Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect: Environmental Assessment Statement

National Grid
Environmental Assessment Statement
Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect
Boroughs of Queens and Brooklyn, New York
CEQR NO. 12OOM001K
Prepared for: National Grid 175 East Old Country Road Hicksville, New York 11801 Phone: (516) 545-3157
Prepared by: AKRF, Inc. 3900 Veterans Memorial Highway Bohemia, New York 11716 Phone: (631) 285-6980
December 2011
Table of Contents
Environmental Assessment Statement Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan Project Tracking Form Attachment A: Project Description and Purpose and Need.................................................. A-1 A. Introduction .................................................................................................................... A-1 B. Project Description and Proposed Pipeline Route.......................................................... A-2 Phase I ............................................................................................................................... A-2 Williams Transco Project ................................................................................................. A-4 Phase II .............................................................................................................................. A-5 C. Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................... A-6 Phase I ............................................................................................................................... A-7 Phase II .............................................................................................................................. A-8 D. Project Schedule ............................................................................................................. A-8 E. Required Permits and Approvals.................................................................................... A-8 Federal ............................................................................................................................... A-9 State ................................................................................................................................... A-9 Local ................................................................................................................................ A-10 F. Summary of Environmental Studies and Environmental Impact ................................. A-11 Land Use and Zoning ...................................................................................................... A-11 Historic Resources........................................................................................................... A-11 Natural Resources ........................................................................................................... A-12 Hazardous Materials ........................................................................................................ A-13 Coastal Zone Consistency ............................................................................................... A-14 Construction .................................................................................................................... A-14 Public Health and Safety ................................................................................................. A-16 B: EAS Screening Analyses ..................................................................................................... B-1 A. Introduction .................................................................................................................... B-1 B. Environmental Screening Analyses ............................................................................... B-1 Land Use and Zoning ........................................................................................................ B-1 Socioeconomic Conditions ................................................................................................ B-1 Community Facilities and Services ................................................................................... B-2 Open Space........................................................................................................................ B-2 Shadows ............................................................................................................................ B-2 Historic and Archaeological Resources ............................................................................ B-3 Urban Design and Visual Resources ................................................................................. B-3 Neighborhood Character ................................................................................................... B-3 Natural Resources ............................................................................................................. B-3 Hazardous Materials .......................................................................................................... B-4 Coastal Zone Consistency ................................................................................................. B-4 i
National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect
Infrastructure...................................................................................................................... B-4 Solid Waste and Sanitation Services.................................................................................. B-4 Energy ................................................................................................................................ B-4 Traffic and Parking ............................................................................................................ B-5 Transit and Pedestrians ...................................................................................................... B-5 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................... B-5 Noise .................................................................................................................................. B-5 Construction Impacts ......................................................................................................... B-5 Public Health and Safety.................................................................................................... B-6 C: Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy................................................................................. C-1 A. Introduction .................................................................................................................... C-1 B. Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ C-1 Land Use ............................................................................................................................ C-1 Zoning ................................................................................................................................ C-5 Public Policy ...................................................................................................................... C-6 C. Probable Impacts of the Proposed Project ...................................................................... C-8 Land Use ............................................................................................................................ C-8 Zoning .............................................................................................................................. C-10 Public Policy .................................................................................................................... C-10 D: Historic Resources ............................................................................................................... D-1 A. Introduction .................................................................................................................... D-1 B. Methodology ................................................................................................................... D-1 C. Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ D-2 Architectural Resources ..................................................................................................... D-2 Archaeological Resources.................................................................................................. D-3 D. Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................... D-6 Architectural Resources ..................................................................................................... D-6 Archaeological Resources.................................................................................................. D-6 E: Natural Resources ............................................................................................................... E-1 A. Introduction .................................................................................................................... E-1 B. Methodology ................................................................................................................... E-1 Study Area ......................................................................................................................... E-1 Assessment of Existing Conditions ................................................................................... E-2 Assessment of Impacts On Natural Resources .................................................................. E-2 C. Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ E-3 Aquatic Resources ............................................................................................................. E-3 Terrestrial Resources ......................................................................................................... E-5 Rare, Special Concern, Threatened and Endangered Species and Habitats ....................... E-7 D. Probable Impacts of the Proposed Project ...................................................................... E-8 Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan.......................................................................... E-10 F: Hazardous Materials ........................................................................................................... F-1 A. Introduction .................................................................................................................... F-1 B. Historical and Existing Conditions ................................................................................. F-1 C. Probable Impacts of the Proposed Project ...................................................................... F-7
ii
Table of Contents
G: Coastal Zone Consistency .................................................................................................. G-1 A. New York State Coastal Zone Management Program ................................................... G-1 B. New York City Waterfront Revitalization Policies........................................................ G-2 New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form ................................................................................................................................... G-8 H: Construction Impacts ......................................................................................................... H-1 A. Introduction .................................................................................................................... H-1 B. Construction Schedule ................................................................................................... H-1 C. Construction Methods .................................................................................................... H-2 Phase I ............................................................................................................................... H-3 Phase II .............................................................................................................................. H-4 D. Impact Assessment and Controls ................................................................................... H-6 Traffic ................................................................................................................................ H-6 Air Quality......................................................................................................................... H-9 Noise ............................................................................................................................... H-10 Tree Protection and Loss ................................................................................................. H-12 Stormwater Management ................................................................................................ H-13 I: Public Health and Safety ...................................................................................................... I-1 A. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... I-1 B. Potential Safety Risks ...................................................................................................... I-1 Third Party Excavation........................................................................................................ I-1 Corrosion ............................................................................................................................. I-2 Leaks and Breaks ................................................................................................................ I-2 C. Regulatory Context .......................................................................................................... I-4 D. Public Health and Safety Procedures ............................................................................... I-5 Additional Measures to Mitigate Risk................................................................................. I-6 E. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Project........................................................................ I-7 J: Bibliography .......................................................................................................................... J-1 Appendix I: Appendix II: Archaeological Surveys Historic Resources Correspondence
Appendix III: Natural Resources Correspondence Appendix IV: Engineering Drawings
iii
List of Tables
E-1 New York State and Federally Listed Plants in the Vicinity of the Proposed Project ....... E-7 E-2 New York State and Federally Listed Terrestrial and Aquatic Wildlife in the Vicinity of the Proposed Project............................................................................... E-8 F-1 Environmental Issues ......................................................................................................... F-2 H-1 Phase I Construction Activities ..........................................................................................H-4 H-2 Phase II Construction Activities .........................................................................................H-5 H-3 Accident Data ..................................................................................................................... H-7
iv
List of Figures
Following Page
A-1 Project Location .................................................................................................................. A-2 A-2 USGS Topographic Map Coney Island Quadrangle ........................................................... A-2 A-3 Aerial Photograph ............................................................................................................... A-2 A-4 Photograph Key .................................................................................................................. A-2 A-5 Project Area Photos ............................................................................................................ A-2 A-6 Project Area Photos ............................................................................................................ A-2 A-7 Project Area Photos ............................................................................................................ A-2 A-8 Project Area Photos ............................................................................................................ A-2 A-9 Project Area Photos ............................................................................................................ A-2 A-10 Project Area Photos ....................................................................................................... A-2 A-11 Project Area Photos ....................................................................................................... A-2 A-12 Project Area Photos ....................................................................................................... A-2 A-13 Project Area Photos ....................................................................................................... A-2 A-14 Project Area Photos ....................................................................................................... A-2 A-15 Project Area Photos ....................................................................................................... A-2 A-16 Project Area Photos ....................................................................................................... A-2 C-1 Existing Land Use............................................................................................................... C-2 C-2a to C-2c Sanborn Map ........................................................................................................ C-2 C-3a to C-3c Tax Map ................................................................................................................ C-2 C-4 Open Space Resources ........................................................................................................ C-2 C-5 Zoning ................................................................................................................................. C-6 D-1 Architectural Resources ...................................................................................................... D-2 D-2 Areas of Archaeological Sensitivity ................................................................................... D-2 E-1 Floodplains ......................................................................................................................... E-4 E-2 NWI Tidal and Freshwater Wetlands ................................................................................. E-4 E-3 NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands ................................................................................................... E-4 E-4 Terrestrial Resources .......................................................................................................... E-6 G-1 Coastal Zone Boundary ...................................................................................................... G-2
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STATEMENT
City Environmental Quality Review ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STATEMENT FULL FORM Please fill out, print and submit to the appropriate agency (see instructions)
PART I: GENERAL INFORMATION

