind farm on breeding grassland birds SLW has selected the proposed Project layout to minimize impacts to sensitive receptors including wintering roosting and foraging birds. Any necessary above ground power lines will follow the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee suggested practices for protecting avian species. SLW, working with the USACE, USFWS, and NYSDEC, is in the process of preparing a Biological Assessment (BA) to evaluate in greater detail the possible impacts to Indiana Bat populations due to construction and operation of the Project. The BA will be used to initiate formal consultation with the USFWS under the Endangered Species Act in connection with SLW’s application for permits from the USACE. Results of the consultation process will determine whether conservation measures in addition to those outlined herein are necessary to avoid, minimize, or mitigate potential impacts from the Project on Indiana bats. The Project site is anticipated to pose a low risk to threatened or endangered raptor species. SLW will consult with the USFWS to address the potential impacts and if any mitigation measures are warranted. To mitigate temporary impacts to breeding listed species, clearing activities will occur prior to the breeding season where appropriate. Impacts to listed plant species will be avoided through avoidance of sensitive ecological communities, such as wetlands, and minimizing permanent impacts to vegetation to the greatest extent practicable. Barriers and culverts will be installed to either prevent or to facilitate movement across Project components. Silt fence will be installed to isolate potential Blanding’s turtle wetlands habitat from construction activity. In addition, barriers (silt fence) will be installed to direct the movements of nesting turtles in a manner that limits the potential for road mortality. SLW will obtain all necessary permits from NYSDOT and local highway department(s) in order to make necessary road improvements and to operate oversized vehicles on the roads. Construction related wear and tear to County and local roads will be discussed with the entities that manage the transportation system and an appropriate strategy for road restoration will be developed.

Over wintering Birds

Threatened and Endangered Species

Individual bats or bat colonies for the Indiana bat and the small-footed myotis have been documented in Jefferson County, within approximately 15 to 40 miles of the proposed Project. No impacts are anticipated.

There is a slight risk of collision for migrating raptors.

There is a slight risk of collision for breeding birds. Potential impacts to State listed plants, Michigan lily and autumnal water-starwort.

Potential impacts to State listed Reptiles and amphibians, Blanding’s turtle

Transportation

The potential need for the Project to improve transportation infrastructure to accommodate construction equipment and oversize vehicles delivering or repair damage to roads caused by construction traffic.

1-9

001600

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 1-1 (Sheet 4 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Potential Impact The need for the Project to temporarily relocate overhead lines, traffic lights, cable and phone lines to accommodate oversize vehicles. Traffic delays and road closures due to transportation improvements or construction traffic; potential disruption of tourism in the Thousand Islands; and increased traffic over local roads during construction Increased traffic generally over local roads during construction. Proposed Mitigation A Transportation and Traffic Plan will be created for the Project and will address this issue. SLW will assess work areas two weeks ahead of construction and will provide schools (during the school-year), police, fire, and emergency service agencies with advance notice of lane or road closures. A Transportation and Traffic Plan will be created for the Project and will address this issue. The proposed Project transportation routes have been selected to minimize impacts to roads and surrounding communities. The number of roads used for material and equipment transportation has been limited to the minimum needed for construction. Aside from the oversized vehicles delivering turbine and tower components, construction vehicles will be similar in nature to vehicles currently traveling over the road network and therefore will likely not require special mitigation measures. Construction equipment and the personal vehicles of construction workers will not be parked along public roadways, but rather in designated parking areas, so as to preserve safety along local roadways (unless exceptions are requested and granted by the appropriate authorities). In consultation with appropriate local officials, a Project speed limit will be established. A Dust Control Plan will be developed and implemented for the construction period. If construction is concurrent, coordination between the projects may be required to ensure that responsibilities for road impacts and remediation are properly recognized and assigned. To the extent there is any overlap in project construction schedules, SLW will coordinate road construction or improvements and transportation activity with the other projects and will seek to modify its traffic management plan, if necessary, to mitigate local transportation cumulative effects. The Project is designed to meet or exceed all of the requirements in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme land use and zoning ordinances; and is compliant with current local zoning and land use regulations in Cape Vincent and Lyme.

Project construction fugitive dust. Transportation - Cumulative

traffic

may

create

If the SLW Project and BP projects are built during the same construction season, it is possible that similar construction transportation routes may be chosen.

Land Use and Zoning

The Project will have temporary, construction-related impacts and permanent, long-term impacts on land use. The Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme have no specific requirements for development of wind projects in their jurisdictions, but have general zoning and land use regulations established for development. Construction of the Project will result in the temporary disturbance of approximately 425 acres of agricultural land and permanent conversion of 41 acres of agricultural land to wind turbine structures, a substation and pervious access roads.

SLW will follow NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets Guidelines for Agricultural Mitigation for Wind Power Projects.

1-10

001601

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 1-1 (Sheet 5 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Utilities and Community Services Potential Impact The Project will result in minor short- and long-term increases in energy usage associated with construction and operation of the Project. There is a remote possibility that some overhead electrical distribution lines will have to be temporarily relocated to accommodate crane routes. During construction, large vehicles and temporary roads closures could block emergency vehicle access to area farms and homes. Proposed Mitigation Mitigation is not necessary as neither of these represents significant impacts on energy resources. SLW will collaborate with the utility owners to reduce impacts to their facilities to the maximum extent practicable. SLW will assess work areas two weeks ahead of construction and will provide schools (during the school-year), police, fire, and emergency service agencies with advance notice of lane or road closures. SLW will issue press releases to local newspapers and radio stations regarding lane or road closures. SLW in collaboration with the Cape Vincent Fire Department (CVFD), has developed an Emergency Response Plan to define prevention and emergency response measures for hazardous materials spills, medical/fire/law enforcement, weather emergencies, and evacuation. SLW will maintain an appropriate level of preparedness and equipment for emergency rescue operations involving the nacelle and tower. SLW Project personnel will meet with the local emergency service personnel (police, fire, ambulance, and health care) to review and discuss the planned construction process. Compliance with setbacks and measures to control public access, such as fences and warning signs, will minimize public safety risks associated with ice shedding. Archeologically sensitive areas to be avoided during project construction will be clearly identified as “No Access” on Project construction maps. Prior to the start of construction, an Unanticipated Discoveries Plan will be developed, describing actions to be taken in the event that archeological sites, including possible human remains, are accidentally discovered during Project construction. SLW will continue drafting a Memorandum of Agreement for Visual Impact Mitigation, to be approved by the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme and by SHPO. Although the visual mitigation options are limited given the nature of the Project and its siting criteria, the following mitigation measures are proposed for the Project: Turbines will be painted white or light grey with non-specular material and not be used for commercial advertising. The turbine areas and facilities will be kept orderly and maintained on a regular basis. Turbines will not be allowed to rust.

Local fire department concerns regarding inexperience with the components of the new wind facility, during construction and operation of the wind power facility,

Impacts from Ice shedding

Cultural Resources

The Project will not affect archeological resources that are potentially eligible for the NRHP. In the event of future archeological discoveries in the archeological APE, SLW intends to avoid impacts to archeological resources that may be potentially eligible to the NRHP. The proposed project will have an adverse visual effect on historic architectural resources.

Visual Resources

The Project will be visible from a variety of locations within 5 miles of the proposed Project Area.

1-11

001602

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 1-1 (Sheet 6 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Potential Impact Proposed Mitigation To the extent practicable, the electrical interconnect between turbines will be installed underground. Overhead electrical transmission from the turbines to the 115 kV transmission line, to the greatest extent practicable, will be sited away from where such infrastructure can be viewed from roads. The developer will also minimize clearing necessary for the installation of the electrical interconnect. The proposed turbines will maintain appropriate buffers from property lines, nearby residences, roads and other nearby visually sensitive areas. Perimeter screen plantings will be used to minimize visibility of the proposed substations and Operations and Maintenance Building. Appropriate plantings will be assessed after construction. The proposed turbines will maintain appropriate buffers to minimize visual impact and extended shadow flicker. Settlement agreements could be used to purchase landscape screening (trees, shrubs), or exclusionary treatments such as curtains or blinds. Aviation warning lighting will be limited to the minimum required by the FAA. The Project will purchase aviation warning lights that are shielded or otherwise directed so that they are the least visible from the ground. Due to the height of the proposed turbines, the FAA requires red flashing aviation obstruction lighting to be placed atop the nacelle on 34 turbines to assure safe flight navigation in the vicinity of the Project. The proposed mitigation described above will be employed.

Some residences located within 10 turbine diameters will experience some degree (less than 30 hours per year) of shadow flicker in the Town of Cape Vincent.

The United States Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires aviation warning lights on the turbines, which could present a potential adverse visual impact from some viewing locations.

Visual - Cumulative

Construction of the SLW Project and the BP projects in relatively close proximity to one another may have the potential to create cumulative visual impacts. There may be locations where turbines from projects will be visible, either at the same time or in rapid succession while traveling on area roadways. In most locations within the study area, only small portions of either project will be visible. However, in some open elevated settings, it is possible that large portions of projects will be visible. During construction there may be short-term localized air quality impacts. Temporary minor adverse impacts to air quality may result from the operation of construction equipment and vehicles.

Air Quality

Standard mitigation control measures to maintain air quality will include: Vehicles used during construction will comply with applicable Federal and State air quality regulations; Limiting engine idling time and equipment shut down when not in use;

1-12

001603

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 1-1 (Sheet 7 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Potential Impact Proposed Mitigation Dust suppression on unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas, and using water or DOT approved dust suppression materials in compliance with State and local regulations; Traffic speeds on access roads will be kept to 25 mph to minimize generation of dust; Car-pooling among construction workers will be encouraged to minimize constructionrelated traffic and associated emissions; Disturbed areas will be re-planted or graveled to reduce wind-blown dust; and Erosion control measures will limit deposition of silt to roadways. The following mitigation measures will be applied to Project construction, as necessary and practicable: Adhering to regular construction work hours Mondays through Saturdays, and typically not working on Sundays or after dark; All construction equipment will be maintained in good working condition in order to reduce general noise emissions; When practical, heavy equipment will be shut down when not active, to minimize idling noise; All internal combustion engines will be fitted with appropriate muffler systems; and Adjacent landowners will be advised in advance of any significant noise-causing activities and these will be scheduled to create the least disruption to residents. It is not expected that mitigative measures will be required during Project operations; however, if needed, a complaint resolution program will be implemented whereby neighboring residents can contact SLW with their concerns. Complaints will be promptly investigated to resolve any verifiable issue or exceedance condition, and mitigation may be taken on a case-by-case basis. FCC's mandate to transition all off-air television broadcasts from analog signals to digital signals by February 2009 will eliminate turbine-related interference problems as digital signals are not subject to interference from intervening structures. Should the NTIA identify any Project-related concerns related to signal blockage following their 30-day review of the Project, SLW will mitigate impacts as required. The use of buffers from roads and property lines and public control measures will minimize already low public safety risk of ice shed. All turbines will have automatic braking and shutdown. Ice detectors will be installed at previously determined locations to notify maintenance personnel of icing conditions, which will allow the operator to take the appropriate actions.

Noise

The proposed Project will generate noise during construction.

The Project will not have significant noise impacts during operation.

Telecommunications

It is unlikely that there will be a significant impact to television signal coverage during Project operation. It is unlikely that the Project will impact government communications. There is a remote possibility that ice shed from turbines could cause personal or property injury.

1-13

001604

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 1-1 (Sheet 8 of 8) Summary of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Aspect of Affected Environment Safety and Security Potential Impact There is a remote possibility that tower collapse or turbine failure could cause personal or property injury. Proposed Mitigation The use of buffers from roads and property lines and public control measures will minimize the already low public safety risk associated with tower collapse or blade failure. The standard engineering design and protection systems incorporated into modern wind turbines will prevent and minimize problems that could lead to tower collapse or blade failure. Stray voltage concerns will be addressed through proper electrical engineering design and installation of all Project electrical components. An Emergency Response Plan has been developed for the Project to ensure the safety of company employees and local residents, visitors, and their property. Prior to the commencement of construction SLW will present, review and revise of necessary the Emergency Response Plan in cooperation with local fire departments. The standard lightning protection system installed within the rotor blades will be used to prevent and minimize problems associated with lightning strikes. SLW will design all facilities in accordance with guidance and regulations of the Department of Homeland Security.

Wind power facilities have the potential to create stray voltage only if the electrical system is both poorly grounded and located near underground or poorly grounded metal objects. Due to their height, physical dimensions, and complexity, wind turbines may present response difficulties to local emergency responders should a fire occur within or near the structures. Storage and use of diesel fuels, lubricating oils, and hydraulic fluids within the Project boundary also create the potential for fire or medical emergencies. Due the height and materials used to construct, the wind turbines are susceptible to lightning strikes. It is not anticipated that the proposed Project will be a target for any homeland security concerns.

1-14

001605

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 1-2 (Sheet 1 of 2) Permits and Approvals for the St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project Agency Towns Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board Town of Cape Vincent Code Enforcement Officer Town of Cape Vincent Departments Town of Lyme Planning Board Town of Lyme Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Lyme Departments Jefferson County Planning Department Highway Department New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Department of State Division of Coastal Resources Department of Transportation Department of Agriculture & Markets Public Service Commission NYSOPRHP (SHPO) Federal Agencies FAA Notice of Construction and Aviation Lighting Plan. Administration of SEQRA Process, and issuance of findings (as Lead Agency under SEQRA). Site Plan Approval for construction of wind energy project and transmission line to Town boundary Zoning Permit Issuance of building permits/certificates of compliance. Review and approval of highway work permits/road agreements. Participation in SEQRA Process as an involved agency Special Use Permit (Zoning Board of Appeals) and other land use considerations for construction of transmission line to substation Issuance of building permits. Review and approval of highway work permits/road agreements. Completion of a NYS General Municipal Law Section 239-m review and issuance of recommendations. County road work permits. ECL Article 17 SPDES General Permit for stormwater discharges including creation of SWPPP and SPCC/Oil Contingency Plans (6NYCRR Part 750).] Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification (6NYCRR Part 608). Issuance of SEQRA Findings as an involved agency. Coastal Zone Management Act Consistency Determination Special Use Permit for oversize/overweight vehicles. Highway work permits. Participation in SEQRA Process as an interested agency. Agricultural District Law Article 25AA, Section 305-a Coordination of local planning and land use decision-making with the agricultural districts program Participation in SEQRA Process as an interested agency. Cultural Resources Consultation. Description of Permit or Approval Required

1-15

001606

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 1-2 (Sheet 2 of 2) Permits and Approvals for the St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project Agency Description of Permit or Approval Required Federal Agencies USACE Nationwide Section 10 Permit for aerial crossing of the Chaumont River. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USACE Section 404 Nationwide Permit for placement of fill in federal jurisdictional wetlands/waters of the U.S. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service OSHA Consultation regarding special status species. 29 CFR 1910 regulations (standard conditions for safe work practices during construction).

1-16

001607

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

components of the WTG, which include the drive train, a gearbox and the generator. The nacelle sits atop the tower. A large flange protrudes from the front of the nacelle to which the hub is bolted. The rotor blades are all bolted to this central hub. Exhibit 2.5.2 provides a detail of the nacelle, hub and rotor Exhibit 2.5.2 - Nacelle Main Components assembly. A transformer will be located near the tower base, to raise the voltage of the electricity produced by the turbine generator to the voltage level of the collection system. The steel towers used for this Project will be manufactured in multiple sections. Each tower will have a locked access door and an internal safety ladder to access the nacelle, and will be painted (off-white) to make the structure less visually obtrusive. Specifications for the turbines are presented in Table 2-1.
Table 2-1 Turbine Specifications Type: Manufacturer: Rated power: Rotor manufacturer: Rotor blade type: Rotor diameter: Rotor swept area: Number of rotor blades: Rotor rated speed: Hub height above ground: Measurement distance R0: Acciona AW 82/1500 IEC IIIb T80A LM40.3P Acciona Windpower, S.A. 1500 kW (1.5 MW) LM 40.3P 82.026 m (269.114 feet) 5281 m2 3 18.25 min-1 80 m (~262 ft) 113 m (~371 ft)

2.5.2

Turbine Spacing

Development of the Project layout has been an iterative process. The first step in siting the wind turbines for this Project was to assess the wind resource and place conceptual turbine locations where wind would appear to be the strongest and steadiest. Appropriate buffers (see Figure 2-2) from roads, property lines, residences, and sensitive environmental resources were taken into 2-7

001608

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 2-2 Construction and Operations Impact Assumptions Project Components Wind Turbines and Workspaces (radius) Crane Pads (length x width) Crane Paths (width) Access Roads (width) Access Roads Temporary “T” Turnaround Areas Buried Electrical Interconnects Buried Electrical Interconnect Work Area Overhead Electrical Interconnect (width) Meteorological Towers Collection Substation/ Operations and Maintenance Building Transmission Owner Substation Staging Areas Concrete Batch Plant
1

Area of Total Disturbance (temporary and permanent) 150 ft per turbine Included in 150 ft workspace for each turbine 35 ft (in non-public road or access road areas only) 39 ft 16 ft x 200 ft 2 ft wide trench per cable plus 10 ft separation between additional circuits Single Cable: 100 ft Multiple Cables: 150 ft 100 ft 1 acre per tower 11.5 acres 0.6 acres 12.25 acres 10 acres

Area of Permanent Disturbance 10 ft per turbine 100 ft x 50 ft None 17 ft -

None 17 ft1 0.10 acre per tower 11.5 acres 0.6 acres None None

This represents the permanent right-of-way width to be periodically maintained where required. No permanent access road will be created.

Topsoil will then be stripped and segregated. Subsoil will then be graded, compacted, and surfaced with gravel or crushed stone in accordance with the requirements of the wind turbine supplier and recommendations from the geotechnical engineer. Geotextile fabric or grid may be installed beneath the road surface to provide additional support, if engineering studies indicate it is necessary. Permanent access roads will generally be 17 feet wide, including side slopes. Crosssections at turning radii and pull-offs to accommodate passing vehicles will be slightly wider, as necessary for safety. Where needed to facilitate cross drainage, culverts will be placed in wetland/stream crossings in accordance with state and federal permits. Appropriate sediment

2-13

001609

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

and soil restoration estimates were based on unit costs of $7.50 and $10.00 per cubic yard, respectively. Based on the above assumptions, the estimated cost of decommissioning the wind turbines will be offset by the salvage value of the towers and the turbine components. Table 2.3 provides the estimated decommissioning cost per tower, in current dollars, in comparison to the salvage value of Project turbines. The estimated cost of decommissioning and expected salvage value of wind components will be reassessed and certified by a Professional Engineer at appropriate intervals throughout operation of the project. SLW will pay for any costs of decommissioning that are not covered by the salvage value.
Table 2.3 Decommissioning Costs Summary
Component Salvage Values Turbine Components Salvage Value Decommissioning Costs Turbine Removal Turbine Foundation Removal Access Roadway Removal Crane/Construction Pad Removal Cable Removal Earthwork & Topsoil Subtotal Decommissioning Cost Salvage Value Less Decommissioning Costs Total Salvage Value Per Turbine (53)
a

Total

a

$4,372,500 $0 $901,000 $199,866 $40,977 $0 $114,506 $1,256,349 $3,116,151 $58,795.31

values are based on current costs and do not assume any inflation costs or other fluctuations.

