A flyer delivered to several towns in the state from representatives of the Northern Pass project has some residents wondering if the project has jumped ahead of any state permitting processes. The flyer asks town officials for suggestions on how to mitigate or compensate for any potential damage created to wetlands or wildlife habitat in towns that might have the most substantial impacts.
The Chronicle has learned that the flyerwas first distributed to selectmen in Deerfield, but also in Lancaster and Whitefield. It is noted in the flyer that “Northern Pass will maintain all discussions as confidential until decisions are made about the relevance of potential projects to the NPT mitigation goals. NPT understands that compliance with the State’s right-to-know requirements, and other considerations, may prevent local governments from maintaining such discussions as confidential.” The flyer asks for information on projects a town or Conservation Commission might be working on—preservation of property or creation of a wildlife habitat— and asks for ideas by March 27 (today).
The request seems to ask for the ideas before the Northern Pass project has filed any state permits—in fact, the Presidential permit (which would allow the project to cross the U.S. border from Quebec into New Hampshire) is still waiting for approval. The flyer also says, “The NH Wetlands Bureau has asked that NPT reach out to towns that have the most substantial wetland impacts to help identify local natural resource projects or priorities that NPT could assist with directly.”
The Chronicle checked in with Will Abbott, Vice President of Policy/Reservation Steward at the Society for Protection of N.H. Forests, who has been following the protocols of the controversial Northern Pass project since it was announced to the public in October, 2010. He said, “After reading the Northern Pass flyer my personal view is that Northern Pass is taking some liberties in saying that DES has asked them to reach out to the towns. When an application is being prepared for a major wetlands application (and this sure is that), the applicant knows that they will need to prepare a mitigation plan as part of the application process if large wetlands areas are going to be disturbed by the project. But the suggestion that DES has specifically asked NP to reach out to thetowns in this instance appears misleading at best.”
The Chronicle contacted the N.H. Wetlands Bureau and learned that many “potential” permits can check in with the department in advance of filing for a permit in order to determine what might be needed before applying to disturb wetlands or wildlife habitat. Jim Martin, the Public Information Officer at N.H. DES, explained that it is routine for DES to work with everyone on a permitting process and provide them with advice. “We do pre-application meetings with everybody,” said Martin. “From the small property owner to larger projects so the applicant will understand any and all permitting responsibilities they might need to meet. If they knew they would have wetlands impacts in certain towns, they should try to reach out either to the town selectmen or to Conservation Commissions to work on projects.”
Ultimately, however, the mitigation will fall under the Wetlands Bureau, as is the case with the proposed Northern Pass project. While it has not started the state permitting process, Martin points out that the public should not have a misperception.
“This is something we offer to everyone looking for permitting information,” he said. “We put a lot of effort into and take a lot of pride in offering pre-application services so that we can actually work with people on what the permitting requirements are.” Lori Sommer, the Wetlands Mitigation Coordinator, explained that the wetlands rules are set up so that an applicant needs to first avoid an impact. If the impact cannot be avoided, the next step is to minimize the impact and, last, to compensate for the losses.
“There is a sequence that they need to do, and the first thing is to look in the communities (which will be impacted) and ask that question,” she said. But the question of why Northern Pass would indicate in their letter that “The NH Wetland Bureau has asked that NPT reach out to towns that have the most substantial wetlands impact,” she said, sounds a little “misleading,” saying, “I don’t know why they wrote that sentence that way, but in our rules we say look in the watershed, look in the community, get a list, develop open space plan, know where there is open wetlands fill so you can restore wetlands. That’s more of what that whole issue revolves around.”
She said that Northern Pass was probably writing the letter based on the requirements that, if they are going to impact wetlands, they need to compensate for the amount of damage that will take place in each town.
“Under compensation, the applicant needs to look locally and exhaust any opportunities the Conservation Commission brings forward. “It’s part of the permit process. Towns have to have a priority list ready. These projects take time to organize and develop. I would hope that the towns would have some sites that they could provide to Northern Pass.”
She reiterates that the Northern Pass project has not submitted any wetland application materials to DES as yet, which, she said, brings into question how a town would know how to make a mitigation request for the project when the application describing the wetlands has not been submitted yet.
"That, I feel, is a little more pressure (on a town) than should be,” she suggested. The Wetland Bureau needs to look at an application town by town and each town’s impact would be evaluated and mitigation would be compensated for those values that are lost.
In other Northern Pass news this week, a second project hasbeen filed for study with ISO New England for a transmission line. According to the ISO-New England website, last month, the project submitted an application for a line that was 1,090 mw in addition to the 1,200 mw line proposed in 2010. The 1,090 line would connect to the Des Cantons Hydro-Quebec substation near Sherbrooke—which is also the location where the 1,200 mw line would link in. The study request for the 1,090 line does not indicate if it is in addition to the already proposed line, or if it would replace that line at a lower voltage than originally proposed. The minimal amount of information lists the project as a 300 kv line—the same as the original 1,200mw line—and lists an operation date of June 1, 2018.