PROJECT NAME 1. National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect
BSA REFERENCE NUMBER (If Applicable) OTHER REFERENCE NUMBER(S) (If Applicable) (e.g., Legislative Intro, CAPA, etc.)
Reference Numbers
CEQR REFERENCE NUMBER (To Be Assigned by Lead Agency)
12OOM001K
ULURP REFERENCE NUMBER (If Applicable)
2a. Lead Agency Information

NAME OF LEAD AGENCY
2b. Applicant Information

NAME OF APPLICANT
Office of the Mayor

NAME OF LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON
National Grid
NAME OF APPLICANTS REPRESENTATIVE OR CONTACT PERSON
Robert R. Kulikowski, Ph.D. 253 Broadway 14th Floor CITY STATE ZIP New York NY 10007 TELEPHONE FAX (212) 788-2937 (212) 788-2941 EMAIL ADDRESS rkulikowski@cityhall.nyc.gov
ADDRESS
John Stavrakas
ADDRESS CITY
40 Sylvan Road STATE Waltham MA ZIP 02451 TELEPHONE FAX (781) 907-2759 EMAIL ADDRESS John.Stavrakas@us.ngrid.com
3.
Action Classification and Type SEQRA Classification

4.
UNLISTED
TYPE I; SPECIFY CATEGORY (see 6 NYCRR 617.4 and NYC Executive Order 91 of 1977, as amended):
6 NYCRR 617.4(b)(9)
Action Type (refer to Chapter 2, Establishing the Analysis Framework for guidance)
LOCALIZED ACTION, SITE SPECIFIC
LOCALIZED ACTION, SMALL AREA
GENERIC ACTION
Project Description:
National Grid proposes to expand its existing natural gas infrastructure in Brooklyn and Queens to reinforce its natural gas transmission and distribution systems and to provide for projected increases in energy demand in both Brooklyn and Queens in the Rockaway Peninsula. National Grid proposes to install new steel natural gas pipelines in two phases. Phase I of the project would be the installation of two parallel (12- and 26-inch) underground natural gas pipelines between Flatbush Avenue at a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field, Brooklyn, to Beach 169th Street south of Rockaway Point Boulevard on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queensa distance of approximately 8,300 feet. Phase II would result in the installation of a 30-inch steel natural gas pipeline beneath Hendrickson Street south of Avenue U to Hendrickson Place then along Hendrickson Place to Flatbush Avenue and then south to the northern terminus of Phase Ia distance of approximately 12,000 feet. See Attachment A, Project Description and Purpose and Need, of the Environmental Assessment Statement (EAS) for more detail. The proposed project would (1) improve gas system infrastructure in the New York metropolitan area, (2) reinforce the gas transmission and distribution systems in Brooklyn and Queens in the Rockaway Peninsula, (3) provide added reliability of service, (4) diversify the natural gas supply source for Brooklyn and Queens, (5) provide for projected future increases in energy demand (meeting both near and long term load growth in National Grids gas distribution system), (6) diversify overall energy supply sources in New York City, and (7) improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. See Attachment A, Project Description and Purpose and Need, for more detail.
4a. Project Location: Single Site (for a project at a single site, complete all the information below)
ADDRESS
Hendrickson Street, Hendrickson Place, Flatbush Avenue from Avenue U in Brooklyn, along areas NEIGHBORHOOD adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge in Brooklyn, under the Rockaway Inlet NAME Mill Basin, Marine and to Beach 169th Street on Rockaway Peninsula in Queens Park, Roxbury TAX BLOCK AND LOT Brooklyn block 8590, lot 700; Queens block 16340, BOROUGH COMMUNITY Queens and Queens CD 14 and DISTRICT lot 9 and block 25005, lot 9999 Brooklyn Brooklyn CD 18
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY BY BOUNDING OR CROSS STREETS
The proposed natural gas pipelines would run under Hendrickson Street, Hendrickson Place, and Flatbush Avenue from Avenue U in Brooklyn along areas adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge in Brooklyn, under the Rockaway Inlet and to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens
EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT, INCLUDING SPECIAL ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION, IF ANY ZONING SECTIONAL MAP NO:
The proposed project is located within or directly adjacent to C8-1, R4, C3, M1-1, and M3-1 districts in the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens
23b, 29a, 29c, 29d
4b. Project Location: Multiple Sites (Provide a description of the size of the project area in both City Blocks and Lots. If the project would apply to the entire city or to areas that
are so extensive that a site-specific description is not appropriate or practicable, describe the area of the project, including bounding streets, etc.)
5.
REQUIRED ACTIONS OR APPROVALS (check all that apply) YES NO City Planning Commission:
Board of Standards and Appeals:
YES DAY
CITY MAP AMENDMENT ZONING MAP AMENDMENT ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT UNIFORM LAND USE REVIEW PROCEDURE (ULURP) CONCESSION UDAAP REVOCABLE CONSENT
ZONING CERTIFICATION ZONING AUTHORIZATION HOUSING PLAN & PROJECT SITE SELECTIONPUBLIC FACILITY FRANCHISE DISPOSITIONREAL PROPERTY
NO YEAR
SPECIAL PERMIT EXPIRATION DATE MONTH
VARIANCE (USE)
VARIANCE (BULK)
ZONING SPECIAL PERMIT, SPECIFY TYPE MODIFICATION OF RENEWAL OF
SPECIFY AFFECTED SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION
OTHER Approval by the Office of the Mayor of the lease agreement between MTA B&T and National Grid
EAS FULL FORM PAGE 2
Department of Environmental Protection: Other City Approvals:

YES
YES NO
NO

RULEMAKING CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC FACILITIES FUNDING OR PROGRAMS; SPECIFY PERMITS; SPECIFY OTHER; EXPLAIN
LEGISLATION FUNDING OF CONSTRUCTION; SPECIFY POLICY OR PLAN; SPECIFY LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVAL (not subject to CEQR) 384(B)(4) APPROVAL
PERMITS FROM DOTS OFFICE OF CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION AND COORDINATION (OCMD) (not subject to CEQR)
Office of the Mayor approval of lease agreement between Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, popularly known as MTA Bridges And Tunnels (MTA B&T) and National Grid New York City Department of City Planning Coastal Zone Consistency; New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission; New York City Department of Transportation street opening permit for selective cuts in Flatbush Avenue and at Beach 169th Street; and New York City Departments of Parks and Recreation and Transportation revocable consent for directional drilling under Belt Parkway and temporary work area in Marine Park
IF YES, IDENTIFY
6.
State or Federal Actions/Approvals/Funding:
YES
NO
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 401 Water Quality Certification and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan; New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation review and concurrence; MTA B&T lease agreement for property rights and long-term operation of the pipelines within property adjacent to the Marine ParkwayGil Hodges Memorial Bridge in Brooklyn, under the Rockaway Inlet, and on the Rockaway Peninsula, irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to MTA B&T; US Army Corp of Engineers Nationwide Permit 12
7.
Site Description:
Except where otherwise indicated, provide the following information with regard to the directly affected area. The directly affected area consists of the project site and the area subject to any change in regulatory controls. The following graphics must be attached and each box must be checked off before the EAS is complete. Each map must clearly depict the boundaries of the directly affected GRAPHICS area or areas, and indicate a 400-foot radius drawn from the outer boundaries of the project site. Maps may not exceed 11x17 inches in size and must be folded to 8.5x11 inches for submission. Zoning map Photographs of the project site taken within 6 months of EAS submission and keyed to the site location map Site location map Figure A-1 Figure C-5 Figures A-5 through A-16 Tax map Sanborn or other land use map Figures C-3a For large areas or multiple sites, a GIS shape file that defines the project sites Figures C-1 and C-2a C2c C3c PHYSICAL SETTING (both developed and undeveloped areas) Total directly affected area (sq. ft.): Type of waterbody and surface area (sq. ft.): Roads, building and other paved surfaces (sq. ft.):
103,300
Other, describe (sq. ft.):
15,250 (the area under Rockaway Inlet 88,050 where the pipelines would be installed)
8.
Physical Dimensions and Scale of Project (if the project affects multiple sites, provide the total development below facilitated by the action) 20,300 linear feet Size of project to be developed:
Does the proposed project involve changes in zoning on one or more sites? If Yes, identify the total square feet owned or controlled by the applicant: YES
(gross sq. ft.)
NO
Total square feet of non-applicant owned development: YES
Does the proposed project involve in-ground excavation or subsurface disturbance, including but not limited to foundation work, pilings, utility lines, or grading? If Yes, indicate the estimated area and volume dimensions of subsurface disturbance (if known): Area:
NO
88,050
sq. ft. (width x length)
Volume:
606,500 backfilled in trench
cubic feet (width x length x depth) Number of additional workers?
Does the proposed project increase the population of residents and/or on-site workers? YES Provide a brief explanation of how these numbers were determined:
NO
Number of additional residents?
Does the project create new open space?
YES
NO
If Yes:
(sq. ft) (pounds per week) (annual BTUs)
Using Table 14-1, estimate the projects projected operation solid waste generation, if applicable: N/A Using energy modeling or Table 15-1, estimate the projects projected energy use: N/A
9.
Analysis Year CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 2

ANTICIPATED BUILD YEAR (DATE THE PROJECT WOULD BE COMPLETED AND OPERATIONAL): ANTICIPATED PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTION IN MONTHS:
Phase I 2013; Phase II 2014

WOULD THE PROJECT BE IMPLEMENTED IN A SINGLE PHASE? YES
+/- 24 months
IF MULTIPLE PHASES, HOW MANY PHASES: Two See Attachment A, Project Description and Purpose and Need. 10. What is the Predominant Land Use in Vicinity of Project? (Check all that apply) NO BRIEFLY DESCRIBE PHASES AND CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE:
RESIDENTIAL
MANUFACTURING
COMMERCIAL
PARK/FOREST/OPEN SPACE
OTHER, Describe:
Public Facilities and Institutions
EAS FULL FORM PAGE 3 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS The information requested in this table applies to the directly affected area. The directly affected area consists of the project site and the area subject to any change in regulatory control. The increment is the difference between the No-Action and the With-Action conditions. EXISTING CONDITION Land Use
Residential
If yes, specify the following No. of dwelling units No. of low- to moderate-income units No. of stories Gross Floor Area (sq. ft.) Describe Type of Residential Structures Yes
NO-ACTION CONDITION
WITH-ACTION CONDITION
INCREMENT
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Commercial
If yes, specify the following: Describe type (retail, office, other) No. of bldgs GFA of each bldg (sq. ft.)
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Manufacturing/Industrial
If yes, specify the following: Type of use No. of bldgs GFA of each bldg (sq. ft.) No. of stories of each bldg. Height of each bldg Open storage area (sq. ft.) If any unenclosed activities, specify
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Community Facility
If yes, specify the following Type No. of bldgs GFA of each bldg (sq. ft.) No. of stories of each bldg Height of each bldg
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Vacant Land
If yes, describe
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Publicly Accessible Open Space

If yes, specify type (mapped City, State, or Federal Parkland, wetlandmapped or otherwise known, other)
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
The proposed pipelines would be installed in the vicinity of Floyd Bennett Field, Brooklyn Marine Park, Fort Tilden, and Jacob Riis Park but would not cause long-term disturbance of these open space uses. See Attachment C, Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy
Yes
Other Land Use

If yes, describe
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Roadways and sidewalks and the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Parking
Garages
If yes, specify the following: No. of public spaces No. of accessory spaces Operating hours Attended or non-attended
EAS FULL FORM PAGE 4 EXISTING CONDITION Parking (continued)

Lots
If yes, specify the following: No. of public spaces No. of accessory spaces Operating hours Yes
NO-ACTION CONDITION
WITH-ACTION CONDITION
INCREMENT
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Other (includes street parking)