2.9

Regulatory Approvals

Development of the Project would require permits, approvals, and consultations with local, state, and federal agencies. The permits and approvals that are expected to be required are listed in Table 2-4.
2.10 Public and Agency Involvement

Extensive agency interaction and public outreach preceded and followed the formal submittal of the DEIS in January 2007 and preparation of this SDEIS. The Applicant has had numerous informational sessions, meetings, and discussions with the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme regarding the Project. Several formal and informal meetings have been held with the Town

2-26

001610

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

agricultural impacts can be identified during this period and follow-up restoration efforts will be implemented.
2.9 Regulatory Approvals

Development of the Project would require permits, approvals, and consultations with local, state, and federal agencies. The permits and approvals that are expected to be required are listed in Table 2-3.
Table 2-3 (Sheet 1 of 2) Permits and Approvals for the St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project
Agency Towns Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board Town of Cape Vincent Code Enforcement Officer Town of Cape Vincent Departments Town of Lyme Planning Board Town of Lyme Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Lyme Departments Jefferson County Planning Department Highway Department New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Department of State Division of Coastal Resources Department of Transportation Administration of SEQRA Process, and issuance of findings (as Lead Agency under SEQRA) Site Plan Approval for construction of wind energy project and transmission line to Town boundary Zoning Permit Issuance of building permits/certificates of compliance Review and approval of highway work permits/road agreements Participation in SEQRA Process as an involved agency Special Use Permit (Zoning Board of Appeals) and other land use considerations for construction of transmission line to substation Issuance of building permits Review and approval of highway work permits/road agreements Completion of a NYS General Municipal Law Section 239-m review and issuance of recommendations County road work permits ECL Article 17 SPDES General Permit for construction stormwater discharges including creation of SWPPP and SPCC/Oil Contingency Plans (6NYCRR Part 750) Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification (6NYCRR Part 608) Issuance of SEQRA Findings as an involved agency Coastal Zone Management Act Consistency Determination Special Use Permit for oversize/overweight vehicles, Highway work permits. Participation in SEQRA Process as an interested agency Agricultural District Law Article 25AA, Section 305-a Coordination of local planning and land use decision-making with the agricultural districts program Participation in SEQRA Process as an interested agency Description of Permit or Approval Required

Department of Agriculture & Markets Public Service Commission

2-24

001611

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 2-3 (Sheet 2 of 2) Permits and Approvals for the St. Lawrence Wind Energy Project
Agency New York State NYSOPRHP (SHPO) Federal Agencies FAA U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service OSHA Description of Permit or Approval Required Cultural Resources Consultation. Notice of Construction and Aviation Lighting Plan. USACE Nationwide Section 10 Permit for aerial crossing of the Chaumont River. USACE Section 404 Nationwide Permit for placement of fill in federal jurisdictional wetlands/waters of the U.S. Consultation regarding special status species. 29 CFR 1910 regulations (standard conditions for safe work practices during construction).

2.10

Public and Agency Involvement

Extensive agency interaction and public outreach preceded and followed the formal submittal of the DEIS in January 2007 and preparation of this SDEIS. The Applicant has had numerous informational sessions, meetings, and discussions with the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme regarding the Project. Several formal and informal meetings have been held with the Town Boards and Town Planning Boards. In addition, SLW has met with various township, county and regional agencies, and organizations throughout the project development process, including local historians and councilman, the Cape Vincent Fire Department, Thousand Island Central School Superintendent, Save The River, Thousand Islands Land Trust, the Development Authority of North County (DANC), and Region 6 NYSDEC Wildlife Offices in Brownville and Watertown. The Applicant also opened an office in the Town of Cape Vincent in the fall of 2006 that is open 4 days a week, providing the opportunity for the general public to obtain information and ask questions about the Project. To further inform the Public, SLW has also created a website (www.stlawrencewind.com), which provides an additional opportunity for interested parties to learn about the Project and submit comments. Posted on the website are the DEIS, results of studies, a transcript of the first public hearing, and comments received during and after the first public hearing and comment period. The Town of Cape Vincent Planning Board held its first public hearing on the DEIS on March 24, 2007. The public comment period on the DEIS extended through June 15, 2007. The first Open House meeting with local residents was held in June 2007 and an additional public information session regarding the proposed Project was held on August 28, 2008. SLW has also had numerous meetings with participating landowners and project neighbors, and the 2-25

001612

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-1 (Sheet 1 of 2) General Description of Soil Series1 (Taken from Soil Survey of Jefferson County, New York [McDowell, 1989])
Risk of Corrosion Water Table Depth (ft) Permeability ( in/ hr ) pH 5.6-7.3 4.5-6 5.6-7.3 5.1-8.4 5.1-8.4 5.6-7.3 N/A 4.5-7.8 5.1-7.8 4.5-8.4 5.1-7.8 5.6-7.8 5.6-8.4 5.6-8.4 5.1-7.3 5.1-7.8 5.1-7.3 5.1-8.4 5.6-8.4 5.6-8.4 5.1-8.4 5.1-7.3 4.5-8.4 4.5-8.4 4.5-7.3 5.6-7.3 Concrete Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High Low Low Low Low Low Moderate Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Low 0.6-2.0 0.6-6.0 <0.2 6.0-20 0.6-2.0 <0.2 N/A 2.0-6.0 0.6-2.0 N/A 0.6-6.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 <0.2 0.2-2.0 0.06-0.2 0.2-0.6 0.2-0.6 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.0 0.6-2.2 0.2-0.6 N/A <0.2 0.6-2.0 <0.2 0.02 0.49 0.49 0.24 0.49 0.49 N/A 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.32 0.32 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.37 0.28 0.32 0.49 0.49 N/A 0.49 0.49 0.49 >6 >6 0.5-1.5 1.5-2 1.5-2 0.5-1.0 N/A 1.5-3.0 >6 0 1.5-2 >6 1.5-3.0 0-0.5 1.5-2.0 0.5-1.5 0-1.0 0-0.5 >6 0.5-1.0 0.5-1.5 0.5-1.5 0 1-3 1.1-1.5 1.5-2.0 10-20 20-40 20-40 20-40 >5 >60 N/A 20-40 10-20 >60 >60 2-10 20-40 20-40 >60 >60 >60 >60 >60 20-40 >60 >60 >60 >60 15-24 20-40 Uncoated Steel Low Low High Low Moderate High Moderate Moderate Low High Moderate Low Low High High High High High Low High High High High High Moderate High Bedrock Depth ( in ) Erosion Factors K Unified Soil 3 Classification SM,GM SM,ML,SM-SC,CL-ML MH,CH SM,SW,SW-SM,SP ML,SM,CL-ML,SM-SC CH,MH N/A SM,ML ML,CL,SM,SC N/A SM,ML CL,ML,SM,CL-ML ML,SM MH,CH ML,CL-ML,OL,CL ML,MH CH,MH ML,MH,OL,OH ML,SM ML,SM ML ML,MH N/A MH,CH,CL,ML ML,SM MH,CH Plasticity Index NP-10 1-6 15-50 4 5-30 5-10 10-40 N/A NP 3-15 N/A NP-4 3-15 10-15 15-20 5-19 11-20 10-40 10-25 1-5 2-10 5-15 10-25 N/A 20-40 5-15 15-50

Soil Name Benson Chatfield Chaumont Claverack Collamer Covington Dumps Elmridge Farmington Fluvaquents Galen Galoo Galway Guffin Hudson Kingsbury Livingston Madalin Nellis Newstead Niagara Reinbeck Saprists Vergennes Williamson Wilpoint C/D D D C C D N/A C C D B C/D B D C D D D B C C D D C C D

Hydrologic 2 Group

1

Descriptions apply to the surfical soil layer. Characteristics, while similar, can vary with depth.

3-11

001613

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-1 (Sheet 2 of 2) General Description of Soil Series1 (Taken from Soil Survey of Jefferson County, New York [McDowell, 1989])

a) Definition Hydrologic group is a group of soils having similar runoff potential under similar storm and cover conditions. Soil properties that influence runoff potential are those that influence the minimum rate of infiltration for a bare soil after prolonged wetting and when not frozen. These properties are depth to a seasonally high water table, intake rate and permeability after prolonged wetting, and depth to a very slowly permeable layer. The influence of ground cover is treated independently. (b) Classes The soils in the United States are placed into four groups, A, B, C, and D, and three dual classes, A/D, B/D, and C/D. In the definitions of the classes, infiltration rate is the rate at which water enters the soil at the surface and is controlled by the surface conditions. Transmission rate is the rate at which water moves in the soil and is controlled by soil properties. Definitions of the classes are as follows: A. (Low runoff potential). The soils have a high infiltration rate even when thoroughly wetted. They chiefly consist of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravels. They have a high rate of water transmission. B. The soils have a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted. They chiefly are moderately deep to deep, moderately well drained to well drained soils that have moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. They have a moderate rate of water transmission. C. The soils have a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted. They chiefly have a layer that impedes downward movement of water or have moderately fine to fine texture. They have a slow rate of water transmission. D. (High runoff potential). The soils have a very slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted. They chiefly consist of clay soils that have a high swelling potential, soils that have a permanent high water table, soils that have a clay pan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material. They have a very slow rate of water transmission. (1) Dual hydrologic groups, A/D, B/D, and C/D, are given for certain wet soils that can be adequately drained. The first letter applies to the drained condition, the second to the undrained. Only soils that are rated D in their natural condition are assigned to dual classes. Soils may be assigned to dual groups if drainage is feasible and practical. 3 Unified Soil Classification, see ASTM D2487. 4 Supplemental information from http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/

2

3-12

001614

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.1.2

Potential Impacts

3.1.2.1 Potential Short-Term Impacts

Approximately 547 acres of surface soils will be disturbed during the construction of the Project. Once construction activities are complete, approximately 92 percent of the disturbed area, or approximately 503 acres of surface soil, will be restored. Table 3-2 provides the approximate areas of both temporary and permanent soil disturbance.
Table 3-2 Approximate Area of Soil Disturbance
Permanent Impact (acres) 0.4 31.3 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 Temporary Impact (acres) 50.8 38.4 282.9 106.5 0.1 0.0 3.6 12.25 9.9

Component Turbines Access Roads Buried Electrical Interconnect Overhead Electrical Transmission Line Collector Substation/O&M Building Transmission Owner Substation Meteorological Towers Laydown Yard Concrete Batch Plant

Based on the information reviewed and described above, the subsoils within the Project Site consist predominantly of silt loams and loams of glacial origin. The soil survey indicates that the soils in and around the Project Area vary from shallow to very deep and have been formed from glacial till derived from the underlying limestone. The water table associated with mapped soils on the Project Site is shallow. In addition, bedrock depths across the area would vary in areas underlain by karst limestone. As stated above, due to its particular characteristics, including an irregular bedrock surface, the presence of large voids and rapid underground drainage, karst limestone presents special challenges for civil engineering projects such as wind energy projects. The finer grained soils may have a tendency to soften on exposure to weather and would likely require protection from weather and vehicle traffic to prevent rutting. Slopes are generally slight to moderate in the area of the proposed wind turbines and slope stability is not expected to be an issue for design. The overall seismic risk is low. Based upon the topographic features (see Figure 2-1) and drainage characteristics of the proposed Project Site, grading and other construction activities could cause the disruption of soils and the increased potential for erosion during construction without appropriate erosion and

3-13

001615

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-12 (Sheet 1 of 4) Number of Birds/Route Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Number of Birds/Route Ogdensburg 0.05 0.16 ----0.21 2.26 1.74 ----0.26 3.63 0.68 ----2.63 0.16 ----0.16 ----0.37 ----0.79 1.89 ----0.16 0.21 0.05 0.16 0.05 0.05 10.89 0.05 0.21 7.26 ----52.95 ----26.16 7.58 0.79 ----1

Common Name Common Loon Double-crested Cormorant Pied-billed Grebe American Bittern Great Blue Heron Green Heron Black-crn. Night Heron Turkey Vulture Canada Goose Wood Duck American Black Duck Mallard Blue-winged Teal Hooded Merganser Northern Goshawk Sharp-shinned Hawk Northern Harrier Broad-winged hawk Red-tailed Hawk American Kestrel Gray Partridge Ring-necked Pheasant Ruffed Grouse Wild Turkey Virginia Rail Sora Common Moorhen Killdeer Spotted Sandpiper Upland Sandpiper Common Snipe American Woodcock Ring-billed Gull Herring Gull Rock Dove Mourning Dove Black-billed Cuckoo Yellow-billed Cuckoo

Scientific Name Gavia immer Phalacrocorax auritus Podilymbus podiceps Botaurus lentiginosus Ardea herodias Butorides virescens Nycticorax nycticorax Cathartes aura Branta canadensis Aix sponsa Anas rubripes Anas platyrhynchos Anas discors Lophodytes cucullatus Accipiter gentilis Accipiter striatus Circus cyaneus Buteo platypterus Buteo jamaicensis Falco sparverius Perdix perdix Phasianus colchicus Bonasa umbellus Meleagris gallopavo Rallus limicola Porzana carolina Gallinula chloropus Charadrius vociferus Actitis macularia Bartramia longicauda Gallinago gallinago Scolopax minor Larus delawarensis Larus argentatus Columba livia Zenaida macroura Coccyzus erythropthalmus Coccyzus americanus

Watertown --------0.05 1.16 9.26 0.79 0.05 0.47 2.53 0.26 0.26 1.37 ----------------0.21 ----0.42 0.63 0.11 0.74 0.11 0.05 0.05 ----0.05 11.63 0.42 0.26 1.05 ----155.74 0.11 43.89 17 1.26 0.16

Philadelphia 0.21 0.11 0.05 0.26 6.00 0.42 2.79 1.05 1.05 0.11 1.74 0.21 0.05 ----0.05 0.26 0.05 0.42 0.74 ----0.05 ----0.53 0.21 0.05 0.11 5.79 0.05 0.26 3.53 0.05 5.05 ----10.37 7.00 1.00 0.05

3-48

001616

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-12 (Sheet 2 of 4) Number of Birds/Route Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Common Name Eastern Screech-Owl Great Horned Owl Common Nighthawk Chimney Swift Ruby-thr. Hummingbird Belted Kingfisher Red-headed Woodpecker Red-bellied Woodpecker Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Downy Woodpecker Hairy Woodpecker Northern Flicker Pileated Woodpecker Eastern Wood-Pewee Alder Flycatcher Willow Flycatcher Willow/Alder Flycatcher Least Flycatcher Eastern Phoebe Grt. Crested Flycatcher Eastern Kingbird Loggerhead Shrike Yellow-throated Vireo Blue-headed Vireo Warbling Vireo Red-eyed Vireo Blue Jay American Crow Common Raven Horned Lark Purple Martin Tree Swallow N. Rough-winged Swallow Bank Swallow Cliff Swallow Barn Swallow Black-capped Chickadee White-breasted Nuthatch House Wren Winter Wren Sedge Wren Scientific Name Otus asio Bubo virginianus Chordeiles minor Chaetura pelagica Archilochus colubris Ceryle alcyon Melanerpes erythrocephalus Melanerpes carolinus Sphyrapicus varius Picoides pubescens Picoides villosus Colaptes spp. Dryocopus pileatus Contopus virens Empidonax alnorum Empidonax traillii Empidonax spp. Empidonax minimus Sayornis phoebe Myiarchus crinitus Tyrannus tyrannus Lanius ludovicianus Vireo flavifrons Vireo solitarius Vireo gilvus Vireo olivaceus Cyanocitta cristata Corvus brachyrhynchos Corvus corax Eremophila alpestris Progne subis Tachycineta bicolor Stelgidopteryx serripennis Riparia riparia Petrochelidon pyrrhonota Hirundo rustica Poecile atricapillus Sitta carolinensis Troglodytes aedon Troglodytes troglodytes Cistothorus platensis 0.11 0.11 ----2.63 0.11 0.47 0.11 0.05 ----1.42 0.05 3.47 0.05 6.16 5.00 10.37 15.37 3.63 4.68 2.74 5.89 ----0.21 ----15.37 5.68 3.53 35.68 ----3.68 1.63 8.79 0.21 7.37 ----19.11 5.63 0.16 13.63 0.05 ----Number of Birds/Route --------0.11 0.95 0.11 0.47 ------------0.68 0.11 3.16 0.26 4.84 2.32 0.89 3.21 1.32 3.68 1.95 5.32 0.16 0.32 ----8.26 4.58 4.68 38.21 ----0.42 0.84 9.95 0.21 5.58 0.05 16.89 2.32 0.32 11.11 ----0.16 ------------1.32 ----0.79 ----0.05 0.11 0.68 0.16 2.21 0.42 3.47 1.26 0.74 2.00 1.37 4.84 1.53 8.16 0.05 1.53 0.05 8.05 9.58 5.26 32.79 0.21 0.11 0.53 7.58 0.21 0.21 1.68 26.89 5.95 1.79 10.89 0.16 0.21
1

3-49

001617

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-12 (Sheet 3 of 4) Number of Birds/Route1 Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Common Name Marsh Wren Eastern Bluebird Veery Hermit Thrush Wood Thrush American Robin Gray Catbird Northern Mockingbird Brown Thrasher European Starling Cedar Waxwing Blue-winged Warbler Golden-winged Warbler Nashville Warbler Yellow Warbler Chestnut-sided Warbler Yellow-rumped Warbler Black-thr. Green Warbler Pine Warbler Cerulean Warbler Black-and-white Warbler American Redstart Ovenbird Northern Waterthrush Common Yellowthroat Yellow-breasted Chat Canada Warbler Scarlet Tanager Eastern Towhee Chipping Sparrow Field Sparrow Vesper Sparrow Savannah Sparrow Grasshopper Sparrow Henslow's Sparrow Song Sparrow Swamp Sparrow White-throated Sparrow Dark-eyed Junco Northern Cardinal Rose-breasted Grosbeak Scientific Name Cistothorus palustris Sialia sialis Catharus fuscescens Catharus guttatus Hylocichla mustelina Turdus migratorius Dumetella carolinensis Mimis polyglottos Toxostoma rufum Sturnus vulgaris Bombycilla cedrorum Vermivora pinus Vermivora chrysoptera Vermivora ruficapilla Dendroica petechia Dendroica pensylvanica Dendroica coronata Dendroica virens Dendroica pinus Dendrocia cerulean Mniotilta varia Setophaga ruticilla Seiurus aurocapillus Seiurus noveboracensis Geothlypis trichas Icteria virens Wilsonia canadensis Piranga olivacea Pipilo erythrophthalmus Spizella passerina Spizella pusilla Pooecetes gramineus Passerculus sandwichensis Ammodramus savannarum Ammodramus henslowii Melospiza melodia Melospiza georgiana Zonotrichia albicollis Junco hyemalis Cardinalis cardinalis Pheucticus ludovicianus 0.11 0.11 3.42 ----8.74 56.26 6.63 ----1.32 111.63 10.37 0.11 0.16 0.05 33.05 5.32 0.05 0.11 0.05 ----1.00 2.47 0.89 0.05 29.89 ----0.11 0.58 3.42 12.32 3.84 1.32 35.11 1.42 0.42 40.89 3.58 0.32 ----2.63 2.11 Number of Birds/Route 0.05 0.42 2.16 ----4.21 43.26 4.89 ----2.47 34.89 4.11 ----0.11 0.05 39.11 1.42 0.05 0.05 0.26 ----1.47 2.47 1.11 ----20.05 0.05 ----0.32 2.74 8.84 2.89 0.26 12.42 --------39.63 1.84 1.37 ----1.84 4.26 3.32 0.26 0.95 0.21 5.05 47.89 6.58 0.16 2.37 21.26 4.89 0.05 2.21 ----32.32 2.26 0.11 0.32 0.42 0.16 2.84 4.37 2.89 0.68 30.37 --------2.05 9.79 11.37 7.79 0.05 12.26 ----0.05 31.11 6.84 0.37 0.21 0.74 4.58

3-50

001618

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-12 (Sheet 4 of 4) Number of Birds/Route Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Common Name Indigo Bunting Bobolink Red-winged Blackbird Eastern Meadowlark Common Grackle Brown-headed Cowbird Baltimore Oriole Purple Finch House Finch American Goldfinch House Sparrow Total Number of Species
1

1

Scientific Name Passerina cyanea Dolichonyx oryzivorus Agelaius phoeniceus Sturnella magna Quiscalus quiscula Molothrus ater Icterus galbula Carpodacus purpureus Carpodacus mexicanus Carduelis tristis Passer domesticus 0.79 36.00 166.05 25.47 35.00 10.84 10.47 0.05 4.00 35.05 27.32 110

Number of Birds/Route 2.11 28.32 74.47 21.84 14.42 5.68 5.47 0.26 0.37 13.58 27.84 104 8.21 27.00 86.63 23.84 16.63 4.84 3.16 0.26 1.05 17.58 15.74 117

Based on 50 stops per route, 3-minute counts per stop, and representing the averages of the total counts along the route for the period 1966-2005. Source: Sauer et al. (2005), United States Geological Survey. 1966-2005 North American Breeding Bird Survey Database [Online]. 3 The Watertown route is located approximately 10 miles southeast of the Project Area; the Ogdensburg route is located approximately 20 miles northeast; and the Philadelphia route is located approximately 30 miles east.
2

Table 3-13 (Sheet 1 of 3) Avian Species Observed During Project Breeding Bird Surveys
Species/Group Waterbirds Great Blue heron Green heron Ring-billed gull Unidentified gull Waterfowl Canada goose Mallard Shorebirds Killdeer Raptors/Vultures American kestrel Northern harrier Turkey vulture Passerines American crow 53 11 1.325
T

1

Number of Individuals 4 1 47 38 27 2 16 2 4 4 9

Number of Groups 4 1 6 2 4 1 10 2 3 3 7

Mean Use

0.1 0.025 1.175 0.95 0.675 0.05 0.4 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.225

Red-tailed hawk

3-51

001619

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-4 NYSDEC Streams Crossed by the Project
Stream Name Chaumont River Kents Creek Scotch Brook Shaver Creek Soper Creek Three Mile Creek Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 1 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 2 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 3 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 4 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 5 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 6 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 7 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 8 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 9 Unnamed Tributary to Kents Creek 10 Unnamed Tributary to Shaver Creek 1 Unnamed Tributary to Shaver Creek 2 Unnamed Tributary to Shaver Creek 3 Unnamed Tributary to Wheeler Creek 1 Unnamed Tributary to Wheeler Creek 2 Unnamed Tributary to Wheeler Creek 3 Unnamed Tributary to Wheeler Creek 4 Unnamed Tributary to Wheeler Creek 5 Unnamed Tributary 1 Unnamed Tributary 2 Unnamed Tributary 3 Unnamed Tributary 4 Unnamed Tributary 5 Unnamed Tributary 6 Unnamed Tributary 7 Unnamed Tributary 8 Unnamed Tributary 9 Unnamed Tributary 10 Unnamed Tributary 11 Unnamed Tributary 12 NYSDEC Stream Classification C C D Not Listed C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C D D D D D D D C C C C C C C D D C

3-23

001620

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-5 Field Delineated Stream Crossings
Wetland ID W26 W26T2 OT13 OT14 OT15 OT16 OT17 OT18 OT21
1

Surface Water Description Intermittent Stream Intermittent Stream Three Mile Creek Unnamed Perennial Stream Unnamed Perennial Stream Intermittent Stream Intermittent Stream Soper Creek Chaumont River

Project Component Turbine 22 Access Road Turbine 22 interconnect Overhead line Overhead line Overhead line Overhead line Overhead line Overhead line Overhead line

Cowardin 1 Classification R4 R4 R3 R3 R3 R4 R4 R3 R2

R2 = Lower Perennial R3 = Upper Perennial R4 = Intermittent

The locations of less prominent surface water features (i.e., centerlines or banks), within larger wetland complexes, were not delineated separately from the larger wetland complex and were included as a wetland feature. Such surface water features, with intermittent drainage or flow, were included in the delineated boundaries for wetlands W9, W10, W17, W17T, W45, W47, W54 and W60. Two ponds, delineated as part of wetlands OT11 and OT12 and one ditch, delineated as part of wetland W49, did not meet NYSDEC definitions of a Stream or Watercourse. Based on the results of the field delineation, only two streams will be affected by the Project, as interpreted from the NYSDEC definitions described in the NY Environmental Conservation Law code Part 608 § 608.1 (t) and (v): surface water bodies W26 and W26T2. Delineated crossing W26 corresponds with a mapped NYSDEC tributary; however, W26T2 does not. Stream crossing W26 is associated with the access road southeast of Turbine 22 and stream crossing W26T2 is associated with the interconnection line northeast of Turbine 20. Proposed stream bank alteration for these features is estimated at 40 and 10 linear feet, respectively. The remaining seven delineated streams identified in Table 3-5, are associated with the overhead transmission line. Project related impacts to these surface waterbodies are not anticipated, as these features are already culverted under the existing railroad right-of-way. Delineated wetlands and surface waterbodies potentially affected by the proposed Project are provided on Figure 3-8. Impacts, by waterbody or wetland, are presented in Table 3-6.

3-24

001621

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-6 (Sheet 1 of 3) Delineated Wetlands and Surface Waterbodies Potential Temporary and Permanent Impacts
Temporary Impact (Cable & Road Disturbance) (square feet) PEM1/PUBH PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PSS1/PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 R4/PEM1 PEM1 R4 PFO PFO1 PEM1 PFO1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 No No No No No No No 800.00 103.36 157.22 650.96 1,825.16 697.30 356.38 No 48.57 No 9,761.75 No 1,360.83 No 361.79 No 215.21 0.005 0.008 0.031 0.224 0.001 0.018 0.002 0.004 0.015 0.042 0.016 0.008 No 589.49 0.014 No 0.00 0.000 No 130.71 0.003 No 42,970.85 0.986 No 224.94 0.005 60.98 5,898.07 137.65 0.00 453.59 91.10 0.00 13612 17078.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3

Permanent Impact (Roads) (square feet) 0.00 771.31 87.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 962.02 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.022 0.001 0.135 0.003 0.000 0.010 0.002 0.000 0.031 0.392 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.018 0.000 40.00 10.00 (acres) Stream Bank Alteration (linear feet)

Wetland ID (acres) 0.013 0.056 0.005 0.015 0.005 0.053 0.090

Cowardin NYS DEC Mapped Classification 1 Wetland

W9 No No No No No No 3,924.95 2,317.81 238.69 661.85 216.38 2,458.92

No

560.20

W10

W11T

W16-T1

W16-T2

W17

W18

W18T2

W22

W24T

W25

W26

W26-T1

W26-T2

W26-T3

W31

W34-T1

W34-T12

W34-T2

W34-T3

W34-T4

W34-T5

W34-T6

W34-T7

3-25

001622

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-6 (Sheet 2 of 3) Delineated Wetlands and Surface Waterbodies Potential Temporary and Permanent Impacts

Wetland ID PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PFO1/PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PEM1 PSS1/PEM1 PEM1 PSS1 PEM1 PEM1 PUBH/PEM1 R3/PEM1 R3/PSS1 No No No No 208.24 625.00 625.00 625.00 84,968.06 No 180.72 No 725.87 No 158.64 No 258.09 0.006 0.004 0.017 0.004 0.005 0.014 0.014 0.014 1.95 No 357.14 0.008 No 642.13 0.015 No 746.52 0.017 No 0.92 0.000 0.00 299.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 161.33 0.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10,723.81 No 276.96 0.006 92.49 No 251.60 0.006 136.94 No 877.00 0.020 0.00 No 1,731.83 0.040 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.67 No 4,026.79 0.092 999.20 0.023 No 1,220.34 0.028 362.11 0.008 No 228.52 0.005 180.05 0.004 50.00 No 568.43 0.013 0.00 0.000 -

Temporary Impact Permanent Impact (Access Roads) Cowardin NYS DEC Mapped (Cable & Access Road Disturbance) Classification 1 Wetland (square feet) (acres) (square feet) (acres) Proposed Stream Bank Alteration (linear feet)

W34-T8

W34-T9

W34-T10

W34-T11

W35

W41

W42T

W45

W47

W48

W49

W52

W53

W54

W55

W59

W60 OT-12 OT-13 OT-18 Total

1

Covertype Definitions PFO1 –– Palustrine forested wetland, broad-leaved deciduous PEM1 –– Palustrine emergent wetland, persistent PSS2 –– Palustrine scrub-shrub wetland, broad-leaved deciduous PUBH –– Palustrine unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded

3-26

001623

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-7 Summary of Mapped NYSDEC Wetlands
Wetland Class I II III IV Total Number of Wetlands 6 42 18 4 70 Acreage 304 3666 470 62 4,501

Table 3-8 Summary of Mapped Palustrine NWI Wetlands
Wetland Class
1

PFO PFO/PSS PFO/PEM PFO/PUB PSS PSS/PEM PSS/PUB PEM PEM/PUB PUB PUS Palustrine Farmed Total
1

Number of Wetland Polygons 172 20 31 2 105 69 1 336 10 253 4 21 1,024

Acreage 2396 228 358 31 265 515 2 863 12 181 2 66 4,919

PFO = Palustrine forested PSS = Palustrine scrub shrub PEM = Palustrine emergent PUB = Palustrine unconsolidated bottom PUS = Palustrine unconsolidated shore

NWI wetlands that occur within the town limits of Cape Vincent and Lyme include palustrine emergent (PEM), palustrine forested (PFO), palustrine scrub–shrub (PSS), palustrine unconsolidated bottom (PUB), and palustrine unconsolidated shore (PUS) cover classes. The following summarizes the specific wetland covertypes as defined by Edinger et al (2002) observed at the proposed project. Shallow Emergent Marsh (PEM) - Shallow emergent marshes are permanently saturated and seasonally flooded wetlands that can be dominated by a variety of herbaceous vegetation. Common dominant herbaceous plants within this community include woolgrass (Juncus effusus), cattails (Typha latifolia), reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), sedges (Carex spp.), and meadow-rues (Thalictrum spp.). Other plants characteristic of shallow emergent marshes include, blue flag iris (Iris versicolor), sensitive fern, cinnamon fern, and rushes (Juncus spp.). Shallow emergent marshes commonly have scattered

3-30

001624

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-7 Summary of Mapped NYSDEC Wetlands
Wetland Class I II III IV Total Number of Wetlands 6 42 18 4 70 Acreage 304 3666 470 62 4,501

Table 3-8 Summary of Mapped Palustrine NWI Wetlands
Wetland Class
1

PFO PFO/PSS PFO/PEM PFO/PUB PSS PSS/PEM PSS/PUB PEM PEM/PUB PUB PUS Palustrine Farmed Total
1

Number of Wetland Polygons 172 20 31 2 105 69 1 336 10 253 4 21 1,024

Acreage 2396 228 358 31 265 515 2 863 12 181 2 66 4,919

PFO = Palustrine forested PSS = Palustrine scrub shrub PEM = Palustrine emergent PUB = Palustrine unconsolidated bottom PUS = Palustrine unconsolidated shore

NWI wetlands that occur within the town limits of Cape Vincent and Lyme include palustrine emergent (PEM), palustrine forested (PFO), palustrine scrub–shrub (PSS), palustrine unconsolidated bottom (PUB), and palustrine unconsolidated shore (PUS) cover classes. The following summarizes the specific wetland covertypes as defined by Edinger et al (2002) observed at the proposed project. Shallow Emergent Marsh (PEM) - Shallow emergent marshes are permanently saturated and seasonally flooded wetlands that can be dominated by a variety of herbaceous vegetation. Common dominant herbaceous plants within this community include woolgrass (Juncus effusus), cattails (Typha latifolia), reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), sedges (Carex spp.), and meadow-rues (Thalictrum spp.). Other plants characteristic of shallow emergent marshes include, blue flag iris (Iris versicolor), sensitive fern, cinnamon fern, and rushes (Juncus spp.). Shallow emergent marshes commonly have scattered

3-30

001625

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-9 Delineated Wetlands Overhead Transmission Line
Wetland ID OT1 OT2 OT3 OT4 OT5 OT6 OT7 OT8 OT9 OT10 OT11 OT12 OT13 OT14 OT15 OT16 OT17 OT18 OT19 OT20 OT21
1

Cowardin Classification 1 PFO1 PFO1 PSS1 PEM1/PSS1 PFO1 PFO1 PSS1 PSS1 PFO1 PFO1 PUBH PUBH/PEM1 R3/PEM1 R3/PSS1 R3/PSS1 R4/PSS1 R4/PSS1 R3/PSS1 PEM1 PFO1 R2OW

NYS DEC Mapped Wetland ID CV-1 CV-1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A U-4 U-5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A X-5

Location Along railroad bed Along railroad bed Along railroad bed and Kents Creek Along railroad bed and Kents Creek Along railroad bed and Kents Creek Along railroad bed and Kents Creek Along railroad bed northwest of McWayne Road Along railroad bed northwest of McWayne Road Along railroad bed Along railroad bed Railroad bed Golf course Intersection of railroad bed and Three-mile Creek ½ mile southeast of Gibson Road ½ mile southeast of Gibson Road 700 feet northwest of County Route 8 700 feet northwest of County Route 8 Upstream of NY State Hwy 12E Along railroad bed Along railroad bed Chaumont River

Cover Class Definition PFO1 –– Palustrine forested wetland, broad-leaved deciduous PEM1 –– Palustrine emergent wetland, persistent PSS2 –– Palustrine scrub-shrub wetland, broad-leaved deciduous PUBH –– Palustrine unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded OW - Open Water R2 - Riverine, lower perennial R3 –– Riverine, upper perennial R4 –– Riverine, intermittent

Although wetland impacts will be avoided if practicable, any clearing through forested wetlands could result in a change from tree species to shrub and herbaceous vegetation. Non-forested wetlands within the proposed overhead transmission line right-of-way consist of emergent and scrub-shrub wetlands. Impacts to non-forested wetlands are expected to be short term and vegetation is expected to return to pre-construction conditions in one to two growing seasons. The NYSDEC considers the conversion of forested wetlands to non-forested wetlands a permanent change in wetland vegetation composition. While this conversion from one cover class to another does not constitute a net loss of wetlands, it may alter the structure and function 3-33

001626

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-10 Hawk Observations for the Braddock Bay1, Franklin Mountain2 and Derby Hill3 Bird Observatory: 20064
Braddock Bay Spring Spring 2006 2007 0 4671 1 20 89 49 43 4 187 0 419 37 5 44 0 1 0 3 157.75 5573 0 15097 150 267 1134 4060 889 26 750 24445 4384 278 55 544 46 14 1 0 378 52140 Franklin Mt. Fall Fall 2006 2007 0 393 121 121 70 573 115 8 115 774 2711 4 207 85 39 14 56 847.25 5406 0 483 140 141 109 835 162 25 93 1639 2146 10 164 89 38 25 0 61 516.42 6160 Derby Hill Spring Spring 2006 2007 1 11375 503 363 474 2706 349 29 578 9442 4859 251 41 216 33 11 1 39 485.6 31271 2 8291 365 244 590 2413 413 16 363 8349 3366 254 47 325 39 9 0 21 444.25 25107

Common Name Black Vulture Turkey Vulture Osprey

Scientific Name Coragyps atratus Cathartes aura Pandion haliaeetus Haliaeetus leucocephalus Circus cyaneus Accipiter striatus Accipiter cooperi Accipiter gentilis Buteo lineatus Buteo platypterus Buteo jamaicensis Buteo lagopus Aquila chrysaetos Falco sparverius Falco columbarius Falco peregrinus Buteo swainsoni

Bald Eagle Northern Harrier Sharp-shinned Hawk Cooper's Hawk Northern Goshawk Red-shouldered Hawk Broad-winged Hawk Red-tailed Hawk Rough-legged Hawk Golden Eagle American Kestrel Merlin Peregrine Falcon Swainson’’s Hawk Unknown Total Number of Hours Total Number of Individuals Observed
1 2

3 4

Located on the southern shore of Lake Ontario in the town of Greece, just outside of Rochester, NY. Located on the Delaware-Otsego Audubon Society Sanctuary, two miles south of Oneonta, NY, overlooking the Susquehanna River Valley, on the western edge of New York’’s Catskill Mountains. Located on the southeastern shore of Lake Ontario in Oswego County. Source: Hawk Migration Association of North America (2006-2007). Hawkcount Results [Online].

American black ducks, Canada geese and to a lesser extent, ring ducks, green-winged teals, gadwalls, American widgeons, and hooded mergansers use these areas as migratory stopovers (Northern Ecological Associates, 1994; Losito, 1993). Other migratory waterfowl documented in the region, include snow goose, northern pintails, northern shoveler, American coot, bufflehead, common merganser, lesser scaup, canvasback and goldeneye. Surveys for migrating birds within the Project Area were conducted in 2006 and included spring and fall radar surveys for nocturnal avian migrants, and spring and fall surveys for migrant raptors (see Appendix E – Avian and Bat Studies). The objective of these surveys was to record and estimate the use of the site by migrant raptors, other diurnal migrants (i.e. waterfowl), and other large birds possibly utilizing this migration corridor. Point counts, as prescribed by the Hawk Mountain Association of North America (HMANA), were conducted by observers

3-41

001627

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-11 (Sheet 1 of 2) Raptor Migration Data for Proposed Wind Sites in New York State 1
Dates Sampled Birds/hr Number of Days Number of Hours Sampled Turbine Height 21 12 58 21 60 (21) 2 (21) 2 60 (60) 2 60 52.5 20 (21) 2 21 37 20 35.3 30 63.5 24 60 (21) 2 (21) 2 234.7 65 73 40 288 575 42 217 0 0 629 369 220 131 9.6 9.1 1.6 3.62 0 0 (2.7) 2 5.68 3.01 3.27 10 13 5 15 0 0 12 14 10 10 (89.7%) 89% 31% 69% 0 0 (67%) 2 51% 62% 63%
2

Location

Total Number of Individuals 232 91 700 47 170 0 0 375 314 164 260 50 19 5 119 177 170.2 125 m 150 m 400 ft 120 m n/a n/a 125 m 118 m 125 m 125 m 15.4 7.5 12.1 1.9 2.83 0 0 6.25 5.23 2.73 4.95 (2.5) 2 (0.9) 2 0.1 3.2 9 4.7 8 8 14 12 11 3 1 4 1 12 15 11 11 6 4 3 7 8 8.1 not calc 2 (80.5%) 61% 3% 76% not calc not calc 78% 83% 77% 64% (94.7%) 2,5 not calc not calc not calc (84.5%) 2,5 125 m 125 m 150 m 400 ft 120 m n/a n/a 118 m 125 m 125 m 125 m 125 m n/a n/a n/a 125 m

Number of Species Seen Percent Below Turbine Survey Times

Year

Spring Cape Vincent, Jefferson County Cape Vincent, Jefferson County Clayton, Jefferson County Chateaugay, Franklin County Marble River, Clinton County Altona, Clinton County Clinton/Ellenburg, Clinton County West Hill, Madison County Windfarm Prattsburgh, Steuben Co. Cohocton, Steuben County Howard, Steuben County Dairy Hills, Wyoming County Bliss, Wyoming County Wethersfield, Wyoming County High Sheldon, Wyoming County Alabama, Genesee County Spring Mean Fall Cape Vincent, Jefferson County Clayton, Jefferson County Chateaugay, Franklin County Marble River, Clinton County Altona, Clinton County Clinton/Ellenburg, Clinton County Jordanville, Herkimer County West Hill, Madison County Windfarm Prattsburgh, Steuben Co. Cohocton, Steuben County 3/21-5/1 4/14-5/12 3/30-5/7 4/19-4/28 4/5-5/6 5/4-5/6 4/18-4/20 4/5-5/16 not reported not reported 4/3-5/14 4/15-4/26 4/21-4/28 4/22-4/29 4/2-5/14 4/16-4/29 7 4 10 3 10 3 3 10 10 10 9 5 3 3 7 5 6.4 10 11 4 10 3 3 44 11 13 7 9/23-11/11 9/9-10/16 9/16-10/26 9/6-11/2 9/24-9/30 9/23-9/28 10/13-11/30 9/6-10/31 not reported not reported

9-5 9-5 9-3 9-4 9-3 9-4 9-4 9-3 not reported ~9-3 9-3 9-3 9-4 9-4 9-5 9-3

2007 2006 2005 2006 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005

9-5 9-3 9-4 9-3 9-4 9-4 ~7:30-3 9-3 not reported ~9-3

2006 2005 2006 2005 2005 2005 2006 2005 2004 2005

3-43

001628

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-11 (Sheet 2 of 2) Raptor Migration Data for Proposed Wind Sites in New York State
Dates Sampled Birds/hr Number of Days Number of Hours Sampled Turbine Height 41 57 16 (21) 2 (21?) 2 21 53.5 19 49 128 206 48 0 231 0 168 148 189 3.1 3.6 (3) 2 0 9.7 0 3.1 8 3.8 8 12 6 0 11 0 9 4 7.7 80% 85% (94.7%) 2,5 0 27% 0 not calc (84.5%) 2,5 125 m 125 m 125 m n/a 400 ft n/a n/a 125 m Total Number of Individuals Number of Species Seen Percent Below Turbine Survey Times Year

Location

Fall Cohocton, Steuben County Howard, Steuben County Dairy Hills, Wyoming County Bliss, Wyoming County Wethersfield, Wyoming County Wethersfield, Wyoming County High Sheldon, Wyoming County Alabama, Genesee County Fall Mean not reported 9/1-10/28 9/11-10/10 9/12-9/17 9/21-11/1 9/13-9/18 8/29-11/4 9/11-10/10 8 10 4 3 3 3 8 5 8.9

~9-3 9-3 9-3 9-4 9-4 9-4 9-5 9-3

2004 2005 2005 2005 2006 2005 2005 2005

1

Source: New York State Department of Environmental Protection 10/1/07

2

(#) = value not reported in results, calculated by DEC based on report text and tables

3

Four turkey vultures were observed but not deemed migratory; not included in overall mean calculation

4

Two broad-winged hawks were observed but not deemed migratory; not included in overall mean calculation