If yes, describe
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Storage Tanks
Storage Tanks
If yes, specify the following: Gas/Service stations: Oil storage facility: Other; identify: Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes No Yes No
If yes to any of the above, describe:
No tanks are on land that would be affected by the proposed project, but some are adjacent to the roadway
Number of tanks Size of tanks Location of tanks Depth of tanks Most recent FDNY inspection date
Population
Residents
If any, specify number Briefly explain how the number of residents was calculated Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Businesses
If any, specify the following: No. and type No. and type of workers by business No. and type of non-residents who are not workers Briefly explain how the number of businesses was calculated
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Zoning*
Zoning classification
Zoning districts along or adjacent to the pipelines include C8-1, R4, M3-1, C3, and M1-1 N/A Commercial, public facilities/institutional uses, parkland, and residential. Zoning classifications include C3, C8-1, M1-1, M3-1, R2, R4, and R5
No Change N/A
No Change N/A
Maximum amount of floor area that can be developed (in terms of bulk) Predominant land use and zoning classification within a 0.25-radius of proposed project
No Change
No Change
Attach any additional information as may be needed to describe the project. If your project involves changes in regulatory controls that affect one or more sites not associated with a specific development, it is generally appropriate to include the total development projections in the above table and attach separate tables outlining the reasonable development scenarios for each site. *This section should be completed for all projects, except for such projects that would apply to the entire city or to areas that are so extensive that site-specific zoning information is not appropriate or practicable.
EAS FULL FORM PAGE 5 PART II: TECHNICAL ANALYSES INSTRUCTIONS: For each of the analysis categories listed in this section, assess the proposed projects impacts based on the thresholds and criteria presented in the CEQR Technical Manual. Check each box that applies. If the proposed project can be demonstrated not to meet or exceed the threshold, check the NO box. If the proposed project will meet or exceed the threshold, or if this cannot be determined, check the YES box. For each Yes response, answer the subsequent questions for that technical area and consult the relevant chapter of the CEQR Technical Manual for guidance on providing additional analyses (and attach supporting information, if needed) to determine whether the potential for significant impacts exists. Please note that a Yes answer does not mean that EIS must be preparedit often only means that more information is required for the lead agency to make a determination of significance. The lead agency, upon reviewing Part II, may require an applicant to either provide additional information to support the Full EAS Form. For example, if a question is answered No, an agency may request a short explanation for this response. YES NO
1. LAND USE, ZONING AND PUBLIC POLICY: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 4
(a) Would the proposed project result in a change in land use or zoning that is different from surrounding land uses and/or zoning? Is there the potential to affect an applicable public policy? If Yes, complete a preliminary assessment and attach.
X X X
(b) Is the project a large, publicly sponsored project? If Yes, complete a PlaNYC assessment and attach. Is any part of the directly affected area within the Citys Waterfront Revitalization Program boundaries? (c) If Yes, complete the Consistency Assessment Form. See EAS Attachment G, Coastal Zone Consistency 2. SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 5 (a) Would the proposed project: Generate a net increase of 200 or more residential units? Generate a net increase of 200,000 or more square feet of commercial space? Directly displace more than 500 residents? Directly displace more than 100 employees? Affect conditions in a specific industry?
X X X X X -
If Yes to any of the above, attach supporting information to answer the following questions, as appropriate. If No was checked for (b) each category above, the remaining questions in this technical area do not need to be answered. (1) Direct Residential Displacement If more than 500 residents would be displaced, would these displaced represent more than 5% of the primary study area population? If Yes, is the average income of the directly displaced population markedly lower than the average income of the rest of the study area population? (2) Indirect Residential Displacement Would the expected average incomes of the new population exceed the average incomes of the study area populations? If Yes, would the population increase represent more than 5% of the primary study area population or otherwise potentially affect real estate market conditions? If Yes, would the study area have a significant number of unprotected rental units? Would more than 10 percent of all the housing units be renter-occupied and unprotected? Or, would more than 5 percent of all the housing units be renter-occupied and unprotected where no readily observable trend toward increasing rents and new market rate development exists within the study area?
EAS FULL FORM PAGE 6 YES (3) Direct Business Displacement Do any of the displaced businesses provide goods or service that otherwise could not be found within the trade area, either under existing conditions or in the future with the proposed project? Do any of the displaced businesses provide goods or services that otherwise could not be found within the trade area, either under existing conditions or in the future with the proposed project? Or is any category of business to be displaced the subject of other regulations or publicly adopted plans to preserve, enhance, or otherwise protect it? (4) Indirect Business Displacement Would the project potentially introduce trends that make it difficult for businesses to remain in the area? Would the project capture the retail sales in a particular category of goods to the extent that the market for such goods would become saturated as a result, potential resulting in vacancies and disinvestment on neighborhood commercial streets? (5) Effects on Industry Would the project significantly affect business conditions in any industry or any category of businesses within or outside the study area? Would the project indirectly substantially reduce employment or impair the economic viability in the industry or category of businesses? NO
X X
3. COMMUNITY FACILITIES: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 6

(a) Would the project directly eliminate, displace, or alter public or publicly funded community facilities such as educational facilities, libraries, hospitals and other health care facilities, day care centers, police stations, or fire stations?
(b) Would the project exceed any of the thresholds outlines in Table 6-1 in Chapter 6? If No was checked above, the remaining questions in this technical area do not need to be answered. (c) If Yes was checked, attach supporting information to answer the following, if applicable. (1) Child Care Centers Would the project result in a collected utilization rate of the group child care/Head Start centers in the study area that is greater than 100 percent? If Yes, would the project increase the collective utilization rate by 5 percent from the No-Action scenario? (2) Libraries Would the project increase the study area population by 5 percent from the No-Action levels? If Yes, would the additional population impair the delivery of library services in the study area? (3) Public Schools Would the project result in a collective utilization rate of the elementary and/or intermediate schools in the study area that is equal to or greater than 105 percent? If Yes, would the project increase this collective utilization rate by 5 percent from the No-Action scenario? (4) Health Care Facilities Would the project affect the operation of health care facilities in the area? (5) Fire and Police Protection Would the project affect the operation of fire or police protection in the area?
X X X
4. OPEN SPACE: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 7

(a) Would the project change or eliminate existing open space? (b) Is the project located within an underserved area in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens, or Staten Island? (c) If Yes, would the proposed project generate more than 50 additional residents or 125 additional employees? (d) Is the project located within a well-served area in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens, or Staten Island? (e) If Yes, would the project generate more than 350 additional residents or 750 additional employees? If the project is not located within an underserved or well-served area, would it generate more than 200 additional residents or 500 (f) additional employees? If Yes to any of the above questions, attach supporting information to answer the following: (g) Does the project result in a decrease in the open space ratio of more than 5%? See EAS Attachment B, EAS Screening Analyses. The proposed project would not change the existing open space ratio. If the project site is within an underserved area, is the decrease in open space between 1% and 5%? If Yes, are there qualitative considerations, such as the quality of open space, that need to be considered?
X -
EAS FULL FORM PAGE 7 YES NO
5. SHADOWS: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 8.