5

Calculated for spring and fall combined

3-44

001629

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-12 (Sheet 1 of 4) Number of Birds/Route Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Number of Birds/Route Ogdensburg 0.05 0.16 ----0.21 2.26 1.74 ----0.26 3.63 0.68 ----2.63 0.16 ----0.16 ----0.37 ----0.79 1.89 ----0.16 0.21 0.05 0.16 0.05 0.05 10.89 0.05 0.21 7.26 ----52.95 ----26.16 7.58 0.79 ----1

Common Name Common Loon Double-crested Cormorant Pied-billed Grebe American Bittern Great Blue Heron Green Heron Black-crn. Night Heron Turkey Vulture Canada Goose Wood Duck American Black Duck Mallard Blue-winged Teal Hooded Merganser Northern Goshawk Sharp-shinned Hawk Northern Harrier Broad-winged hawk Red-tailed Hawk American Kestrel Gray Partridge Ring-necked Pheasant Ruffed Grouse Wild Turkey Virginia Rail Sora Common Moorhen Killdeer Spotted Sandpiper Upland Sandpiper Common Snipe American Woodcock Ring-billed Gull Herring Gull Rock Dove Mourning Dove Black-billed Cuckoo Yellow-billed Cuckoo

Scientific Name Gavia immer Phalacrocorax auritus Podilymbus podiceps Botaurus lentiginosus Ardea herodias Butorides virescens Nycticorax nycticorax Cathartes aura Branta canadensis Aix sponsa Anas rubripes Anas platyrhynchos Anas discors Lophodytes cucullatus Accipiter gentilis Accipiter striatus Circus cyaneus Buteo platypterus Buteo jamaicensis Falco sparverius Perdix perdix Phasianus colchicus Bonasa umbellus Meleagris gallopavo Rallus limicola Porzana carolina Gallinula chloropus Charadrius vociferus Actitis macularia Bartramia longicauda Gallinago gallinago Scolopax minor Larus delawarensis Larus argentatus Columba livia Zenaida macroura Coccyzus erythropthalmus Coccyzus americanus

Watertown --------0.05 1.16 9.26 0.79 0.05 0.47 2.53 0.26 0.26 1.37 ----------------0.21 ----0.42 0.63 0.11 0.74 0.11 0.05 0.05 ----0.05 11.63 0.42 0.26 1.05 ----155.74 0.11 43.89 17 1.26 0.16

Philadelphia 0.21 0.11 0.05 0.26 6.00 0.42 2.79 1.05 1.05 0.11 1.74 0.21 0.05 ----0.05 0.26 0.05 0.42 0.74 ----0.05 ----0.53 0.21 0.05 0.11 5.79 0.05 0.26 3.53 0.05 5.05 ----10.37 7.00 1.00 0.05

3-48

001630

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-12 (Sheet 2 of 4) Number of Birds/Route Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Common Name Eastern Screech-Owl Great Horned Owl Common Nighthawk Chimney Swift Ruby-thr. Hummingbird Belted Kingfisher Red-headed Woodpecker Red-bellied Woodpecker Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Downy Woodpecker Hairy Woodpecker Northern Flicker Pileated Woodpecker Eastern Wood-Pewee Alder Flycatcher Willow Flycatcher Willow/Alder Flycatcher Least Flycatcher Eastern Phoebe Grt. Crested Flycatcher Eastern Kingbird Loggerhead Shrike Yellow-throated Vireo Blue-headed Vireo Warbling Vireo Red-eyed Vireo Blue Jay American Crow Common Raven Horned Lark Purple Martin Tree Swallow N. Rough-winged Swallow Bank Swallow Cliff Swallow Barn Swallow Black-capped Chickadee White-breasted Nuthatch House Wren Winter Wren Sedge Wren Scientific Name Otus asio Bubo virginianus Chordeiles minor Chaetura pelagica Archilochus colubris Ceryle alcyon Melanerpes erythrocephalus Melanerpes carolinus Sphyrapicus varius Picoides pubescens Picoides villosus Colaptes spp. Dryocopus pileatus Contopus virens Empidonax alnorum Empidonax traillii Empidonax spp. Empidonax minimus Sayornis phoebe Myiarchus crinitus Tyrannus tyrannus Lanius ludovicianus Vireo flavifrons Vireo solitarius Vireo gilvus Vireo olivaceus Cyanocitta cristata Corvus brachyrhynchos Corvus corax Eremophila alpestris Progne subis Tachycineta bicolor Stelgidopteryx serripennis Riparia riparia Petrochelidon pyrrhonota Hirundo rustica Poecile atricapillus Sitta carolinensis Troglodytes aedon Troglodytes troglodytes Cistothorus platensis 0.11 0.11 ----2.63 0.11 0.47 0.11 0.05 ----1.42 0.05 3.47 0.05 6.16 5.00 10.37 15.37 3.63 4.68 2.74 5.89 ----0.21 ----15.37 5.68 3.53 35.68 ----3.68 1.63 8.79 0.21 7.37 ----19.11 5.63 0.16 13.63 0.05 ----Number of Birds/Route --------0.11 0.95 0.11 0.47 ------------0.68 0.11 3.16 0.26 4.84 2.32 0.89 3.21 1.32 3.68 1.95 5.32 0.16 0.32 ----8.26 4.58 4.68 38.21 ----0.42 0.84 9.95 0.21 5.58 0.05 16.89 2.32 0.32 11.11 ----0.16 ------------1.32 ----0.79 ----0.05 0.11 0.68 0.16 2.21 0.42 3.47 1.26 0.74 2.00 1.37 4.84 1.53 8.16 0.05 1.53 0.05 8.05 9.58 5.26 32.79 0.21 0.11 0.53 7.58 0.21 0.21 1.68 26.89 5.95 1.79 10.89 0.16 0.21
1

3-49

001631

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-12 (Sheet 3 of 4) Number of Birds/Route1 Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Common Name Marsh Wren Eastern Bluebird Veery Hermit Thrush Wood Thrush American Robin Gray Catbird Northern Mockingbird Brown Thrasher European Starling Cedar Waxwing Blue-winged Warbler Golden-winged Warbler Nashville Warbler Yellow Warbler Chestnut-sided Warbler Yellow-rumped Warbler Black-thr. Green Warbler Pine Warbler Cerulean Warbler Black-and-white Warbler American Redstart Ovenbird Northern Waterthrush Common Yellowthroat Yellow-breasted Chat Canada Warbler Scarlet Tanager Eastern Towhee Chipping Sparrow Field Sparrow Vesper Sparrow Savannah Sparrow Grasshopper Sparrow Henslow's Sparrow Song Sparrow Swamp Sparrow White-throated Sparrow Dark-eyed Junco Northern Cardinal Rose-breasted Grosbeak Scientific Name Cistothorus palustris Sialia sialis Catharus fuscescens Catharus guttatus Hylocichla mustelina Turdus migratorius Dumetella carolinensis Mimis polyglottos Toxostoma rufum Sturnus vulgaris Bombycilla cedrorum Vermivora pinus Vermivora chrysoptera Vermivora ruficapilla Dendroica petechia Dendroica pensylvanica Dendroica coronata Dendroica virens Dendroica pinus Dendrocia cerulean Mniotilta varia Setophaga ruticilla Seiurus aurocapillus Seiurus noveboracensis Geothlypis trichas Icteria virens Wilsonia canadensis Piranga olivacea Pipilo erythrophthalmus Spizella passerina Spizella pusilla Pooecetes gramineus Passerculus sandwichensis Ammodramus savannarum Ammodramus henslowii Melospiza melodia Melospiza georgiana Zonotrichia albicollis Junco hyemalis Cardinalis cardinalis Pheucticus ludovicianus 0.11 0.11 3.42 ----8.74 56.26 6.63 ----1.32 111.63 10.37 0.11 0.16 0.05 33.05 5.32 0.05 0.11 0.05 ----1.00 2.47 0.89 0.05 29.89 ----0.11 0.58 3.42 12.32 3.84 1.32 35.11 1.42 0.42 40.89 3.58 0.32 ----2.63 2.11 Number of Birds/Route 0.05 0.42 2.16 ----4.21 43.26 4.89 ----2.47 34.89 4.11 ----0.11 0.05 39.11 1.42 0.05 0.05 0.26 ----1.47 2.47 1.11 ----20.05 0.05 ----0.32 2.74 8.84 2.89 0.26 12.42 --------39.63 1.84 1.37 ----1.84 4.26 3.32 0.26 0.95 0.21 5.05 47.89 6.58 0.16 2.37 21.26 4.89 0.05 2.21 ----32.32 2.26 0.11 0.32 0.42 0.16 2.84 4.37 2.89 0.68 30.37 --------2.05 9.79 11.37 7.79 0.05 12.26 ----0.05 31.11 6.84 0.37 0.21 0.74 4.58

3-50

001632

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-12 (Sheet 4 of 4) Number of Birds/Route Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Common Name Indigo Bunting Bobolink Red-winged Blackbird Eastern Meadowlark Common Grackle Brown-headed Cowbird Baltimore Oriole Purple Finch House Finch American Goldfinch House Sparrow Total Number of Species
1

1

Scientific Name Passerina cyanea Dolichonyx oryzivorus Agelaius phoeniceus Sturnella magna Quiscalus quiscula Molothrus ater Icterus galbula Carpodacus purpureus Carpodacus mexicanus Carduelis tristis Passer domesticus 0.79 36.00 166.05 25.47 35.00 10.84 10.47 0.05 4.00 35.05 27.32 110

Number of Birds/Route 2.11 28.32 74.47 21.84 14.42 5.68 5.47 0.26 0.37 13.58 27.84 104 8.21 27.00 86.63 23.84 16.63 4.84 3.16 0.26 1.05 17.58 15.74 117

Based on 50 stops per route, 3-minute counts per stop, and representing the averages of the total counts along the route for the period 1966-2005. Source: Sauer et al. (2005), United States Geological Survey. 1966-2005 North American Breeding Bird Survey Database [Online]. 3 The Watertown route is located approximately 10 miles southeast of the Project Area; the Ogdensburg route is located approximately 20 miles northeast; and the Philadelphia route is located approximately 30 miles east.
2

Table 3-13 (Sheet 1 of 3) Avian Species Observed During Project Breeding Bird Surveys
Species/Group Waterbirds Great Blue heron Green heron Ring-billed gull Unidentified gull Waterfowl Canada goose Mallard Shorebirds Killdeer Raptors/Vultures American kestrel Northern harrier Turkey vulture Passerines American crow 53 11 1.325
T

1

Number of Individuals 4 1 47 38 27 2 16 2 4 4 9

Number of Groups 4 1 6 2 4 1 10 2 3 3 7

Mean Use

0.1 0.025 1.175 0.95 0.675 0.05 0.4 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.225

Red-tailed hawk

3-51

001633

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-12 (Sheet 4 of 4) Number of Birds/Route Documented Along the USGS Breeding Bird Survey2 Watertown (61071), Ogdensburg (61096), and Philadelphia (61113) Routes3 in the Project Vicinity
Common Name Indigo Bunting Bobolink Red-winged Blackbird Eastern Meadowlark Common Grackle Brown-headed Cowbird Baltimore Oriole Purple Finch House Finch American Goldfinch House Sparrow Total Number of Species
1

1

Scientific Name Passerina cyanea Dolichonyx oryzivorus Agelaius phoeniceus Sturnella magna Quiscalus quiscula Molothrus ater Icterus galbula Carpodacus purpureus Carpodacus mexicanus Carduelis tristis Passer domesticus 0.79 36.00 166.05 25.47 35.00 10.84 10.47 0.05 4.00 35.05 27.32 110

Number of Birds/Route 2.11 28.32 74.47 21.84 14.42 5.68 5.47 0.26 0.37 13.58 27.84 104 8.21 27.00 86.63 23.84 16.63 4.84 3.16 0.26 1.05 17.58 15.74 117

Based on 50 stops per route, 3-minute counts per stop, and representing the averages of the total counts along the route for the period 1966-2005. Source: Sauer et al. (2005), United States Geological Survey. 1966-2005 North American Breeding Bird Survey Database [Online]. 3 The Watertown route is located approximately 10 miles southeast of the Project Area; the Ogdensburg route is located approximately 20 miles northeast; and the Philadelphia route is located approximately 30 miles east.
2

Table 3-13 (Sheet 1 of 3) Avian Species Observed During Project Breeding Bird Surveys
Species/Group Waterbirds Great Blue heron Green heron Ring-billed gull Unidentified gull Waterfowl Canada goose Mallard Shorebirds Killdeer Raptors/Vultures American kestrel Northern harrier Turkey vulture Passerines American crow 53 11 1.325
T

1

Number of Individuals 4 1 47 38 27 2 16 2 4 4 9

Number of Groups 4 1 6 2 4 1 10 2 3 3 7

Mean Use

0.1 0.025 1.175 0.95 0.675 0.05 0.4 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.225

Red-tailed hawk

3-51

001634

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-13 (Sheet 2 of 3) Avian Species Observed During Project Breeding Bird Surveys
Species/Group Passerines American goldfinch American robin Baltimore oriole Barn swallow Black-capped chickadee Bluejay BobolinkBCC Brown-headed cowbird Cedar waxwing Chestnut-sided warbler Common grackle Common yellowthroat Eastern bluebird Eastern kingbird Eastern meadowlark Eastern towhee Eastern tufted titmouse Eastern wood peewee Empidonax spp. European starling Grasshopper sparrowSC Gray catbird Horned lark
SC

Number of Individuals 23 30 6 23 5 2 76 11 4 1 29 29 2 4 32 1 1 5 1 235 1 6 6 3 1 2 11 7 136 1 37 2 48 13 1 1 1 4 6 31

Number of Groups 15 25 3 6 3 2 32 4 1 1 3 20 2 3 28 1 1 5 1 19 1 5 2 3 1 1 11 7 49 1 26 2 35 3 1 1 1 4 5 18

Mean Use

0.575 0.75 0.15 0.575 0.125 0.05 1.9 0.275 0.1 0.025 0.725 0.725 0.05 0.1 0.8 0.025 0.025 0.125 0.025 5.875 0.025 0.15 0.15 0.075 0.025 0.05 0.275 0.175 3.4 0.025 0.925 0.05 1.2 0.325 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.1 0.15 0.775

House wren Indigo bunting Northern cardinal Ovenbird Red-eyed vireo Red-winged blackbird Rose-breasted grosbeak Savannah sparrow Scarlet tanager Song sparrow Tree swallow Unidentified passerine Unidentified sparrow Veery Willow flycatcher Wood thrush
BCC

Yellow warbler

3-52

001635

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-13 (Sheet 3 of 3) Avian Species Observed During Project Breeding Bird Surveys
Species/Group Upland Gamebirds Ruffed grouse Wild turkey Doves Mourning dove Rock pigeon Other Birds Hairy woodpecker Northern flicker Unidentified woodpecker
1

Number of Individuals 1 4 10 14 1 2 3

Number of Groups 1 1 6 5 1 2 3

Mean Use

0.025 0.1 0.25 0.35 0.025 0.05 0.075

T=State Threatened, SC=State Species of Concern, BCC=USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern

were the most common passerines observed. Most of the observed species are associated with agricultural, grasslands, and/or edge habitat. The northern harrier, a NYS threatened species; the horned lark and grasshopper sparrow, NYS species of concern; and bobolink and wood thrush, USFWS 2002 Birds of Conservation Concern, were recorded during the surveys.
3.3.5.2 Potential Impact

Construction and operation of the proposed Project will likely result in minor, temporary impacts to breeding birds. During construction, clearing and work activities in open habitats will temporarily displace nesting and foraging individuals from the work area and suitable adjacent habitats. Approximately 41 acres of pasture/hay fields, which represent much less than one percent (approximately 0.003 percent) of pasture/hay fields in the Town of Cape Vincent, may be displaced by Project infrastructure. Similarly, 17 acres of second growth deciduous forest (approximately 0.001 percent of forested cover in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme) will be cleared for the Project. Of this total, less than 1 acre will be permanently cleared for Project infrastructure and 16 acres will be temporarily cleared for construction. This will result in temporary and permanent minor habitat loss for some forest-nesting avian species. However, unlike most of the northeast where forest habitats remain a high priority, grasslands are more important in the St. Lawrence River Valley and forested areas temporarily disturbed will be initially converted to grassland habitats. Some grassland species may be disturbed or displaced by turbine noise and movement. Studies have shown small scale reductions in density for some nesting grassland bird species close to operating wind turbines (Leddy et al. 1999, Johnson et al. 2000). In general, use by grassland birds was lower in areas with turbines than in areas without. At Buffalo Ridge, Montana, areas 3-53

001636

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-14 (Sheet 1 of 2) Birds Observed During Audubon Christmas Bird Counts for Watertown, NY (NYWA) 1 for Count Years 105 and 106 (12/2004-1/2005 and 12/2005-1/2006)
Survey Date Common Name Snow Goose Canada Goose Tundra Swan American Black Duck Mallard Greater Scaup Long-tailed Duck Common Goldeneye Hooded Merganser Common Merganser Ring-necked Pheasant Ruffed Grouse Wild Turkey Great Blue Heron (Blue form) Bald Eagle Northern Harrier Sharp-shinned Hawk Cooper's Hawk Accipiter sp. Red-tailed Hawk Rough-legged Hawk American Kestrel Ring-billed Gull Herring Gull Great Black-backed Gull Rock Pigeon Mourning Dove Red-bellied Woodpecker Downy Woodpecker Hairy Woodpecker Northern Flicker Pileated Woodpecker Northern Shrike Blue Jay American Crow Common Raven Horned Lark Black-capped Chickadee Tufted Titmouse Scientific name Chen caerulescens Branta canadensis Cygnus columbianus Anas rubripes Anas platyrhynchos Aythya marila Clangula hyemalis Bucephala clangula Lophodytes cucullatus Mergus merganser Phasianus colchicus Bonasa umbellus Meleagris gallopavo Ardea herodias Haliaeetus leucocephalus Circus cyaneus Accipiter striatus Accipiter cooperii Accipiter Buteo jamaicensis Buteo lagopus Falco sparverius Larus delawarensis Larus argentatus Larus marinus Columba livia Zenaida macroura Melanerpes carolinus Picoides pubescens Picoides villosus Colaptes auratus Dryocopus pileatus Lanius excubitor Cyanocitta cristata Corvus brachyrhynchos Corvus corax Eremophila alpestris Poecile atricapillus Baeolophus bicolor 18 Dec 2004 (41 hrs) 11 4523 -16 407 4 4 1 14 39 --93 -1 17 2 3 -52 13 1 34 38 14 547 284 2 15 6 -1 2 74 2601 1 55 227 1 28 Dec 2005 (31 hrs) -913 7 3 84 --170 -100 2 1 290 2 2 -2 3 1 84 11 3 11 17 12 1002 638 2 13 7 5 1 6 163 1330 4 120 206 --

3-56

001637

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK Table 3-14 (Sheet 2 of 2) Birds Observed During Audubon Christmas Bird Counts for Watertown, NY (NYWA) 1 for Count Years 105 and 106 (12/2004-1/2005 and 12/2005-1/2006)
Survey Date 18 Dec 2004 28 Dec 2005 (41 hrs) (31 hrs) 1 1 18 18 -2 181 2 931 1672 32 -69 121 -3 14 20 -3 614 51 31 41 1 -1 -145 66 46 35 373 711 47 47

Common Name Red-breasted Nuthatch White-breasted Nuthatch Eastern Bluebird American Robin European Starling Cedar Waxwing American Tree Sparrow White-throated Sparrow Dark-eyed (Slate-colored) Junco Lapland Longspur Snow Bunting Northern Cardinal Red-winged Blackbird Brown-headed Cowbird House Finch American Goldfinch House Sparrow Total Number of Species
1

Scientific name Sitta Canadensis Sitta carolinensis Sialia sialis Turdus migratorius Sturnus vulgaris Bombycilla cedrorum Spizella arborea Zonotrichia albicollis Junco hyemalis Calcarius lapponicus Plectrophenax nivalis Cardinalis cardinalis Agelaius phoeniceus Molothrus ater Carpodacus mexicanus Carduelis tristis Passer domesticus

Source: National Audubon Society (2002). The Christmas Bird Count Historical Results [Online].

Canada geese, American crows, European starlings, rock doves, and house sparrows. It is important to note that the Audubon Christmas Bird Counts were conducted in different areas than the Project Area surveys and reflect different years, locations, and habitats. However, they provide a general indication of birds that might be expected in the area absent site-specific data. Winter surveys were conducted for SLW in 2006-2008 within the proposed Project Area. All waterfowl and raptor observations were plotted for six fixed survey points (Appendix E – Avian and Bat Studies). In addition, other large birds such as waterbirds, upland game birds, and species of interest were also recorded during the surveys. Survey results are presented in Table 3-15. Mean use is calculated as the number of individuals observed within 800 meters of the survey point per 60-minute survey. Frequency of occurrence is calculated as the percent of surveys in which a species was observed. In comparison, a total of 2,230 individuals in 280 groups of waterbirds, waterfowl, and raptors were recorded during the 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 Audubon Christmas Bird Count surveys (Table 3-14), while Project surveys counted 2,867 individuals in 417 groups (Table 3-15). Four species of waterfowl (all gull species), five species of waterfowl, and ten species of raptors 3-57

001638

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-15 (Sheet 1 of 2) Raptor and Other Large Bird Species Observed During 2007 and 2008 Winter Waterfowl and Raptor Surveys at Project Area

2007 Percent Frequency Individuals 49 4 250 115 24 3 131 15 63 6 19 1 1 0.05 11 56 4 16 0.71 3.00 0.29 0.90 80.95 47.62 9.52 42.86 4.76 5 2 4 1 1 2 5.48 1.14 0.14 6.24 19.05 4.76 4.76 9.52 1932 14 235 45 2 216 4 2 2 1 0.19 11.90 9.52 4.76 4 2 37 6 1946 2 1 12 2 47 0.04 0.02 0.41 0.07 21.47 0.16 17 Groups Mean Use

2008 Percent Frequency 2.22 1.11 7.78 2.22 16.67 2.22

Species/Group

Individuals

Groups

Mean Use

Waterbirds

Great Black-backed Gull Herring Gull Ring-billed Gull Unidentified Gull Waterfowl

Canada Goose Mallard Tundra Swan Unidentified Scaup Common Merganser Raptors

Accipiters Coopers Hawk

0.02 0.01 0.01 0.80 1.27 0.17 0.13 0.02 11 4 11 4 0.12 0.04

2.22 1.11 1.11 52.22 68.89 13.33 10.00 2.22 12.22 4.44 1 1 201 72 114 15 12 2 15 1 1 185 62 109 14 10 2 15

Sharp-shinned Hawk Unidentified Accipiter Buteos Red-tailed Hawk Rough-legged Hawk Unidentified Buteo Northern Harrier Bald Eagle Falcons

American Kestrel Merlin

3-58

001639

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-15 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Raptor and Other Large Bird Species Observed During 2007 and 2008 Winter Waterfowl and Raptor Surveys at Project Area
2007 Individuals 8 21 129 1 70 37.62 0 1 146 6.14 0.05 85.71 4.76 3 1.00 14.29 3.43 3.58 0.01 3 0.38 4.76 0.06 Groups Mean Use Percent Frequency Individuals 5 Groups 4 Mean Use 2008 Percent Frequency 3.33 17.78 74.44 1.11

Species/Group Vultures 5 309 309 323 322 1 2867 4 16 16 117 116 1 417

Turkey Vulture Upland Gamebirds Wild Turkey Passerines American Crow Common Raven Total

3-59

001640

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-16 (Sheet 1 of 2) Summary of Listed Species Reported in the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Database

Common Name Vascular Plants Lilium michiganense Callitriche hermaphroditica Endangered (St.) NHP Yes Yes Endangered (St.) NHP Yes Yes

Scientific Name

Status (State/Federal) Source

Suitable Habitat On Project Site?¹

Suitable Habitat in Project Area?¹

Suitable Habitat in Project Area?¹ Wet meadows, floodplain forests, swamps Lakes and streams

Michigan Lily

Autumnal WaterStarwort Fish Carpiodes cyprinus S2-Imperiled (NHP listing) NHP No Yes Threatened (St.) NHP Yes Yes

Quillback

Rivers and lakes

Reptiles Emydoidea blandingii Shrub swamps, marshes, and shallow ponds Yes Yes Yes Yes NHP NHP NHP NHP NHP No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Marshes, grasslands and croplands Yes No Freshwater marshes Agricultural areas Grasslands and rocky inland shores NHP Marshes Grasslands Agriculture fields, grasslands Lakes, rivers, reservoirs Streams, ponds, lakes, marshes

Blanding’’s Turtle2

Birds3 Asio flammeus Chlidonias niger Lanius ludovicianus Sterna hirundo Ixobrychus exilis Bartramia longicauda Circus cyaneus Haliaeetus leucocephalus Podilymbus podiceps Threatened (St.) Threatened (St.) Threatened (St.) Threatened (St.) Threatened (St.) Threatened (St.) Endangered (St.) NHP Endangered (St.) NHP Endangered (St.) NHP

Short-eared owl

Black Tern

Loggerhead Shrike

Common Tern

Least Bittern

Upland sandpiper

Northern harrier

Bald eagle

Pied-billed grebe

3-63

001641

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-16 (Sheet 2 of 2) Summary of Listed Species Reported in the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Database

Common Name Cistothorus platensis Ammodramus henslowii Gavia immer Ardea herodias Spizella pallida Special Concern (St.) NHP Yes Yes Special Concern (St.) NHP Yes Yes Special Concern (St.) NHP No Yes Threatened (St.) NHP Yes Yes Threatened (St.) NHP Yes Yes

Scientific Name

Status (State/Federal) Source

Suitable Habitat On Project Site?¹

Suitable Habitat in Project Area?¹

Suitable Habitat in Project Area?¹ Marshes and wet meadows Grasslands Lakes Marshes and swamps Grasslands

Sedge Wren

Henslow’’s sparrow

Common Loon

Great Blue Heron

Clay-colored sparrow

Mammals Myotis sodalis Myotis leibii Special Concern (St.) NHP No Endangered (St./Fed.) NHP Yes

4

Indiana bat

Yes Yes

Eastern small-footed myotis

Caves, mines, under rocks and tree bark, floodplain forest, beech-maple forest, limestone woodlands Caves, mines, under rocks and tree bark, forest and forest edge

1 Project Area is defined as the larger area of leased parcels equal to approximately 7,900 acres, and the term Project Site is defined as the area required for construction of the Project which includes both the permanent and temporary footprint of disturbance. 2 Documented within 0.6 mile of project site (NHP) 3 Avian species that may be located within a 10-mile buffer of the project boundary 4 Bats that may be located within a 40-mile buffer of the project boundary but have been documented beyond the boundaries of the project site

3-64

001642

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Plain region). Winter raptor surveys did not record short-eared owls; however, two stated listed species of concern, Cooper's hawk and sharp-shinned hawk, were documented.
3.3.7.2 Potential Impact

Potential effects associated with major construction projects on threatened and endangered species include both direct and indirect effects. Direct effects are results of the proposed action and would include effects such as loss of habitat and mortality of individuals. Indirect effects are those caused by the proposed action that are reasonably certain to occur and may include effects such as disturbance and/or displacement of individuals, change in habitat suitability or habitat degradation, and change in population density or distribution. Effects may be temporary (shortterm), for example during the project construction period, or long-term, such as effects arising from long-term operation and maintenance of the facility (Table 3-17). Also, effects may be cumulative, arising from the total impact of development, management, and use of the surrounding land.
Table 3-17 Potential Impacts to Threatened and Endangered Species from the Project Impact Duration Short-Term (e.g., during construction) Impact Type Direct Indirect Temporary loss of habitat from Prohibiting or altering (displacement) use of the area due construction areas that will be reclaimed to construction activity. Potential mortality from construction Altering or disturbing species or related activity. behavior patterns due to construction activity. Permanent loss of habitat to wind Prohibiting or altering project. (displacement) use of the area due to the wind project. Potential mortality due to wind plant Altering or disturbing species operation. behavior patterns due to wind project operation. Altering or changing species distribution patterns due to the wind project.

Long-Term (e.g., during project operation and maintenance)

Plants: Michigan lily and autumnal water-starwort have not been documented within the Project Area during wetlands surveys. Suitable habitat for these species within the Project Area is either limited or not available, as the site is primarily agricultural land with limited undisturbed wetland and aquatic habitats to support these species. As wetlands have been avoided or minimized, impacts to Michigan lily and autumnal water-starwort are not anticipated.

3-66

001643

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-18 Coastal Zone Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitats in Project Vicinity
Will Project Destroy Habitat? No Will Project Impair Habitat Viability? No

Habitat St. Lawrence River Shoreline Bays

Distance From Project 0.5-2 miles

French Creek Marsh

1-2 miles

Carlton Island –– Featherbed Shoals

1.5 miles 1

Fox Island –– Grenadier Island Shoals Point Peninsula Marsh Point Peninsula

6-8 miles 2 8-10 miles 3 8-10 miles 3

Wilson Bay and Marsh

2-3 miles

1 2 3

Activities That Impair Habitat Viability Activities that substantially degrade water quality, increase turbidity or sedimentation, reduce water levels, or increase water level fluctuations Activities that substantially degrade water quality, increase turbidity or sedimentation, reduce water levels, alter flows, or alter water level fluctuations, or eliminate wetland habitats, or result in significant human disturbance of the area Activities that substantially degrade water quality, or result in substantial alteration or fluctuation of water levels Activities that degrade water quality Activities that degrade water quality, reduce water levels, or increase water level fluctuations Waste disposal, and discharges of sewage or stormwater runoff containing sediments or chemical pollutants and decrease of available habitat Activity that degrade water quality, increase turbidity or sedimentation, reduce water levels, or increase water level fluctuations, or eliminate wetland habitats, or result in significant human disturbance of the area.

No

No

No

No

No No No

No No No

No

No

In St. Lawrence River In Lake Ontario Across Chaumont Bay

3.4

Transportation/Traffic

The proposed St. Lawrence Windpower Project Area would be located in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme, and would be surrounded by an extensive network of local, county and state managed roads (see Figure 2-1). This section describes the network of roads that may be used during construction of the proposed wind energy project, the potential impact of construction traffic on the existing transportation system, and measures to mitigate potential impact. This section has been prepared based on consultations with the New York State Department of Transportation, Region 7.

3-77

001644

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

improvements or construction traffic; potential disruption of tourism in the Thousand Islands; and increased traffic over local roads during construction. SLW investigated several routes throughout the Project Area that could be used for delivery of turbine components and related construction materials. The turbine component delivery vehicles would be oversized, requiring modification to intersections along the preferred routes. Since preparation of the DEIS, the roads proposed for material and equipment transport have been minimized. It is expected that delivery of turbine components and materials would come from the north or south along Interstate Route 81. From Interstate Route 81 (Exit 48), the primary route is Route 342 West to NYS Route 12 to Route 9. From Route 9 local roads will be used including Pelo, McKeever, Mason, Peo (Gosier), Favret/Cold Spring, Hell, Constance, Swamp (Wilson), Deer Lick and State Route 12E (between Favret and Deer Lick Roads only). County Roads 8 (Johnny Cake Road), 9 (Sandy Bay Road/St. Lawrence Road), 4 (Rosiere Road), 5 (Church Street/Three Mile Creek Road), and 179 (Evans St/Caroline St.) and local roads Wells Settlement (Ashland), Gibbons (Merchant), Cheever and Old Town Springs will be used as secondary routes for civil works vehicles and transport of electrical equipment associated with the overhead transmission line. This route has been selected to minimize impacts to traffic on the local roads and surrounding communities. Specifically, the route has been designed to reach the largest number of wind turbine locations while minimizing potential impacts and potential disruption to tourism by avoiding route 12E. Existing local road and the turbines, or Project facilities they provide access to, are listed in Table 3-19. Final construction transportation plans would be approved by state and local officials.
Table 3-19 Existing Local Roads and Proposed Wind Turbine Facility
Local Road Name Deer Tick Road Favret Road Swamp Road Cold Springs Road Hell Street Constance Road Peo Road Mason Road Johnny Cake Road McKeever Road Sand Bay Road Turbine Number/Facility 1-2, 3-4 5-8, 9, 10 Substation, O&M Building, Temporary work area and parking 12-13, 14-15 16-19, 26, 27, 29, 30 20-25 28, 31 33, 34-35 32, 36-37, 38, 39-41, 42 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48-49, 50-53