(a) Would the proposed project result in a net height increase of any structure of 50 feet or more? See EAS Attachment B, Screening Would the proposed project result in any increase in structure height and be located adjacent to or across the street from a sunlight(b) sensitive resource? If Yes to either of the above questions, attach supporting information explaining whether the projects shadow reach any sunlight(c) sensitive resource at any time of the year. 6. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 9 Does the proposed project site or an adjacent site contain any architectural and/or archaeological resource that is eligible for, or has been designated (or is calendared for consideration) as a New York City Landmark, Interior Landmark or Scenic Landmark; is listed or eligible for listing on the New York State or National Register of Historic Places; or is within a designated or eligible New York City, New (a) York State, or National Register Historic District? If Yes, list the resources and attach supporting information on whether the proposed project would affect any of these resources. See EAS Attachment D, Historic Resources 7. URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL RESOURCES: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 10 Would the proposed project introduce a new building, a new building height, or result in any substantial physical alteration to the (a) streetscape or public space in the vicinity of the proposed project that is not currently allowed by existing zoning? See EAS Attachment B, Screening Would the proposed project result in obstruction of publicly accessible views to visual resources that is not currently allowed by existing (b) zoning? (c) If Yes to either of the questions above, please provide the information requested in Chapter 10.
X X -
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X -
8. NATURAL RESOURCES: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 11

(a) Is any part of the directly affected area within the Jamaica Bay Watershed? If Yes, complete the Jamaica Bay Watershed Form. Does the proposed project site or a site adjacent to the project contain natural resources as defined in Section 100 of Chapter 11? If (b) Yes, list the resources: Attach supporting information on whether the proposed project would affect any of these resources. See Attachment E, Natural Resources 9. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 12 Would the proposed project allow commercial or residential use in an area that is currently, or was historically, a manufacturing area (a) that involved hazardous materials? Does the proposed project site have existing institutional controls (e.g., (E) designations or a Restrictive Declaration) relating to (b) hazardous materials that preclude the potential for significant adverse impacts? Does the project require soil disturbance in a manufacturing zone or any development on or near a manufacturing zone or (c) existing/historic facilities listed in Appendix 1 (including nonconforming uses)? Does the project result in the development of a site where there is reason to suspect the presence of hazardous materials, (d) contamination, illegal dumping or fill, or fill material or unknown origin? Does the project result in development where underground and/or aboveground storage tanks (e.g., gas stations) are or were on or (e) near the site? Does the project result in renovation of interior existing space on a site with potential compromised air quality, vapor intrusion from on(f) site or off-site sources, asbestos, PCBs or lead-based paint? Does the project result in development on or near a government-listed voluntary cleanup/brownfield site, current or former power (g) generation/transmission facilities, municipal incinerators, coal gasification or gas storage sites, or railroad tracks and rights-of-way? Has a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment been performed for the site? (h) If Yes, were RECs identified? Briefly identify: A limited Phase I as is typical for linear projects was performed. See Attachment F, Hazardous Materials (i) Based on a Phase I Assessment, is a Phase II Assessment needed?
10. WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 13

(a) Would the project result in water demand of more than one million gallons per day? (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) Is the proposed project located in a combined sewer area and result in at least 1,000 residential units or 250,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial space in Manhattan or at least 400 residential units or 150,000 sq. ft. or more of commercial space in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Staten Island or Queens? Is the proposed project located in a separately sewered area and result in the same or greater development than that listed in Table 13-1 in Chapter 13? Does the proposed project involve development on a site five acres or larger where the amount of impervious surface would increase? Would the proposed project involve development on a site one acre or larger where the amount of impervious surface would increase and is located within the Jamaica Bay Watershed or in certain specific drainage areas including: Bronx River, Coney Island Creek, Flushing Bay and Creek, Gowanus Canal, Hutchinson River, Newtown Creek, or Westchester Creek? Would the proposed project be located in an area that is partially sewered or currently unsewered? Is the project proposing an industrial facility or activity that would contribute industrial discharges to a WWTP and/or generate contaminated stormwater in a separate storm sewer system? Would the project involve construction of a new stormwater outfall that requires federal and/or state permits?
(i) If Yes to any of the above, conduct the appropriate preliminary analyses and attached supporting documentation.
YES
NO
11. SOLID WASTE AND SANITATION: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 14

(a) Would the proposed project have the potential to generate 100,000 pounds (50 tons) or more of solid waste per week? Would the proposed project involve a reduction in capacity at a solid waste management facility used for refuse or recyclables (b) generated within the City? 12. ENERGY: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 15 Would the proposed project affect the transmission or generation of energy? The proposed project would increase natural gas (a) supply and enhance system reliability. 13. TRANSPORTATION: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 16 (a) Would the proposed project exceed any threshold identified in Table 16-1 in Chapter 16? If Yes, conduct the screening analyses, attach appropriate back up data as needed for each stage, and answer the following (b) questions: (1) Would the proposed project result in 50 or more Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) per project peak hour? If Yes, would the proposed project result in 50 or more vehicle trips per project peak hour at any given intersection? **It should be noted that the lead agency may require further analysis of intersections of concern even when a project generates fewer than 50 vehicles in the peak hour. See Subsection 313 in Chapter 16 for more information. (2) Would the proposed project result in more than 200 subway/rail or bus trips per project peak hour? If Yes, would the proposed project result per project peak hour, in 50 or more bus trips on a single line (in one direction) or 200 subway trips per station or line? (3) Would the proposed project result in more than 200 pedestrian trips per project peak hour? If Yes, would the proposed project result in more than 200 pedestrian trips per project peak hour to any given pedestrian or transit element, crosswalk, subway stair, or bus stop? 14. AIR QUALITY: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 17 (a) Mobile Sources: Would the proposed project result in the conditions outlined in Section 210 in Chapter 17? Stationary Sources: Would the proposed project result in the conditions outlined in Section 220 in Chapter 17? (b) If Yes, would the proposed project exceed the thresholds in the Figure 17-3, Stationary Source Screen Graph? (attach graph as needed) (c) Does the proposed project involve multiple buildings on the project site? (d) Does the proposed project require Federal approvals, support, licensing, or permits subject to conformity requirements? Does the proposed project site have existing institutional controls (e.g., (E) designations or a Restrictive Declaration) relating to air (e) quality that preclude the potential for significant adverse impacts? (f) If Yes, conduct the appropriate analyses and attach any supporting documentation.
X X X X -
X X X X
X X X X X
15. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 18

(a) Is the proposed project a city capital project, a power plant, or would fundamentally change the Citys solid waste management system? (b) If Yes, would the proposed project require a GHG emissions assessment based on the guidance in Chapter 18? If Yes, attach supporting documentation to answer the following; (c) Would the project be consistent with the Citys GHG reduction goal? 16. NOISE: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 19 (a) Would the proposed project generate or reroute the vehicular traffic? Would the proposed project introduce new or additional receptors (see Section 124 in Chapter 19) near heavily trafficked roadways, (b) within one horizontal mile of an existing or proposed flight path, or within 1,500 feet of an existing or proposed rail line with a direct line of sight to that rail line? Would the proposed project cause a stationary noise source to operate within 1,500 feet of a receptor with a direct line of sight to that (c) receptor or introduce receptors into an area with high ambient stationary noise? Does the proposed project site have existing institutional controls (e.g., E-designations or a Restrictive Declaration) relating to noise that (d) preclude the potential for significant adverse impacts? (e) If Yes, conduct the appropriate analyses and attach any supporting documentation.
X -
17. PUBLIC HEALTH: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 20

Would the proposed project warrant a public health assessment based upon the guidance in Chapter 20? See EAS Attachment I, Public Health and Safety 18. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 21 Based upon the analyses conducted for the following technical areas, check Yes if any of the following technical areas required a (a) detailed analysis: Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy; Socioeconomic Conditions; Open Space; Historic and Cultural Resources; Urban Design and Visual Resources; Shadows; Transportation; Noise. If Yes, explain here why or why not an assessment of neighborhood character is warranted based on the guidance in Chapter 21, Neighborhood Character. Attach a preliminary analysis, if necessary. Because the proposed project is the installation of new gas (b) pipelines beneath existing roadways (Hendrickson Street, Hendrickson Place, and Flatbush Avenue) and underwater lands adjacent to Marine Parkway Bridge, there would be no change to Neighborhood Character in the vicinity of the proposed project. (a)
EAS FULL FORM PAGE 9 YES NO
19. CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 22

Would the projects construction activities involve (check all that apply): Construction activities lasting longer than two years; Construction activities within a Central Business District or along an arterial or major thoroughfare; Require closing, narrowing, or otherwise impeding traffic, transit or pedestrian elements (roadways, parking spaces, bicycle routes, sidewalks, crosswalks, corners, etc); Construction of multiple buildings where there is a potential for on-site receptors on buildings completed before the final build-out; The operation of several pieces of diesel equipment in a single location at peak construction; Closure of community facilities or disruption in its service; Activities within 400 feet of a historic or cultural resource; or Disturbance of a site containing natural resources.
X X X X X X X X
If any boxes are checked, explain why or why not a preliminary construction assessment is warranted based on the guidance of in Chapter 22, Construction. It should be noted that the nature and extent or any commitment to use the Best Available Technology for construction equipment or Best Management Practices for construction activities should be considered when making this determination. See EAS Attachment H, Construction Impacts, for information on the construction schedule, methods, and controls as well as an impact assessment.
20. APPLICANTS CERTIFICATION

I swear or affirm under oath and subject to the penalties for perjury that the information provided in this Environmental Assessment Statement (EAS) is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief, based upon my personal knowledge and familiarity with the information described herein and after examination of pertinent books and records and/or after inquiry of persons who have personal knowledge or such information or who have examined pertinent books and records. Still under oath, I further swear or affirm that I make this statement in my capacity as the President of National Grid, New York Kenneth D. Daly
APPLICANT/SPONSOR
of
National Grid
NAME OF THE ENTITY OR OWNER
the entity which seeks the permits, approvals, funding or other governmental action described in this EAS. Check if prepared by: Kenneth D. Daly
APPLICANT/SPONSOR NAME: LEAD AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE NAME:
APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE
or
LEAD AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE (FOR CITY-SPONSORED PROJECTS)
SIGNATURE:
DATE:
PLEASE NOTE THAT APPLICANT MAY BE REQUIRED TO SUBSTANTIATE RESPONSES IN THIS FORM AT THE DISCRETION OF THE LEAD AGENCY SO THAT IT MAY SUPPORT ITS DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE.
EAS FULL FORM PAGE 10 PART III: DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To Be Completed by Lead Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: In completing Part III, the lead agency should consult 6 NYCRR 617.7 and 43 RCNY 6-06 (Executive Order 91 of 1977, as amended) which contain the State and City criteria for determining significance. 1. For each of the impact categories listed below, consider whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. For each of the impact categories listed below, consider whether the project may have a significant adverse effect on the environment, taking into account its (a) location; (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude IMPACT CATEGORY Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy Socioeconomic Conditions Community Facilities and Services Open Space Shadows Historic and Cultural Resources Urban Design/Visual Resources Natural Resources Hazardous Materials Water and Sewer Infrastructure Solid Waste and Sanitation Services Energy Transportation Air Quality Greenhouse Gas Emissions Noise Public Health Neighborhood Character Construction Impacts 2. Are there any aspects of the project relevant to the determination whether the project may have a significant impact on the environment, such as combined or cumulative impacts, that were not fully covered by other responses and supporting materials? If there are such impacts, explain them and state where, as a result of them, the project may have a significant impact on the environment. LEAD AGENCYS CERTIFICATION Potential Significant Adverse Impact YES NO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
3.
Assistant to the Mayor

TITLE
Office of the Mayor

LEAD AGENCY
Robert R. Kulikowski, Ph.D.

NAME SIGNATURE
December 02, 2011
Check this box if the lead agency has identified one or more potentially significant adverse impacts that MAY occur. Issue Conditional Negative Declaration A Conditional Negative Declaration (CND) may be appropriate if there is a private applicant for an Unlisted action AND when conditions imposed by the lead agency will modify the proposed project so that no significant adverse environmental impacts would result. The CND is prepared as a separate document and is subject to the requirements in 6 NYCRR Part 617.
Issue Positive Declaration and proceed to a draft scope of work for the Environmental Impact Statement. If the lead agency has determined that the project may have a significant impact on the environment, and if a conditional negative declaration is not appropriate, then the lead agency issues a Positive Declaration.
NEGATIVE DECLARATION (To Be Completed By Lead Agency) Statement of No Significant Effect Pursuant to Executive Order 91 of 1977, as amended, and the Rules of Procedure for City Environmental Quality Review, found at Title 62, Chapter 5 of the Rules of the City of New York and 6NYCRR, Part 617, State Environmental Quality Review, the [ ] assumed the role of lead agency for the environmental review of the proposed project. Based on a review of information about the project contained in this environmental assessment statement and any attachments hereto, which are incorporated by reference herein, the [ ] has determined that the proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. Reasons Supporting this Determination The above determination is based on information contained in this EAS that finds, because the proposed project:
No other significant effects upon the environment that would require the preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement are foreseeable. This Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law (SEQRA).
TITLE
LEAD AGENCY
NAME
SIGNATURE
Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan Project Tracking Form
Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan Project Tracking Form

The Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan, developed pursuant to Local Law 71 of 2005, mandates that the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) work with the Mayors Office of Environmental Coordination (MOEC) to review and track proposed development projects in the Jamaica Bay Watershed (http://www.nyc.gov/html/oec/downloads/pdf/ceqr/Jamaica_Bay_Watershed_Map.jpg) that are subject to CEQR in order to monitor growth and trends. If a project is located in the Jamaica Bay Watershed, (the applicant should complete this form and submit it to DEP and MOEC. This form must be updated with any project modifications and resubmitted to DEP and MOEC.
The information below will be used for tracking purposes only. It is not intended to indicate whether further CEQR analysis is needed to substitute for the guidance offered in the relevant chapters of the CEQR Technical Manual.
A. GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION

1. 2. 3. CEQR Number 12OOM001K 1a. Modification
National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect Project Name: Project Description

National Grid proposes to expand its existing natural gas infrastructure in Brooklyn and Queens to reinforce its natural gas transmission and distribution systems and to provide for projected increases in energy demand in both Brooklyn and Queens in the Rockaway Peninsula. National Grid proposes to install new natural gas pipelines in two phases. Phase I of the project would be the installation of two parallel (12- and 26-inch) underground natural gas pipelines between Flatbush Avenue and a point in the vicinity of the southern most airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field, and Beach 169th Street south of Rockaway Point Boulevard on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queensa distance of approximately 8,300 feet. Phase II would result in the installation of a 30-inch steel natural gas pipeline beneath the following roadbeds: Hendrickson Street between Avenue U and Hendrickson Place, Hendrickson Place, and Flatbush Avenue between Hendrickson Place and the northern terminus of Phase Ia distance of approximately 12,000 feet. See Attachment A, Project Description and Purpose and Need, of the Environmental Assessment Statement (EAS) for more detail.
4.
Project Sponsor:
National Grid
Office of the Mayor approval of lease agreement between the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, popularly known as MTA Bridges and Tunnels (MTA B&T), and National Grid New York City Department of City Planning Coastal Zone Consistency; New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission; New York City Department of Transportation street opening permit for selective cuts in Flatbush Avenue; New York City Departments of Parks and Recreation and Transportation revocable consent to construct and maintain a pipeline under City-owned inalienable property; New York State Department of Concurrence; State Coastal Zone Management
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 401 Water Quality Certification and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan; New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation review and concurrence; MTA B&T lease agreement for property rights and long-term operation of the pipelines within property adjacent to the Marine ParkwayGil Hodges Memorial Bridge on the Rockaway Peninsula, under the Rockaway Inlet, and in Brooklyn irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to MTA B&T; Construction permit from MTA B&T for construction and installation of the pipelines on property irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to MTA B&T; and US Army Corp of Engineers Nationwide Permit 12
5. 6.
Required approvals:
Project Schedule (build year and construction schedule):
Phase I 2012-2013, Phase II 2013-2014

Page 1 of 4
B. PROJECT LOCATION:
Hendrickson Street from Avenue U to Hendrickson Place, Hendrickson Place, and Flatbush Avenue from Hendrickson Place in Brooklyn, adjacent to the Marine ParkwayGil Hodges Memorial Bridge, in Brooklyn, under the Rockaway Inlet, and to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens Brooklyn block 8590 Queens block 16340 Queens block 25005 700 9 9999 The proposed pipelines would be installed under Hendrickson Street, Hendrickson Place, and Flatbush Avenue and beneath uplands and underwater lands adjacent to Marine Parkway Bridge, and thence to Beach 169th Street. Zoning districts along or adjacent to the pipelines include C8-1, M3-1, C3, M1-1, and R4 N/A Commercial, institutional, Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge, residential, parking facilities, vacant land, and open space associated with Floyd Bennett Field, Brooklyn Marine Park, Fort Tilden, and Jacob Riis Park
1.
Street address:
2.
Tax block(s):
Tax Lot(s):
3. 4.
Identify existing land use and zoning on the project site: Identify proposed land use and zoning on the project site:
5. 6.
Identify land use of adjacent sites (include any open space):
Describe existing density on the project site and the proposed density: Existing Conditions Proposed Condition
N/A 7. Is project within 100 or 500 year floodplain (specify)?
N/A
100 Year
500 Year
No
Figure E-1 in EAS Attachment E, Natural Resources, shows the 100-year and 500-year floodplain boundaries for the study area. The terrestrial portions of the Phase I and Phase II pipeline routes are outside of the 100-year and 500-year floodplains, with the exception of the area immediately north of Marine Parkway Bridge along the Phase I portion of the pipeline. The 100-year and 500-year floodplain boundaries that overlap the pipeline route north of the bridge are within a segment of the pipeline that would be placed underground through directional drilling. The floodplain boundaries on the south side of the bridge would be north of where the directionally drilled pipeline segment would be connected to a trenched segment that heads west to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula.
Page 2 of 4
C. GROUND AND GROUNDWATER

1. 2. 3. Total area of in-ground disturbance, if any (in square feet): Will soil be removed (if so, what is the volume in cubic yards)? Subsurface soil classification: (per the New York City Soil and Water Conservation Board):
88,050 Soil will be backfilled, if suitable. Urban Land-Udorthents-Sudbury (Brooklyn section) and Urban LandUdipsamments-Udorthents (Queens section)
4. 5.
If project would change site grade, provide land contours (attach map showing existing in 1' contours and proposed in 1' contours). N/A Will groundwater be used (list volumes/rates)? Volumes:
Yes
No
Rates: Yes
6.
Will project involve dewatering (list volumes/rates)? Volumes:
No Rates:
7.
Describe site elevation above season high groundwater:

The project site is in a tidal area, and land ranges from 8 to 20 feet above high water in Jamaica Bay.
D. HABITAT
1. Will habitat be removed, particularly native vegetation?
Yes
No
If YES, Attach a detailed list (species, size and location on site) of vegetation to be removed (including trees >2" caliper, shrubs, understory planting and groundcover). List species to remain on site. Provide a detailed list (species and sizes) of proposed landscape restoration plan (including any wetland restoration plans). 2. 3. Is the site used or inhabited by any rare, threatened or endangered species?
Yes
No
Will the project affect habitat characteristics? Yes No If YES, describe existing wildlife use and habitat classification using Ecological Communities of New York State at http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/29392.html.
4.
Will pesticides, rodenticides or herbicides be used during construction? If YES, estimate quantity, area and duration of application.
Yes
No
5.
Will additional lighting be installed? Yes No If YES and near existing open space or natural areas, what measures would be taken to reduce light penetration into these areas?
Page 3 of 4
E. SURFACE COVERAGE AND CHARACTERISTICS

(describe the following for both the existing and proposed condition): Existing Condition 1. Surface area: Roof: N/A N/A Proposed Condition
Pavement/walkway:
73,050 square feet
,73,050 square feet
Grass/softscape
15,000 square feet
15,000 square feet
Other (describe):
9,900 linear feet of street bed
9,900 linear feet of horizontal directional drilling under land
2.
Wetland (regulated or non-regulated) area and classification: N/A N/A
3.
Water surface area: 3,815 linear feet of horizontal directional drilling under Rockaway Inlet.
4.
Stormwater management (describe): Existing how is the site drained?