3-79

001645

001646

001647

001648

001649

001650

001651

N

LAKE ONTARIO
s
POINT
KRING

s
12

c
1
OGA
BAY

CALAB

GOOSE

s
12
NO NAME

NO

RD

NAME

c
1
RD
DUTCH

DUTCH

GOOSE

c
1

c
111

c
111

SETTLEMENT

BAY

RD

RD

RD

RD

RD

c
111

GOUVERNEUR
s
37
RD

s
12
BAY

LIMEST
SETTLEMENT

ONE

RD

POINT

RD

CARNE

i
81

RD

c
1

BAY
LOG

GOOSE

RD

RD

DINGMAN

BAY

GIE

DORR

c
100

GOOSE
DINGMAN
RD POINT

RD
BAY

DUMP RD

HUNNEYMAN

HILL

GOOSE

RD

RD

RD

PIERCE

RD

RD

c
191
RD

e
971 K

c
111

c
1

ALNEY

LAKE

THE

INSTER

i
81
WESTM
RD

STUMP

s
12

PARK

RD

e
971 K

HOLLOW

WATER

ISLES

s
26
OTTER ST

RD

c
100

RD

s
12

SON

s
37

s
SPIES

37

ROSSIE
RD

s
58

RD

RD

c
100
POINT

RD VIVIAN

i
81

c
191

VIVIAN

s
26
SHOULETT E

RD

WIMMER

RD

RD

RD
SWAN

LANDON

RD

LAKE

POINT

FARREL

L

GRASS

NUMBER

CENTER

LAWREN CE PARK

RD

PROJECT LOCATION
CROSS
RD

RD

c
100
PEEL

PINEHU
ISLAND

RD

STEIN

RST

DOCK
COLLIN

PINE

LAKE

i
81
LANDIN G

ST

s
12

s
12
SETTLEMENT

RD
COTTAG

c
21
SETTLEMENT

HANSON

SAINT

s
12
RD

HARD
WILLS

RD

s
26

6

BRIDGE

LAWRE

RD

RD

CARR RD

NCE

PARK

RD

BURNS

RD

RD

c
2
6

RD

RD

H ENGLIS
CARPEN

NEWMAN

26B

NY

LDS

NUMBER

3RD

ST
RD

REYNO

ST
ELM
ST
ST

4TH

ST
ST

RD

OF

RD

TAYLOR
RD

RD

CROSS

RD

ISLAND

WESTMINSTER

PARK

ALEXANDRIA
1ST

FLATS

OLD

STATE RD

HARD
RD

HANSON

BRIDGE

RD

FLATS

SAINT

RD

E

THOUS AND
S

HILL

TER

2ND

BRIDGE
S
RD

c
3
OLD
RD
OLD

RD

BUTTERFIELD LAKE RD

NY

26B

OLD

MILL ST

RD STATE
HILL

I
AVE

s
26
ALLEN

COTTAGE
NO NAME

c
25

u
11
c
25
CHURCH RD

s
FOWLER

RD

c
100

WESTM

SEAWAY

RD

SCHOOL HOUSE

INSTER
RD

PARK

s
37
RD

c
22
RD

LOWER

c
24

CAMEL

SHORE

CHALK
BAILEY

RD
LANDING

POINT

RAMP BOATRD

RD

RD

REED

STATE

s
180
RD

c
2

RD

SCHOOL ST

FITCHETTE

HUNTER

RD

OLD

RD

RD

LAKE

s
180
LEDGES
RD

GORE

c
3
NGE

RD
WILLIAM

ENT

MUSKALO

JOYNER

NEW

TURNBULL
HILL
RD

N

26

CONNECTICU

T

RD

CLEAR

MIDDLE

SIMPSO

RD

N

GORE

12

SETTLEM

ENT

RD

MIDDLE

RD

c
2
COX

SETTLEMENT

s
180
RD

c
3

s
26
RD

c
21
RD

RD

RD

22

RD

RD

CROSS

RD

GE
MOON

BAILEY

VROOMAN

HALL

i
81
S

RD

ROCK

RD

RD

RD

HILL

LAKE

PULPIT

OWN

LINE

12

LAKE

RD
RS

3

HAX

LINE

CORNE
EAST RIDGE

MIDDLE

e e
970 L

970 L

c
3

TANNERS

RD

CORNERS

13

JACK

c

HYDE

EAST

RD

EAST

LINE

c
15
RD

RD
BALDWIN RD

SCHNEIDER RD

HAX

RD
SCHNEIDER

s
12

c
3
BLACK

c
13

i
81

RD

ST

RD

RD

s
12E

s
180
RD

RD

HYDE

LAKE

3

VROOMAN

c s
12E

RD

c
23
SAMPSON

RD

RD
WILSON

KS

SETTLEMENT

s
12
OLD

c
4

RD

RALSTON

ST

MAIN

ST

RD

AVE

ST

SPICER

GE

BRIDGE
ST

26

AUSTIN

s
12E
STATE

s
12
c
181
HAYES
CLAYTON

FREDERIC

RD
BALDWIN

RED

c
13
BLACK

CREEK
RD

ST

MILL
ST

PLEASA

RD

s
26
OXBOW

ST

RD

OLD

RY

c
24

NT

s
12E

EAST

BREEZY

ST

POINT

c
13
RD
RD
MIDDLE
REESE

RD

DEFERNO

RIDGE

EAST
CATFIS POINT RD H
E RD COMMOD

CARPEN TER
RD

WASHINGT WILLOW

MAIN

ON
ST

HOYT

i
81
BED
CARPEN

OLD US 11

ST
ACADEMY

AVE

RD

s
12E

DANNEWALD

CLAYTON

c
13

s
411

c
5

JACK

c
9
RD

c
10
RD
RD

ST

c
181
SUNRISE

s
411
AVE

s
411
AMEND

ORE

s
12 E
BEVINS

ST

DANO

SIDE

SYLVESTER

RIVER

COMMERCIAL

s
411

LA

RD

OLD

OLD

WHISKEY
RD

c
10
GRANT

LOVERS
RD

c
181
RD

RD

s
411

CEMETE

RD

AVE

US

PINE

ANTWERP

NY

ST

193

PARK

RD
ST

RD

AVE

CHURCH
ST

EVILLE LAFARG

HIGH

MORGAN

c
46

RD

MILLER
RD

RIDGE

c
194

c
28

OLD

c
194
WAITE

c
26

BACON

RD

NY 26

RD

c
194

DEPOT

c
194

MAPLE

BUREN
VAN

ST

MECHANIC

ST

TER

AVE

c
136

c
28
ST

MILL ST
FORD

RD

c
5
UNDERBLUFF
RD

RD

s
411

STEACEY

s
12E

MADISO

N

RD

s
26

FULTON

RD

ORE

s
37

LEXINGTON

RD

AVE
ST

RUDES

c
11
RD

RD

u
11

MC ALLISTER
AVE

RD

s
180
RD

RD

c
194
RD

PELO

HOUSE

c
4
RD

OLD

c
15
PERCH

c
136

RD

c
7
RY
ZANG

RD

CEMETE

RD

c
8

c
5
FRENCH

DIXON

GROVE

LA

c
7
GLASS

RD

RD

SCHELL

FLAT

s
26
c
28
RD

US

COOLID

S HOLKIN

CREEK

SNELL

c
9
RD
MUTTON
ER MCKEEV
RD

CARTER

RD

CLAYTON
CROSS RD

STREET

BUTTERMILK
RD

c
20
RD
RD

RD

RD

SCHNAUBER

GOSIER

WOOD

u
11

RD

RD

RD
R

MCKEEV

CONSTA NCE

RD

s
12E

CARR

MANCE

c
8

ER

c
20

ST

RD

RD

s
26
FLATS
RIDGE

u
11

CEMETE RY

EDDY

c
9
RD NT
ADAMS

RD

COUNTRYMAN

RD

c
8
ROSIERE
VINCE

SILVER

OVERBLUFF

RD

MCCOY RD

STREET

RD

RD

c
18
HOLMES

RD

TRACY

RD

s
12
SAM
WILDER

RD

RD

KENNEY

CAPE
FERRY (SEASONAL)
s
12E
BRANCH E

c
9

ELM

c
12
SCHELL

RIDGE

RD

SHIMEL

GARDEN

HAGEN

RD

HONEY

u
11

OF
RD

GARDEN

RD

c
5
RD

RD

BLUFF UNDER
RD

EDEN

OF

EDEN

c
30
RD

c
4

c
11

RD

PINK

VINCENT
RD

STEPHA

DUMP

12

c
4

ST

OVERBLUFF

SCHOOL

RD

c
179
MACOMB

ST
Y FACTOR ST
DEPAUVILLE

c
15
RD
RD

c
6

RD

HALLADAY

CARTER

s
12 E
VOTRA RD

RD

RD

NIE

c

RD

RD

s
180
s
180
RD

E

LHOUS

c
46
RD

SANDY

su
11 26
HOLLOW

SCHOO

EMEN

RD

EISS

RD

c
29
BELILE
GREAT
RD

T

SETTL

EISS

RD

MASON

HART

JOACHIM
PLEASA NT
RD
HILL
HALL

RD

BACON

SWALLIA
SPRINGS

ROCK

RD

INE

STREET

SOURW

RD

BURNT

RD

TOWN

RD

s
12E

LAKE

PHILADELPHIA
c
30
RIDGE
RD

RD

HELL

FAVRET

DOG

15

STREET

GRANT

QUARRY STONE RD

ASHLAND

FARRELL

s
12E

DOG
RD

CARTER

ROBINSO

PERCH

FULTS

OLD

RD

ELM

c
4
BURNT
HELL

RD

HILL

i
81
VAADI RD

KISER

RD

SCHOOLHOUSE

s
26

ER

RD

RD

RD
HALLADAY

RD

N

c
17

RD

RD

CALL

RD

CARTER

FAVRE

c
4
RD
DEZENG

c
8
RD
RD

c
5

ROBINSO N

s
12
DEPAUVILLE

RD

WOODARD

11

MILLER

s
180
RD

KISER

c
29

RD

ALVERSO

s
26
N RD

c
30
LINE

c
6

s
12E

c
179

RD

RD

SCHOOLH OUSE

DEERLICK

c
6

RD

RD

c
4
STERNBER

POINT

HERBRECHT

LOWE

SETTLEMENT

RD

WILSON

RD

SCHOOLHOUSE

BURNT
BEACH

LYME
RD

VAADI

ROCK

RD

LAKE

c
128
RD

ELM

BECKWITH

ROCKBR

OOK

c
17

RIDGE

RD

s
12
WOODAR D

RD

RD

c
46

RD

RD
HOLMES

RD

RD

RD

AD
RD

ANSTE

RD

RD

FARRELL

DELLES

RD

RD

i
81

RD

RD
RD

ST

c
17

s
37

RD

u

PLEASAN

RD
WILSON

RD

RD
ST

STREET

TOWN
GREAT

T

T

RD
GARDNE RVILLE

c
29

ASHLAND

KISER

DUTCH

ROOT

c
125
RD

RD

s
180
PERCH

MILLS

RD

RD
LASHAW

CHEEVER

RD

KISER

SCHOOLHOUSE

EVANS

VAN ALSTYNE

c
128
TRACT

RD

RD

MERCHANT
RD

s
12
RD
JENKINS

FULTS

c
56

17

L TASSE VAN

LAKE

c
6
RD

c
125
RD

MORRIS

RD

ST

PERCH

c
5
S SPRING
RD

ST

MILL

ANT MERCH

RD
STONE ST

ST

ST

NT

CHURCH

MERCHA

POINT

s
12E

RD
RD

RD

MAIN

s
12E
EY HUMPHR

TOWN

BAY VIEW DR

c
55
OLD
W

RD
ALLEN

WADDIN GHAM

RD

CIRCLE
MAIN

COMBS

KNOWLESVILL

BATES

RD

RS
BEDFOR

ARNOLD

RD

RD

CROSS

TRACT

c
56
POINT

WATER

c
57
S

EVANS

ST

ST

c
55
RD

FOX

125

RD

MARTIN

CORNE
D

c

RD

RD

WADDINGH

D BEDFOR

DR

CHURCH

CARR
ST
ST

AM

RD

BEND

RD

c
179
DR

RD

VILLE

KNOWLESVILLE

SIMONET

E

RD

STONY

RD

s
12 E

RD
RD

16

TRACT
MORRIS

RD

c
125
RD

c
16

ST

CEMETE
GARTLAND

CHURCH

c

ST

RAY

HENRY

RY

PEARL
PECK

LE

ST

ST

ST

ACADEMY

VAADI

AVE

WILLOW ST

ST

N

WILLOW

c
16

NOBLE

MAIN

u
11

s
26

11

RD

HUFF

26

RD

F CUTOF

RD

ST
ST

ET

SIMON

c
8

c
46
STEINH ILBER

S

s
26

RD

GARDNE

c

s u
BEDLAM

RD

16

RVILLE

c

c
46
FACTORY

PLEASA

ROCK

MCKEAV

c
29

NT

c
5

MILLER

c
179
WHITE

c
17

ALVERS

CALL

18

46

DAYTON

c
6

c
6
RD

RD

s
12
RD

LAKE
PERCH
VAADI

EXT

c
8

RIVER

c

c

s
37

c

RD

c
30

ON

u
11

ST

ST

c
12
HALLE

ORLEANS
STREET

s
37
RD

SMITH

GAP

c
46

CENTE

DUTCH

s
26
S

CLAYTO

c
20

HOLKIN

u
11

PLEASAN T

c
30
ST

N

RD

RD

R

11

s
12

RD
SHIMEL

GE

ST

AVE

KILLKEN

BED

NY

PARTRID

i
81
ORLEAN S

HOUGHT

ON

ENGLISH

CREEK

LAKE

c
194
NY 26

c
194
QUAKER
NY

RD

KELSEY

HILL

26

RD

s
26

RD

RD

RD

RD

RD

s
37

STONE

RD

c
15

s s THERESA
RED

s
37

37

s
26

RD

POOLE

c
22
RD

c
23

c
21

c
24

u
11

c
26
DICKSON

KELSEY

POOLE

RD

RD

c
21

c
22

c
23

BEARTO WN

c
24

RD

u
11

c
26

KILLKE

s
180

c

ROY

NNY

c
3

EAST

HOUGHTON

ENGLISH

e

s

ST

970 L

CORNER

DELPHI

PARTR

S
CREEK

BAKER

DICKSON

IDGE

c
13

TANNER RD

VROOMAN

s
12

c
15

BEART

DICKSON

WORDE

N

c
13

RANCH

RD

MUSKALON

HILL

FOX

RD

194

11

ISLAND

s
12

c
21

RD

HANNI

s
RD

TOWN

RD
RD
BREEZY

GORE

S

SETTLEM

u
11

RD

PINES

MASON

s
POINT

ROBINSO N

MAY

12
RD

c
13

i
81

c
15

RD

c
24
ENGLISH
COUNTY

BEARUP

RD

IRWIN

s
BLANCHARRD

MAY

RD

IRWIN

MOON

LINE

RD

RD

LAKE

RD

D

c
HULL

FONTAIN

c
26

AVE

c
22

POTTER

E

BLVD

RD

LAKE

RD

RD

RD

RD

RD

RD

EAST RIDGE

COUNTY

LINE

CREEK

OLD

RD

c
193
HIGHLA

c
21

RD

c
22

ANTWERP
RD

26

FACTORY

RD
FOX HILL

RD

STAR

ND

c

c
KEYES

RD

BALD

RD

CEMETE RY

RD

ROCK
ELLIS

RD

ST

RD
RD

RD
LAKE

CARTER

DRAKE

RD

CLAYTON CENTER
RD

RD

RD

HOLMES

CHILD CHILD

RD

BEND

FAVRET

WILSON

RD

RD
RD
REMEL
SWAMP

RD

RD

WHITE

RD

BEND

VAADI

RD
G

RD

ST

ST

MILE

RD

S

N

CREEK

MAIN

MORRI

ST

3

GTON WASHIN

MADISO

TEMPLE

MILL

RD

c
16
ST

RD

c
16

RD

ROGERS

ST
FOX

HART

STONE
GUFFIN

s
12E

GREAT

3
RD
ST

LAKE

RD

CASE

DUMP

s
37
PERCH
RD
FINCH

RD

37

STRONG

c
125

26

RD

s
12E

RD

RD

59

HOUSE

c
RD

RD

s
180
RD

s
12

i
RD

c
46
GOULDS

c
29

81

e
971 Q

i
81

CHEEVAR
RD

s
342
PLANK

c
57
RD

1

125

SCHOOL

BONNEY

HARDSCR ABBLE

s
12E
STAR
RD
RD FARM GAME

RD

c
53

REASONER

BARON

RD

s
342
MILLER
REASONER

s
342
RD SWITZER

HOGSBA

s
3

RIVERSIDE

LA 4

LANE ANDERSON

s
3
JACKSO RD

WILNA

AVE

c
41

COLE
WILLOWBROOK

s
3 A
AVE

DR

RD

E
PARK

RD SCHOO

RD

STALDER

STAR LHOUS EXT

BROWN

LAKE

STATE

s
180
PARK

c
57

ADAMS

SHORE

57

RD

RD

RD

RD

LANE

WENDELL

c
54
FARM

PINE

DR
CEMETERY
UNION

LESTOR

c
PARK
S

c
59

RD

s
12 E
c
53
CEMETERY

RD

MILLER RD

RD

ROUTE
PERSHA

MULLIN

RS
GONSETH

PEARL

STATE

RD

MOFFETT

c
53
WHITE RD

CORNE

s
283

ST

OLD

c
46

RD

c
53
RD

RD

REED

s
37
HINDS
RD

RD

c
36
MARTIN

c
36

s
3 A

NORTH

RD

c
40

AVE

AVERY

c
47

RAILROAD ST

c
138

CRYSLER DR

c
37
3
RD

c
42
KEMPANY

ST

c
53
TIMMERMAN

W
HOWE
ST

DEXTER

RD

s
180

c
53
FETTERLY

c
53
BROWN

N

ST

JEFFERS

RD

c
57

s
12
RD

e
971 V

5

RIVERSIDE

s
26
OLD STATE
2ND

ST

LA 3
RD
LA 1

HILL

DR

MAIN

RTE 3

RD

MILADY

STATE

RD

971 V

BURNASH

BOOT

BUSH

u
11
PLANK RD

c
138

c
129
PORTER
LERAY

RD

JACK

e c
50

ST

LA 2

ST

PERCH

c
143
SELOS

MULLIN
ST

RD

BEAUMON

AVE

ST

s
3

T

MAIN

RD

RD

s
37

JACKSON

RD
W ST LAWRENCE

RD
BEACH

DOANE

LAWRE NCE

TON

c
59
WOODS
STONE

c
59
RD

c
59

AVE
FRANKLIN

BROWN
E

ST

POTTER AVE

WASHINGTON

W

180

RICE
WILLIAM

ST

WARREN
BLVD

ST
ST

ONTARIO

ST

FOSTER
RD

ST

RD

MAIN
MICHIGAN ST

RELYEA

ST

W MAIN
ST

ST

SUPERIOR

MILL

190

12E

DR

ST

HURON

c s
ST

WEST

s
12F
MIDDLE

ST

RD

MAIN

REEVES

12E

ST

E

GOULD

s s
12F

WOODLAWN

SHORE
ST

s
342

RUTLAND

ST

ST

ON

3

PENNOCK

s

PIKE

ST

AVE

LAMARTINA DR

SHORE

ST

PINE ST
ST

PINE
ST
ST
ST

RD

RD

RD
RD

RD

CHURCH ST
GROVE

ST

283

ALEXANDRIA

971 H

HILL

12E

s s
3

MAIN

e
RD
EVANS
ROME

s c
190

PLAZA

GLASS

S

MIDDLE

WOODAR

RD

SHORE

S

c
59

OLD

HADLEY

c
144

DR

RD

i
81

s
12

RD

s
12F

283

ESTATES

CARD

c
46
RD

GLASS

DR PATRICIA DR

MIDDLETON

u
11

s
12E

MIDDLE

RD
RD

Y MILITAR

SHORE

RD

EVANS

OLD

Watertown
s
3
FLORAL
JERICHO

s
3

12

283

TAYLOR

s
3

s
12 F

u
11

AUSTIN

c
59
SHORE

RD

s s
12F 3

s
3
s
3

WEST

RD

HOLLOW

SHORE

s
3

s
3

TWIN

OAKS
RUTLAND

c
144

RD

RD

RD

c
49
WHITTAKER

c
49
ANDREWS

HALL

c
42
RD

CARD

RD

s
3

RD
RIDGE

SAYRE SAYRE
RD

RD

s
12

c
46
COLE
TOTH

STREE

283

RD

s
3

ALEXAND

c
59

RD

RD

RD

180

12 F

s
12F

RIA

HADLEY

c
143

s
3
ROGERS

RD

RD

RD

s

s
FILLEY
RD

s
12F

s
12E

u
11

s
283
DUFFY

s
3

RD

c
144

RD

c
47
RD

c
42
CROSSING

ROGER

12F

ST

TAYLOR

s
180

GLEN

c
59

s
12F

ST CLARE

S

s

S

CHURCH

ST

i
81

s
12

u
11

u s
11
RD

LAFAVE

s
342
RD

STATE

AVE

WAYSIDE

RD

HADLEY DR
ST

RD

RODGERS
ON

PL

RD

MAPLE

RD

s
26

E

c
46
MOSHER

ST

c
144

ST
REMIN ST
E

BURNUP

AMES

ST

HUNTINGT

RD
STAFFORD DR

D

s
RD

RD

WOOD

c
143

c
47

s s
26
RD

s
3

3

STREET

HILL

HOWE

s
3

s
3
T

REMING

PINE

RD
NG CROSSI

ST

RD

c
42

RD

CROGHA N

RIVER BEND
RD

RD

s
26

s

RD

s
3

RD

RD
RD

c
47

s
3

u s
11

s
RD
STAPLIN

LAMB
RD

c
47

RD

RD

RIDGE

u
11

RD

STAPLIN

RD JOHNSON

RD

RD

s
3

RD
PECK

SHORE

HARBOR

RD

S

SHORE

RD

SLATER

RUTLAND

SMITH

s
180
YOUNGS

c
63

MILITARY

RD

s
3
N BURTO

RD

DR

c
63
OLD

HUMPHREY

HESS

c
75

c
66

i
81
PACIFIC

u
11
c
65

HADCOCK

c
59
STORRS

s
180
RD

MISER

EDDY

s
126

STAPLIN

c
160

RD

c
49

RD

c
160

c
48

s
126

ST

s
3
RD

RD

u
11

EDDY

i
81

s s
12 3

CHAMPION
RD

s
126
RD
CUTLER

S

c
48

s
126

s
126
RD

s s c
26 126 46
STEAM
RD
HILL

STRICKLAND

RD

WADSWORTH

RD

RD

s
126

WEAVER

s
126

ROME

s
12

HOLLOW

c
49

OOK

BALL

c
159
OVERL

sRUTLAND
126
c
162

s
126

c
45

c
48

s
26

c
47
LINE

SCHOOL

c
45

c
75

LLOYD

c
75

HOUNSFIELD
MARTIN

FIELDS

c
48

s
126
RD

s
126

RD

c
159
E

c
47
RD

RD

RD

GOTHAM

c
47

c
62

u
11
OLD

s
12

SHERMAN

s
3
MARTIN

RD

c
63
ROME

c
65
SPRING

c
165
VALLEY

RD

s
12

RD

c
62

PARKER

BUETEL
RD

c
65

c
165

c
67

c
62
GILLETTE

c
155
RD
RD

s
12
c
67
VAN ALLEN RD

c
160

c
163
RD

BROCKLIN VAN

RD

N

LAKE

RESSIGUE

RD

N
LAKE

RD

RD

c
160
MIDDLE

c
161
RD
RD

c
75

RD

s
3

s
3
FAWDREY
N
HARBOR
RD

COOK

STREET

c
66
RD

RD

s
26

MASSEY

HUMPHREY

s
232
RD

c
162

RD

S
RD

LAKE

RD
S

CROSS

c
156
RD

LAKE

RD
BAST
TODD

RD

s
232

c
63

MURROCK

c
65

WATERTOWN
VAN ALLEN
RD

c
47

s
12
RD
RD

RD

VENTON

c
161

s
3
EVELEIGH
RD

c
62

e

RD

970 K

c
64
RD

e
RD

970 K

VALLE

s
232

c
68

RD

RD

COOK

u
11

MICEK

232

SWITZER

c
64

c
64
POINT

CLARK
CAMPBELLS

RD

STREET

RD

STREET

RD
HEINES

RD

RIDGE

c
75
RD

c
145
OLD
RD

WAITE

c
66
N

IVES

CAGWIN

RICH

CADY

i
81

s u
11
u
11
RD

SWAN

c
155

RD

c
69
ILL RD

RD
CREEK

POINT

s
12
LEE
RD
RD

c
163

HICKEY

WEST

RD

ST

RD

s
12

W

SANDY

c
156

CHURCHILL

DENMARK

s
126

RD

Y

SALT

RD

RD

MASSEY

FRALICK

c
69

c
69
RD

c
161
O BRIEN
RICH

HARBOR

E
RICH

ARCHER

c
145

RD
S

PINKNEY

RD

c
64

RD

VAN VALKENBURG RD

RD

RD

BALL RD

BRODIE

c
75
RD

MASSEY
RD

c
63
STREET

c
155
N HARBOR
RD
ZOAR
HICKOCK

CRAMER

RD

RD

BONI
RD

DORAN

RD

CURTIS

RD
COFFEEN

CADY

FREEMAN
KILLENBECK

JACOBS

RD

RD

KELLOGG

RD

COFFEEN

DUNBAR

s
3

RD

RAMSE Y RD

RD

RD

CAIRD

RD

RD

RD

UNDERWO

e
971 P

c
68

CREEK

KNAPPS
RD

RD

OD

bdillenbeck F:\Projects\2009\09-010d - St. Lawrence Wind\cadd\dgn\miscellaneous\trf reg loc.dgn

HARBOR

OWENS

RD

CAIRD

FASSETT

RD

RD
HICKOCK RD

c
69
RD

FULLER

c
123
HOE

RD

N

N WATSO

RD

SNOWS

SCHOOL

MASSEY
RD

c
71

c
71

c
75

c
64

68

SMITH

RD
SMITH

N SCHOOL

HOUSE

RD

c s
123 3
RD

RD

RD
ST

S
HARBOR

RD

RD

c
71

PENNEY

66

c
71

RD

c
68
PARKER
RD

HARBOR

THOMAS

RD
RD

c
156

RD

RD

CRAMER

RD

RD

RD

c
71

c
NORTH

RD

NORTH

RD

CRAMER

N

RD

PENNEY

c
66
OVERTON

u
11

GARDNER

HARBOR

GILMAN

RD

c
63

STREET

ZOAR

c

SHANGRAW

HOUSE

i
81

c
155

c
156

s
410

RD

c
75
SNOWSHOE

c
66

u
11
ST
GREEN

PENNEY
GILMAN

N

c
69

BAY

RD

c
71

c
155
PITCHER
ST

WHITES

RD

RD

76

RD

HARBOR

c
72

HEATH

c
178

c
123
HARBOR

WHITFORD

HENDERSON
SAND
RD
VIEW

RD

RD

DEPOT
ST

ST
WILSON

GARDNER

RD

TEEPLE

ZOAR

GOODNOUGH

c
69
BISIG
RD

SHANGRAW

c
RD

SETTLEMENT

s
177

LA

BAILEY ST

GREEN

c
66
ST

GRANT

s
177
SCHOOL
ST

RD

i
81

DUMP

RD

ST

c
76
BISHOP

PARADISE

WINDMILL

c
76

RD

MICHAE L

GREEN

MINKLER

CORNELL
RD

RD

c
72
HOUSE
HOUSE
FARGO
LIGHT
RD

SETTLEME
PENNEY

NT

RD
RD

c
178
RD

c
178

MILITARY
RD

LIGHT
RD

MILL

c
178
RD

s
178
ST

c
71
FACTORY ST

RD

RD

c c
152 152

DANLEY

c
152
RD
RD

c
75

c
77
GARLOCK

c
123
CLUB

SHEAR

RAYS

STREET

RD

NUTTING
STONY

CREEK

RD

RD

s s
3
c
152

CEMETERY

ADAMS
RD
CORNERS
RD

i
81
RD
SPOOK HILL

HORNER DR

s
HILL

RD
RD

KENFIELD

177
PORK
HILL

c
68
WYMAN

c
69

SCHOOL

WORDEN

RD

c
156
KENFIELD

PORK

RD

MAIN
ST

s
12

RD

RD

s
177

MAIN

RD

PLANK
RD
ST

c
69

c
69
RD

c
97

s
177

PINCKNEY

s
26

RD

PARK

RD

ST

GAME

c
155

WILLIAMS

RD

RD
WILLIAMS

s
3

178

BAY

WHITNEY

RD

c
69
AYLES

c
97
LOVELAND

BROWN

RD

DANLEY

c
78

u
11

RD

c
152
STONY
CREEK
RD

SMITH

JEAN

s
178
RD
BISHOP

GARLOCK

RD

c
152

RD

c
77

s
178
PAUL

s
178

COBBVILLE

s
178

N

ADAMS

MAXON

GRAND

i
81

LA

WRIGHT

u
11
HGTS
PATRICK

RD

RODMAN
RD

RD

RD

TOWN

BARN

s
177

BECKY

LA

c
97

CLARK

c
95

s
177

s
178

s
177

LYONS

LOWVILLE HARRISBURG

s
178

c
69

LOWE

c
75
MIXER
NOHLE

84

s
178

i
81

c
69

FULLER

RD

RD

c
82

c
84

RD

DOBBINS

c
84
RD

DONA

c

c
189

BOLTON

BOLTON

RD
RD

s
289

c
82
RD

SPRING

ST

GRUNTLEY

s
3

c
189

s
178

SPRING

RD

RD

u
11

c
97

GRUNTLEY

c
78
PL

c
79
FILLHART PL

c
91
ST

GROVE

ELDORADO
RD
BENTON PL

c
79

MATHERS

MILL

RD

c
79
RD

s
178

s
177
RD
COUNTY

RD

c
40

RD

CROGHAN

c

CK

RD

MILITAR

s
342
GRACEY

HOLBROOK RD

O CONNER

s
26
BACK

WEAVER

NELLIS

RD

s
180

c
37
MUNNSDORFER

s

RD

R

SMITH

MUSTA

c
37

RD

MUNNSDORFE

DR
PARKER

APARTMENT DR W
AVE

LA 2

s
3 A
BOYD

s
3

Y

RD

NORTH

c

RD

CROGH

c
6

AN

MILE

c
125

BROWNVILLE

u
11

LE RAY

ST

NELLIS

RD

CORNERS

RD

RD

RD

BENTO

N

RD

RD

IKEYS

c
75

DIXON

RD

SWAN
RD

TILLER

JEFFERSON
PARK
MCHALE
RD

RD

RD

SHORT
RD

i
81
85

LAWRENCE

c
75

SOUTHWICK

PL

s
193
RD

RD

HAMMON

s
193

c
78
RD

LOOMIS RD

RD

ELLISBURG
RD
ROGERS

s
289
RD

c
85

RD
MOONE

RD

MILLER

RD

c
WARDWELL

i
81
BAKER

RD

D

SAXE

LD

MACHO

RD
RD
LANDING

MACHOLD

i
81
SETTLEME

u
11

RD

s
193

SCOTT
RD

RD

c
120
ST
NORTH LANDIN G

s
193
RD

RD

RD

RD

FACTORY

RD

WILDER

MAIN

N

EISENH

s
289

AUER

RD

FARM

MARKE

T

WINONA

RD

E

LOOP

RD

W

LOOP

RD

NASH

3

c
89
RD
BROWN

RD

BROWN

W

RENSHA

ST. LAWRENCE WIND FARM JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
PROJECT: 09-010d DATE: 2/09

RD
RD
DEPAU VILLE

RD

ST

EMPIE

RD

RD

LEWISBURG

ACCESS RAMP

RD

SAWDY

REGIONAL LOCATION MAP

CORNER

RD

ST

PARK

ACADEM

c
54

RD

PARISH
CARR
RD

RD

RD

Y
ST

c
55

E

CHURCH

s
12
PARRISH RD
RD
CASE

GOULD

s
3
BACKUS

ST

DEPOT ST

RD

WITT
POINT

PAMELIA

c
41

c
4
TERRACE

SLYE RD

WILNA

RD

RD

RANSO

M

WALRATH

CROWNER

RD

AVE

MAIDEN LA

RD

N JACKSO N

RD

RD

ST

GAME

STAIE

WHITE

RD

ST

SHORE
RD

PERRIGO

DEXTER ST

PATTERSON

RD

DR PARKVI

RD

RD

EW

RD

GTON

BUTTS

MAPLE

RD

RD

REEVES
ACKERMAN
RD

STOREHOUSE

WARREN

PARK

RD

BALDWIN RD BALDWIN

ST

RD

BOYD

REEVES

STONE

WRAPE

RD
RD

RD

BACH
RD

RD

RD

SMITHV ILLE

SPENCER

RD

RD

MAXON
RD

CHURCH

LAWTONRD
HILL

HARBOR

RD

RD

RD
RD

RD

OVERTON

WHITF ORD

RD

OLD
ROUTE

MILITARY

RD

156

RD

HARBO

MILITA RY

R

PLANK

ALLEY

ST

RD

RD

RD

LAGROSSE
RD

LANE

ELDORADO

RD

c
95
ST

c
189
RD

JERUSALEM
RD

LOOMIS

MIDDLE

JERUSALEM

RD

JERUSALEM

G
HAYES

LINE RD

CROSSIN

s
177

s
812

RD

BENTON
LYNG

MARTIN

c
97

RD
WASHINGTON

c
97
WASHIN GTON

s c
178 189

c
96

PL
BENTON
RD

c
96
NICHOLS

PARK

c
85
PARK
VALLEY

s
178

c
189

s
12
RD

EMERSON

PL

PIERREPONT
PL

PL
RD

RD

MARKET

MEAT PL

RD

Y

c
93
GULF

N

JOHNSON
RD
ROGERS

s
178

c
189

s
178
MOORE

c
189

c
96
WAITE

c
93
OVERTON
MOONEY

LEMAY

LARMON

RD
SETTLEMENT

LEE

u
11

c
92

c
93
RD
MACKLIN
RD

RD

MARTIN

c
93

RD

s
3
RD

L HASSE

ALLARD

s
289
RD

c
91
RD

COMSTOCK

RD

c
120

s
3
L HASSE

c
120
CHAMBERLAIN
RD

s
289

RD
BENJAMIN PL
LONDON

c
91
WARDWELL

u
RD

K
RD

COMSTOC

11

COMSTOCK

RD

LORRAINE
RD

c
95

c
92

c
93
NICHOLS

MANOR

c
91

PIERREPONT

LORRA

c
91

c
92

WAITE

c
95

s
26
RD

GULF

LOG LONDON

RD

WRIGHT

RD

RD

S

LARMON

MOONEY RD

RD

WRIGHT

ROGERS

LOG

INE

c
93

GULF

S

DODGE

c
93

BISHOP
RD

MONITOR

RD

LORRAINE
NT

DIXON

RD
SHARP

MANOR

WATERVILLE
FRENCH

RD

c
91
RD

c
93
OCONNORS
RD
TOWN
BICE

PIERREPONT

RD

RD

WOODPECKER

SKINNER

LORRAINE

RD
RD
JOSLYN

MANOR

THOMPSON

RD

TORRY

HILL

RD

c
121
RD

c
87

s
193
i
81
MAIN
LA

T

c
92
CREEK

RD

s
193

c
91

PIERREPON

CHURCH RD

LINE

c
92
RD

RD

NO
NAME
RD

c
95
MARSH
RD

s
3

RD

c
121

MARSH

c
90
MC DONALD
ELLIS

c
90
RD

MANNSVILLE
DIXON
LORRAINE

RD

MANNS VILLE

WORTH
c
95
VAN BROCKLIN
MACDONALD

MARTINSBURG

WASHBURN

RD

G LANDIN

RD

RD

c
90

s
CLARK

WEBB RD
S

ST LINCOLN
DOUGLAS

LORRAINE

ST

c
87
LILAC
PARK
RD

LORRAINE

DR
MILL

ST

LORRAINE

RD

c
90

MANNSVILLE
ST

RD
THOMPSON

RD

RD

ST

c
121

c
95

HOBBS

HESSEL
GILBERT

RD

HOXIE

u
11
RD

RD

RD

c
90

MANNSVILLE
RD

LORRAINE

CORNERS

NE

c
90
RD

RD

c
89

COBBLESTO

c
92
VAN WORMER
RD

RD

RD

MONTARIO

RD
BALDWIN
RD

DINGHAM

BETTINGER

RD

BALCH

c
121
WEAVER

RD

BAY

RD

RD

c
122

SAND

RD

s
3
STAPLI

N

RD

RD

HENDERSON RD

RD

RD

c
87
RUDD

u
11

i
81
RD

HAGEN

MONTAGUE

c
122

u

FIGURE:

1

001652

F:\Projects\2009\09-010d - St. Lawrence Wind\cadd\dgn\miscellaneous\trf twr loc.dgn

s
12E
C PO AT FIS IN T H RD

N
c
9

s
12E

53 52 51
c
7

48 50 49 39 44 40
RD

PE

LO

c

4

47

JEFFERSON

9

COUNTY

c
8

G

L

A

SS

LA

c
7

46 38 37 45
R D

RD

41
G O SIE

LAKE
G

ER

R

ST

ER

8

M

ONTARIO
C O N
CO N ST A N CE

s
12E
RD

CE

C

26

M

CK

M AN

S TA N E

30 34
RD

EE

c

CK

36

35

RD

EE

V

E R
RD
29

ER

O SI

43
V

M

42

EE

CK

M

U

TT

V

O

N

C

EM

ET

ER

Y

c
8

22 24

JEFFERSON

R D

32 27
R D
RD

21

20 19

17

A M

SO

N

COUNTY

SA

28

8

R O

23

31

33

SI

ER

E

25

A

D

M A

S

M

RD

C
V O

F O T E N G E A C L N IL VI s V PE A
BR A N CH E

10

18

16

c
4

S

E

T

T

L

E

M

E

N

T

RD

c
4

15

CO MA

MB

12E

ST

c
6

s
12 E
R D

RD

12
M A SO N

11
W SO IL N

13 9

14

RD

SW
ROC K

AL

LIA

RD
T BU RN

8

T R A

c
6
RD R

c
6 12E
G

FA
QU
T N A

V

R

ET

ARR

ON

Y

R

D

HELL

5
ST ON RD E

7

HELL

s
12E

RD

RD

RD

c

8

LS

E T

ASH

s

4

LA

6
R V

c

ND

RO

CK

F A

3
F

WI

B

U

R

N

T

R

D

4
RD

R

E

T

LYME
EL H L

c

5

RO

BIN

SO

N

RD

1
RD

c
6

2
IC DEE RL K

s
12E

c
6
RD
T IN

DE

LI ER

CK

PO

s
12 E
RD

CAPE
A

c
RD

4

c
RD
R D

8

c
V

5

RD

RO

BIN

FR

SO

EN

c
RD

N

C

H

9

C

R

EE K

RD
FA V R T E

RD

RD

c

4

VINCENT
RO CK

W

SO IL

N

RD

B

U

R

N

T

B

ASHLAND

C

R

D

RO

H

OT

E

A

RD

CH

EE

VE

R

MERCHANT

c
56

ACCESS ROADS WIND TOWERS PARTICIPATING PROPERTY OWNERS

WIND TOWER LOCATIONS

ST. LAWRENCE WIND FARM JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
PROJECT: 09-010d

s

DATE: 2/09

FIGURE:

2

001653

RD

WILSON

ST

D

Z E

N E

G

E R

M

SW

E L
RD

A M P

RD

F:\Projects\2009\09-010d - St. Lawrence Wind\cadd\dgn\miscellaneous\trf rte.dgn
RD

c
4
RD

s
12E
ST AT E

s
12
RD

c
BLACK

13

c
181
HAYES

RD

OLD

CREEK

FOX
HILL

OR

s
12E
GR AN T RD
LOV ERS

EAS T

s
12 E
CLAYT ON
BALD
LA
RD

WHISKEY
RD
SYLV ESTE R

N
RD

LE

AN

S

ST

RD

c
10

c
181
ST

RIDGE

BR EE ZY
PO INT

c
RD LD EWA

13

RD

RD

DEF

LAKE
O ERN

s
12E
CA PO TF IN ISH RD

DANN

CLA

c

13

YTO

N

E

s

411

RI

DG

ST EA

CO MM OD E RD

T

RD

ONTARIO
RD

c
9
RD

c
10
RD

ST

c
c
5

181

s

411

s
REESE

MIDDLE

ROCK

411

SUN

AMEND

c

5

RISE

MILL

AVE

RD

ST

FOR

D

UNDERBLUFF

RD

s
12E

PEL O

5
INS

BEV
ELLIS

c
11
RD
RD

s

180

RD

RD

c
7

JEFFERSON

LAWRENCE HAMLET
CR EE K

HO

US

E

c
4

SAINT

s
12

RD

CLAYTON
ZANG

RD

9
COUNTY
LA

RY TE

CE

ME

c
8
EN CH

S AS GL

GR

c
7
RD

c
5

OV

DIXON

E

RD

FLAT

c
9
FR

CARTER

K

STREET

BUTT

ERMIL

RD
RD

RD

R D

ON

ER

EV

RD
RD

G
ER

KE

MU

ER

O
GO

SI
R

SIE

MC

SCHNAUBER

E
EE V

CE

R
M CK
WO OD

7
RD

TO

N

DU

TC H

NT

GA P

TT

C
s
12E
RD

TA NC E
CE ME TE RY
RD

MC

CA

NC E

CO NS

TA N C E
RE

KE

RD

RR

MA

O N S
EV

CL

AY

RD

ST

ER

RD

AM AD

NC VI

BLUFF

RD

RD

CAR

CRO SS RD

TER

RD
RD

ET STRE

c
HA LL ER

12

RD
c
8

RD

CLAYTON

c
9
RD T
S

RIDG

E

6
SIE RO

c
8
EN

JEFFERSON

D

R

SAM

RD

11 8
A M
RD

SO

N
COUNTY

c
9

c
12
FF

c
5
EY KE NN RD

RD
RB DE UN

LU

TRA

CY

RD

8

s
12

4

ORLEANS
CENTER
RD

FLA

TS

RD

HONEY

c
4

c
11

RD

NT

ST

VO

BUR

SPR

ING S

C
SWA
ROCK

LLIA

UR WI NE

RD

TR

HELL

s
12E
RD

RD

RD

RD

TOW N

c
6
FA
RD

c
6
ET VR

HELL

N

ET

T

QU
AN

5

GR

SO

LAN

12E
ASH

ST

STO

s

D

RD

RE

NE
CK RO

MI

179

LL

ARR

c
RO
OLD

c
BIN SO N

ER

Y

D R
8

c

s
RD

180

RD

s
12

CAR

c
6
A

RD

HALLADA

TER

Y

STR

EET

F O T E N G E A C L N IL VI s V PE A
BR AN CH E
T M LE TT SE EN

10
RD

MP

ST EP HA NI ST E

DU

c
4

c
12
OOL SCH

OVERBLUFF

c
179

ST
Y FA OR CT ST

12E
N

s
RD

12
OMB MAC
SO MA

12 E
FA VR ET

9
RD

RD

s
DEPAUVILLE
HART
RD

180

RD

EISS

RD

EISS

RD

RD

RD

OVER

MCCOY

RD

RD

WILDER

RD

RD

SO

G

DO

DOG

T

ER

c
4
T RN BU

HILL

RD

WIL

V

14
E R
HE LL
RD

RD

RD

RD

RD

STREET

A

CARTER

VR

c
6

13
DE ZE RE NG ME

s
12E
SW

DEE

c
6
RD

WO

c
4

RD

OD

AR

LIC ER DE
P
CK

K
L

CAPE
RD
RD

c
RD

4

c
8

c
5

F

FA

RO BIN SO N

s
12
DEPA

ET

ER

LL MI

RD
RD

WOODARD

s

180

LYME
RD

RD

RD

c
179

RD

RD

RD

RLI

NT POI

CK

RD

ON LS WI

RD

c
128
T RN BU

BE
ASHLAND

RO

AC H
RD

OT

c
RD

125

RD

s
180
CHE EVE R
VAN ALSTYNE

c
128
TRAC T
RD
IS

RD

MERCHANT
RD

c
56

s

12

c
6
FF HU
RD

c
125

MORR

VAA

DI

RO

HERB

VINCENT

RECH

LO

WE

s
RD

12
STE RNB ERG

CA

RT

D

RD

RD

T

HIL L

WI N LSO

RD
RD

VAADI

RD

RD

VAADI RD

W HI TE

TE WHI

HAL

WILSON

ST
UVIL LE

AY LAD

RD

AM

VAADI

RD

RD

RD

RD
DE
RD

RD

c
5
RD

RD

IL UV PA

NT HA RC ME
IN T

RD

HR MP HU

c
8
BAY VIEW DR
RD

NY STO
RD

TO

WN

RD

EY

s
12 E
s
12E

ACADEMY ST

VA

AD

I

LE

MIL

ST

ST

NT

CHURCH
EMPIE

PO

ME

RC

HA

s
12E
RD

s
12 E
L

RD

NG

S

RI

TRACT

MORRIS

c
125
RD

c
STONE ST

16

RD

c
55
D OL

EN ALL

RD

S

W
S
TE

CIRCL E
MA IN
RD

MB CO

KNOWL ESVILLE

KNO

WLE

LE SVIL

RD

RN CO

CR OS S
T IN PO

c
56
CO

D OR DF BE

WA

TE

R

EV

c
57

AN

S

ST

ST

c
125
DR

BA

TRA

c
55

FOX

CT

RD

RD

ER

c
179

S

RD

RD

DR
RK PA
MIL

CHU RCH

CA
ST

RR

ST
ST
AC AD
E

c
54
RD
EM Y
SO N

H

RIS

RD

PA

K EE CR
3

MA
ON IN SH WA GT
MA

IS

c
ST

CAR

55
RR

R

RD

ST

IN
DI

L MIL

ST

MO

s
RD
ST

GO

12

UL

D

RD

c
ST
RT

16

c
NE
HA

16

RD

X FO

STO

s
12E
GUFFIN
POIN T

RD
CASE

3

BROWNVILLE
WI TT

PARRISH RD

E

c
6

MIL

c
125
SE CA

RD

c
125

s
12E

HO US

RD

O CONNER

RD

RD

c
59
RD

s
WE AV

s

12

180
ER
SM ITH

RD

i i
E

RD

81 81

PER CH

s
WALRATH

180

DUMP

RD

RD

RD

RD
ST

LAKE

i

81

MU

ST

AR

D

c
57
RD

1
c
125
OOL SCH

BONNEY

HA RD SCR AB BL E

s
12E
ST AR

REASONER

RD

c

53

GA
RD
RD

LER

MIL

ME RD FA RM

RD

PARK
SC

ST HO

OL

E AR US HO T EX RD

3
E ST AT

SWITZER

RD

BR

N OW

RD

MUL

LAKE

s
180
RK PA
MOFFETT

c
57

ST

ADAMS
E OR SH

59

RD

c
57
RK PA

RD

RD
S

c
RD
RY ETE CEM
FAR M

54

PERC

c

s
RD

c

53

REED

12 E
E AT

LIN

c

53

MILL ER RD

EXIT 48
GA

ST

RD

c
57
SHORE

c
E AT

53

s
180

RD
RD

RD

RD

W
CH BEA
RD

ST

LAW

REN CE

N

DO AN

S OD WO

c
59
ST ON E

E
RD

c
59

c
59

AVE

BR

OW

E

ST

POTTER

LA

AVE
BUTTS

WR

ON

EN CE

SHOR

E

s
180

RICE

ST

PIKE
RD

WARREN

PREFERRED LOCAL ROUTE PARTICIPATING PROPERTY OWNERS ACCESS ROADS WIND TOWERS
1

PREFERRED LOCAL ROUTE OPTION

STUDY AREA INTERSECTION

ST. LAWRENCE WIND FARM JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
PROJECT: 09-010d

DATE: 2/09

WASHINGT

ST

ST

c
53
TIMMERMAN

c
53
FETTERLY

c

53

s
ME

12

H

LAN

E

RD

s

342

s

2

RD

MI

LIT

AR

Y

342

RD

WAYSIDE

RD

AVE

FIGURE:

3

001654

RD

SP

BE DF OR D

RD

RN S ER

E
RA NS OM

REASONER

RD

WH

ITE

RD

WH

ITE

BROWN

FRANKLIN

MAPLE

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

The preferred delivery and transportation route for the proposed Project was selected to minimize impact to local traffic, damage to local, county and state highways, the number of roads being used for delivery, and potential improvements to individual roads. Furthermore, private access roads will be constructed from public roads over privately owned land to the proposed turbine locations. The layout for access roads is depicted on Figure 3-12. The turbine construction cranes will be transported to the site in a semi-dismantled manner and hauled to specific crane assembly areas designated along the turbine access roads. The locations of the crane assembly area will depend on the feasibility of walking the crane between turbine sites. This will be further evaluated as part of the comprehensive transportation study pending Project approval. The physical dimensions of vehicles delivering the turbine and tower components would dictate the road width and turning radius needs at intersections along the delivery route, as these are the heaviest and longest vehicles that would be necessary for construction. Table 3-20 provides dimensions of specialized vehicles required for delivery of WTG components. Intersections located within the Project Area were visually evaluated using a minimum truck turning radius of 130 to 150 feet, the required radius for the oversize vehicles typically used to deliver turbine and tower components. In addition, an engineer also conducted a screening level visual inspection of road surfaces and integrity of roads within the Project Area to preliminarily assess the types of improvements that might be necessary to accommodate construction traffic.
Table 3-20 Delivery Vehicle Dimensions and Weights
Component Delivery Vehicle 80 m Tower Base Section 80 m Tower Mid Section 80 m Tower Top Section Nacelle Hub Assemble Blades (two) Length 140 ft 0 in 140 ft 0 in 100 ft 0 in 100 ft 0 in 75 ft 0 in 155 ft 0 in Height 20 ft 0 in 18 ft 0 in 16 ft 0 in 18 ft 0 in 18 ft 0 in 13 ft 10 in Width 15 ft 0 in 13 ft 0 in 11 ft 0 in 11 ft 0 in 11 ft 0 in 10 ft 0 in Gross Weight 134,000 lbs 130,000 lbs 86,000 lbs 130,000 lbs 50,000 lbs 35,000 lbs

The Applicant has also identified the following requirements for roads to be used as primary delivery routes for the transport of wind turbine components: Maximum road grade of 10 percent; No dips or rises greater than 18 inches over a 65 foot distance; Maximum vehicle gross weight of 135,000 pounds (lbs) (24,000 pounds maximum per axle);

3-80

001655

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

(development policy), 11-12 (flooding and erosion hazards policies), 21-22 (recreation policies), 27 (energy policy), 33, (water and air resources policies), and 44 (wetlands policy), listed in Table 3-21 below. All of the State's policies are derived from existing laws and regulations administered by various State agencies. The NYSDEC administers many of the programs found in the State’s polices (e.g., the Department operates regulatory programs, which provide protection to tidal and freshwater wetlands [Policy 44], restrict development and other activities in flood and erosion hazard areas [policies 11-12], and protect air and water resources [policies 33]). Other agencies, such as the Public Service Commission and the State Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment administer programs that regulate the siting of energy transmission facilities and regulate the location of electric power plants.
Table 3-21 Consistency with New York State Coastal Policies1
No. 2 Policy Facilitate the siting of water-dependent uses and facilities on or adjacent to coastal waters Buildings and other structures will be sited in the coastal area so as to minimize damage to property and the endangering of human lives caused by flooding and erosion Activities or development in the coastal area will be undertaken so as to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion by protecting natural protective features including beaches, dunes, barrier islands, and bluffs. Water-dependent and water-enhanced recreation will be encouraged and facilitated, and will be given priority over non-water-related uses along the coast. Development, when located adjacent to the shore, will provide for water-related recreation, whenever such use is compatible with reasonably anticipated demand for such activities, and is compatible with the primary purpose of the development. Decisions on the siting and construction of major energy facilities in the coastal area will be based on public energy needs, compatibility of such facilities with the environment, and the facility’’s need for a shorefront location. Best management practices will be used to ensure the control of stormwater runoff and combined sewer overflows draining into coastal waters. Preserve and protect tidal and freshwater wetlands and preserve the benefits derived from these areas. Consistency Measures The 0.41-mile segment of the overhead transmission line and Interconnection Substation would not preempt the reasonably foreseeable development of water dependent uses. The 0.41-mile segment of the overhead transmission line and Interconnection Substation is not located in coastal erosion hazard areas, coastal high hazard areas, or floodways. The 0.41-mile segment of the overhead transmission line and Interconnection Substation will not be located on beaches, dunes, barrier islands, or bluffs and will not result in disturbance of these areas. The 0.41-mile segment of the overhead transmission line and Interconnection Substation will not result in a barrier to the recreational use of a major portion of a community's shore. Water-related recreation use is not compatible with the development, and a reasonable demand for public use is not foreseen. Purpose and need is discussed in Section 2.3 of the SDEIS. Sections 3.1 through 3.13 discuss compatibility with the environment. The activity will be performed in accordance with applicable permit conditions, including the SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges during Construction. The 0.41-mile segment of the overhead transmission line and Interconnection Substation will not affect tidal or freshwater wetlands.

11

12

21

22

27

33

44
1

Source: NYSDOS Coastal Management Program. 2002. State Coastal Policies. Accessed December 11, 2008 http://nyswaterfronts.com/downloads/pdfs/State_Coastal_Policies.pdf.

3-87

001656

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

3.5.1.4 Agricultural Land Use

Approximately 1,028 working farms occupy 330,561 acres in Jefferson County according to the 2002 U.S. Department of Agricultural National Agricultural Statistics Service (Census of Agriculture, 2006). The leading agricultural products in Jefferson County include: dairy products (78.1 percent), cattle and calve products (9.3 percent), hay and silage products (5.3 percent), colonies of bees and honey products (1.6 percent), and 1.6 percent as corn used for grain (Yarnall, 2002). According to U.S. Census Bureau (2006) statistics, 3.4 percent of the population was engaged in farming in 2000. The Project Area affects one agricultural district (Jefferson County Agricultural District #2 North) and the entire Project Area is located in this district. Agricultural land use is a significant component of the Project Area with approximately 6,280 (80 percent) acres of the Project Area in row crops, field crops, or pastureland. The Project Area includes approximately 60 working farms, most of which are dairy farms. The patchwork of fields and farms located in the many valleys edged by ridge tops with steep slopes is what defines the landscape/community character of the majority of the Project Area. Within the Project Area, approximately 60 percent of the area is designated as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance (Table 3-22).
Table 3-22 Summary of Prime Farmland1 in the Project Area
Farmland Class Prime Farmland Prime Farmland if Drained Not Prime Farmland Farmland of Statewide Importance
1

Total Acres by Farmland Class 77.9 101.0 111.2 256.5

Total Percent by Farmland Class 14 18 20 47

Source: Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resource Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Survey Area, State [Online].

3.5.1.5 Future Land Use

Other than the proposed Project, future land use patterns in the area are anticipated to remain largely unchanged for the foreseeable future. Inquiry with the Town of Cape Vincent found one proposed industrial development (1 acre of land bought by the Town for water storage) outside of the Project Area. Various residential developments, including a proposed seasonal trailer park development would be dispersed throughout the Town. Inquiry with the Town of Lyme found no commercial or industrial proposed or planned future developments. Several residential developments have been proposed in the Village of Chaumont and on the outskirts of town. BP

3-88

001657

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-23 (Sheet 1 of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number Jean Philipe Galbrand du Fort House (90NR01173) John Borland House (90NR01168) Otis Starkey House (90NR01181) Warren Wilson House (90NR01130) Captain Louis Peugnet House (90NR1126) George Reynolds House (90NR01127) Reuter Dyer House ( 90NR01124) Nicholas Cocaigne House (90RN1121) Johnson House (90NR01125) Broadway Historic District (90NR01169) James Buckley House (90NR01170) Remy Dezengremel House (90NR01122) Joseph Docteur House (90NR01123) Xavier Chevalier House (90NR01120) Claude Vautrin House (90NR01129) Fairview Manor (05NR05454) St. Vincent of Paul Catholic Church (90NR01180) Union Meeting House (90NR01128) Burnham House (90NR01171) Gen Sacket House (90NR01178) Lewis House (90NR01175) Anthony Levi building (90NR1166) Aubertine Building (90NR01167) 31469 Rosiere Road 6338 Gosiere Road 33110 Mason Road 38289 State Route 12E, Clayton 139 Kanady Street 6433 Millens Bay Road 565 Broadway 467 James Street 230 Market Street 580 Broadway 496 Broadway 30538 Rosiere Road 169 Joseph Street Village of Cape Vincent 33071 Tibbetts Point 2867 Favret Road 29902 County Road 4 34191 Route 12E 32115 County Road 6 4670 Favret Road 9500 Point Street 127 Joseph Street Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent 313 James Street Cape Vincent Address Village/Town Determination 1 NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL

Map Code

NRL-1

NRL-2

NRL-3

NRL-4

NRL-5

NRL-6

NRL-7

NRL-8

NRL-9

NRL-10

NRL-11

NRL-12

NRL-13

NRL-14

NRL-15

NRL-16

NRL-17

NRL-18

NRL-19

NRL-20

NRL-21

NRL-22

NRL-23

3-104

001658

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-23 (Sheet 2of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number Glen Building (90NR01174) Roxy Hotel (90NR01176) Cornelius Sacket House (90NR01177) Rogers Brothers Farmstead (95NR00907) Tibbetts Point Lighthouse (90NR01119) Wilcox Farmstead (90NR03009) Chaumont House (90NR03014) Chaumont Historic District (90NR03013) Evans Gaige Dillenback House (90NR03016) George House (90NR03018) St. Johns Episcopal Church (90NR01179)* Duvillard Mill (90NR01172) Vincent Le Ray House (90NR01182) house farmstead farmstead farmstead Beechwood outbuilding associated with Beechwood house farmstead servants quarters house house 3204 NY 12E 2481 NY 12E 31429 CR 6 31429 CR 6 596 W. Broadway 523 W. Broadway 523 W. Broadway 266 N. Lake Street 139 S. Kanady Street 29766 CR 6 2066/2072 Deerlick Road 375 Broadway 583 Broadway 352 Market Street 27405 Washington Street 27655 Evans Road Along Main Street 11616 Main Street County Route 57 Tibbetts Point 27658 Dablon Point Road 571 Broadway 310 Broadway Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Chaumont Chaumont Chaumont Chaumont Chaumont Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent 352 Broadway Cape Vincent Address Village/Town Determination 1 NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRL NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE

Map Code

NRL-24

NRL-25

NRL-26

NRL-27

NRL-28

NRL-29

NRL-30

NRL-31

NRL-32

NRL-33

NRL-34

NRL-35

NRL-36

T-4

T-7

T-10

T-14

T-20

T-21

T-24

T-25

T-26

T-36

T-47

3-105

001659

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-23 (Sheet 3 of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number house house Market Street Cemetery house house house house house house tourist cabins factory (now historical museum) house house farmstead house house The United Church commercial - fisheries house house Riverside Cemetery house tourist cabins boat house house 662 S. James Street 561 S. James Street 437 S. James Street 260 E. Broadway 567 E. Lake Street 212 William Street 742 E. Broadway (rear) No number; State Route 12E 32719 NY 12E 34725 County Route 7 34765 CR7 35109 CR 7 233/235 S. Point Street 134 N. Point Street 173/175 N. James Street 184 N. Market Street 131 W. Gouvello Street 151 W. Gouvello Street 266 S. Market Street 179 W. Lake Street 320 S. Market Street 383 S. Market Street No address; Market Street 277 W. Broadway Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent 139 W. Broadway Cape Vincent Address Village/Town Determination 1 NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE UN NRE UN NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE

Map Code

T-48

T-50

T-78

T-91

T-93

T-98

T-101

T-126

T-127

T-129

T-147

T-155

T-167

T-176

T-181

T-184

T-209

T-247

T-264

T-269

T-297

T-301

T-336

T-337

T-346

3-106

001660

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-23 (Sheet 4 of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number farmstead house tourist cabins house Cedar Point State Park office building parsonage New England Barn St. Lawrence Union Cemetery house farmstead St. Vincent de Paul Church house commercial building farmstead house house farmstead farmstead farmstead house house New St. Vincent de Paul Cemetery Judd Cemetery Sand Bay Cemetery Bayworth Farm 30485 Rosiere Road Vacant, no number; W side Hell St. 5477/5553 Constance Road 5477/5553 Constance Road 32175 Hell Street 4609 Favret Road 250 Center No number; NY State Route 12E No number; NY State Route 12E No number; NY State Route 12E 27846 Dablon Point Road 31305 Rosiere Road 5851 Dezengremel Road 31345 Rosiere Road 31385 Rosiere Road 7242 Millens Bay Road 33751 Rosiere Road St. Lawrence Union Cemetery 33905 Rosiere Road 35158 Rosiere Road Cedar Point SP 36091 State Route 12E 35681 State Route 12E 35530 State Route 12E Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent 35438 CR 7 Cape Vincent Address Village/Town Determination 1 NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE UN NRE UN NRE

Map Code

T-356

T-358

T-359

T-368

T-380/HR-35

T-408

T-420

T-421

T-424

T-428

T-445

T-450

T-453

T-461

T-464

T-470

T-471

T-473

T-479

T-484

T-505

C-1

C-3

C-4

HR-9

3-107

001661

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-23 (Sheet 5 of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number Merchant House Edsall House Vincent Schaumont Farmstead Hemple House and Farm Furman House Rosseau House St. Vincent de Paul Cemetery Worner House and Farm Calhoun House and Dairy Farm farmstead Kernan Cottage Hickory Point Club Cottages Kernan Cabin Carleton Villa Kernan House Kernan Cottages George Brothers Building (90NR03017) Borden House Sizeland Cottage 1 Sizeland Cottage 2 Walts House St. Paul's ME Church White House J. Wells House Wells Settlement/Wells Family Cemetery 3063 Carleton Island Road #1 3089 Carleton Island Road #1 3063 Carleton Island Road #1 3158 Carleton Island Road #3 3164 Carleton Island Road #3 3164 Carleton Island Road #3 27428 Mill Street 27707 Water Street 27605 Water Street 27587 Water Street 27375 Washington Street 27487 Washington Street 27490 Washington Street 29340 Ashland Road 30228 / 30215 Ashland Road Grenadier Island Road #3 15782 French Creek Road 30252 Burnt Rock Road Intersection of Rosiere and Dezengremel roads 30485 Rosiere Road 30411 Rosiere Road 30374 Rosiere Road 30321 Rosiere Road 69031 Stony Point Road Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Clayton Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Cape Vincent Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme Lyme 27341 Stony Point Road Cape Vincent UN NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE UN NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRL NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE Address Village/Town Determination 1

Map Code

HR-11

HR-12

HR-15

HR-16

HR-17

HR-18

HR-20

HR-22

HR-32

HR-36

HR-40

HR-41

HR-42

HR-43

HR-44

HR-45

HR-46

HR-50

HR-52

HR-53

HR-54

HR-55

HR-56

HR-62

HR-63

3-108

001662

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-23 (Sheet 6 of 6) Historic Properties Evaluated Within the Five-Mile Area of Potential Effect Description/SHPO Inventory Number Mitchell House and Farm Harris/Emerson Cemetery Thomas House Anthony House/Farm Dodge Farm Colello House 37455 NY Route 12E 12283 County Route 9 31700 Swalia Road Lyme Clayton Clayton 10163 County Route 8 Lyme Robinson Road, west of Three Mile Creek Lyme 27817 Three Mile Point Road North Lyme Address Village/Town Determination 1 NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE NRE

Map Code

HR-64

HR-68

HR-69

HR-70

HR-71

HR-72

1

NRE = National Register Eligible; NRL = National Register Listed; UN = Unevaluated, but considered NRE

3-109

001663

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Original 96-turbine Project. The principal difference between the two projects is the number of turbines potentially visible from any given location. Throughout the five-mile radius study area, the number of turbines in the revised Project potentially visible at given locations is substantially reduced as compared to the original viewshed map. This clearly results from the reduction in project size by 43 turbines.
Table 3-24 Viewshed Coverage Summary
Topography Only Viewshed (see Exhibit 3.8.1) Acres Percent Cover 3,144 4% 2,587 2,093 1,967 2,504 78,898 91,193 3% 2% 2% 3% 86% 100% Vegetation and Topography Viewshed (see Exhibit 3.8.2) Acres Percent cover 29,430 32% 9,132 6,242 6,254 6,291 33,343 91,193 10% 7% 7% 7% 37% 100%

No Turbines Visible 1-10 Turbine Visible 11-20 Turbines Visible 21-30 Turbines Visible 31-40 Turbines Visible 40-53 Turbines Visible Total

Table 3-24 and Exhibit 3.8.2 indicate that one or more of the proposed turbines theoretically would be visible from approximately 68 percent of the five-mile radius study area. Approximately 32 percent of the study area will likely have no visibility of any wind turbines due to intervening landform or vegetation. Turbine visibility is most common from inland agricultural areas where cleared lands provide long vistas in the direction of turbine groupings. Project visibility will also occur from unscreened coastal areas (primarily along the St. Lawrence River), Lake and River Islands, and from on-water vantage points throughout the five-mile radius study area. The area most directly affected by views of the Project will be central portion of the turbine area where multiple turbines will be visible up to 360-degrees around a vantage point. Viewers to the north and west of CR 6 (Rosiere Road) will encounter views of a large number of turbines (30 to 53) at foreground and middleground distances (e.g., ½ to 3 miles). Similar views of multiple turbines will occur along portions of NY Rte.12E, Deer Lick, Favret, Mason, McKeever, Sand Bay (CR 9), Johnny Cake, Gosier, Hell, Constance, Wilson, and Branche Roads. This high degree of Project visibility is the result of broad agricultural clearing and the lack of screening hills. While the viewshed map indicates theoretical visibility of multiple turbines within the Village of Cape Vincent, field observation determined the prevalence of mature street trees and site landscaping combined with one- and two-story residential and commercial structures (not

3-118

001664

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK

Table 3-25 (Sheet 1 of 4) Visual Resource Visibility Summary
Potential Visibility Map ID
Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Excluding Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.1) Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Including Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.2)
1

Receptor Name

Municipality

Inventory Type

Actual View Likely Based on Field Confirmation of Existing Lineof-sight

Cultural Resources
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10.1 12.1 13 18 19 20 21 22 26 27 28 30 Broadway Historic District LeRay, Vincent, House St. Vincent of Paul Catholic Church Lewis House Roxy Hotel Borland, John, House Buckley, James, House St. John's Episcopal Church Sacket, Cornelius, House Starkey, Otis, House Galband du Fort, Jean Philippe, House Glen Building Burnham, E. K., House Duvillard Mill Aubertine Building Anthony, Levi, Building Sacket, General, House Cocaigne, Nicholas House Peugnet, Captain Louis, House Johnson House Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance

3-121

001665

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-25 (Sheet 2 of 4) Visual Resource Visibility Summary
Potential Visibility Map ID
Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Excluding Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.1) Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Including Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.2)
1

Receptor Name

Municipality

Inventory Type

Actual View Likely Based on Field Confirmation of Existing Lineof-sight

Cultural Resources
31 32 35 36 37 38 40.1 41 42 43 44 48 50 51 53 54 55 56 Tibbetts Point Lighthouse Rogers Brothers Farmstead Dyer, Reuter, House District School No. 3 Dezengremel, Remy, House Wilson, Warren, House Fort Haldimand Site Reynolds, George, House Chevalier, Xavier, House Vautrin, Claude, House Union Meeting House Docteur, Joseph, House The Row Taft House Taylor Boathouse Three Mile Bay Historic District Wheeler, Menzo, House Stone Shop, Old Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Lyme Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Cape Vincent Town of Lyme Town of Lyme Town of Lyme Town of Lyme Town of Lyme Town of Lyme Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance Statewide Significance View from top of lighthouse

Not visited

Recreational and Tourist Resources
9.1 10 11 Village of Cape Vincent River Access Village of Cape Vincent Historical Museum Cape Vincent Village Green Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Village of Cape Vincent Local Importance Local Importance Local Importance

3-122

001666

SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT TOWNS OF CAPE VINCENT & LYME JEFFERSON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Table 3-25 (Sheet 3 of 4) Visual Resource Visibility Summary
Potential Visibility Map ID
Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Excluding Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.1) Theoretical View Indicated by Viewshed Including Existing Vegetation (see Exhibit 3.8.2)
1

Receptor Name

Municipality

Inventory Type

Actual View Likely Based on Field Confirmation of Existing Lineof-sight

Recreational and Tourist Resources
13.1 15 17 19.1 24 25 31.1 31.2 31.3 36.1 40.2 40.3 40.4 40.5 40.6 40.7 49 59.2 62 33 35.1 Cape Vincent Recreation Park Wolfe Island Ferry Landing Cape Vincent Public Dock NYS DEC Research Station & Aquarium Village of Cape Vincent Boat Launch Village