The roadways are directly drained into the nearest water body.
Proposed describe, including any infrastructure improvements necessary off-site:

During construction, the following measures will be followed: In locations where construction adjoins existing ROWs and road crossings, erosion control measures would conform to the existing drainage pattern and runoff structures. Silt fences would be used to slow surface runoff and trap sediment. Where appropriate, water diversion devices would be used to control surface runoff on ROWs and adjacent work areas. Storm and/or sewer drain openings in the road or shoulder would be protected by completely covering the openings during trenching and backfilling activities or by installing a geo-textile fabric under the grate of the drain opening to prevent silt and sediment from entering the basin. Storm drain inlets would be protected. Inlet protection would be installed at all catch basins where the contributing drainage areas are not stabilized. Inlet protection would be installed at catch basins located downstream of soil stockpiles. Temporary sediment traps would be provided. Soil stockpiles would be protected and stabilized. Stabilized construction entrances would be provided and maintained, with stone provided to remove mud from construction vehicle tires, all construction traffic directed to use the stabilized entrances, and adequate drainage provided to prevent ponding. Landscape restoration as necessary.
Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A:
Project Description and Purpose and Need
A. INTRODUCTION
To reinforce its natural gas transmission and distribution systems and to provide for projected increases in energy demand, National Grid proposes to install new natural gas pipelines in the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. In Phase I, two pipelines (a 12-inch and a 26-inch line) would be installed beneath Flatbush Avenue from a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field, using horizontal directional drilling (HDD) along areas adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Bridge and under the Rockaway Inlet south to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens (see Figure A-1). These two pipelines would be connected to existing 8-inch distribution pipelines operating at the typical natural gas distribution pressure used in households on both the Brooklyn and Queens sides of the Rockaway Inlet and would deliver natural gas from Brooklyn to the Rockaway Peninsula as distribution pipelines. In Phase II, one 30-inch pipeline would be installed beneath Hendrickson Street from Avenue U south to Hendrickson Place, east under Hendrickson Place to Flatbush Avenue, and then south to the point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field at the terminus of Phase I as described above. If any of the work proposed by National Grid to install pipelines under inalienable New York City property is not authorized under an existing franchise agreement with the City of New York, National Grid would be required to petition the City of New York for a revocable consent for installation, operation, and maintenance that portion of the pipeline. Prior to the completion of the Phase II pipeline, and at the request of National Grid, The Williams Company Transco pipeline subsidiary (Williams Transco) would bring a new 26-inch pipeline branch from the existing offshore Lower New York Bay Extension pipeline to the Rockaway Peninsula (the Williams Transco Project). The Williams Transco Project is undergoing a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) environmental review pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) as part of obtaining a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. When the National Grid Phase II pipeline is installed, the Phase I 26-inch pipeline would be disconnected from the existing 8-inch distribution lines and connected to the Phase II 30-inch pipeline at a proposed meter and regulator (M&R) station (also known as a custody transfer station) within Floyd Bennett Field; the southern end of the Phase I 26-inch pipeline would be connected to the new Williams Transco 26-inch pipeline. The Phase I 26-inch pipeline would then operate at normal transmission pressure and serve as a new transmission line to bring natural gas north into New York City. The total length of the proposed project is approximately 20,300 feet. This Environmental Assessment Statement (EAS) has been prepared to provide a comprehensive description of the proposed project and to present an analysis of the pertinent environmental issues related to the projects potential environmental impacts. It has been prepared in accordance with New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), Environmental Conservation Law 8-0108 et seq., 6 NYCRR Part 617, and with Executive Order 91 of 1977, as amended, and the Rules of Procedure for City Environmental Quality Review found at Title 62, Chapter 5 of the Rules of the City of New York (CEQR), following the methodologies in the A-1
9.21.11
55TH ST
T TH 65
53R 53RD ST
ST 51ST ST
RD 63
N
Lindower Park
BAS SE
ST
H TH 58 ST
UE U
T ST
LL
E AV
NU
T 64
ST
ST
BARLO W DR
WHITM AN DR
66
TH
NAT
ION
AL D
BELT
E AV
TT A VE
PKWY
T ST AN ST T M ST ST LE A LL R H DE 38T CO MB I RY KI TH 36 3 ST S
BE VY T CT N F FA E C CT
STR IC
K LA
E AV
ND
E NU
AVE
E AV
MAYFAIR DR
ISLAND CHANNEL
T TI N NA NA O L DR
Long Pol Bar

Brooklyn Marine Park
MILL BASIN
Model Airplane Field Four Sparrow Marsh Preserve
BU A AT F FL
S IT R ER G EN K EE R C
G ER S TS RI N EN VE AV
SH E E A AV

Aviator Sports Complex
L IL M EE CR K
North Forty Natural Area
Historic Aircraft Restoration Project
Floyd Bennett Field
I IR A T CT
L RT BA
TT
PL
Community Garden Ryan Visitor Center Ecology Village Campground
Dept of Sanitation Training Center
R R D DA E
B AB
NO
E BE Y
EL E AV
CT
CT
Plumb Beach Point Breeze
M AD O C VE AV
DEEP CREEK
SHELL BANK CREEK
GERRITSEN INLET
DEAD HORSE BAY
GNRA Park Administration Headquarters

TIO NR
Dead Horse Bay Natural Area
VIA Bennett Field A USMC Park Armed Entrance Forces Reserve Center
Gateway Environmental Study Center
Recreation Area
Floyd Bennett Field
A MA N RIN EP
Source: 2004 USGS Aerial, NYCDOITT 2006 City Base Map
YB K KW
ROCKAWAY INLET
IDG RID E
Riis Landing
BAYSIDE
Jacob Riis Park

R BA RE TR D
D
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase I Phase II

R RE
H CH EA BE H ST T 169
Breezy Point
C RO PO AY K AW
INT
D BLV
MU
RR
R AY
E O HER R RD
Y B Transit Ferry Dock andAFerry Route S
E ID
H RS MA
AL
LR
Directional Drill Entry

ALLEY
MARKET ST
G AN
ER
Fort Tilden
VE ID A
IS DAV
RD
Directional Drill Exit
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
Project Location
Figure A-1
NATIONAL GRID BROOKLYN-QUEENS INTERCONNECT
2010 City Environmental Quality Review Technical Manual. These methodologies were used to assess the potential environmental impacts that would result from the proposed project.
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED PIPELINE ROUTE

The National Grid new underground natural gas pipelines are described in greater detail below. Figures A-1 to A-3 illustrate the proposed pipelines routes while Figure A-4 provides a key to photographs of the proposed route as shown in Figures A-5 through A-16. PHASE I The first phase of the project would be the installation of approximately 8,300 feet of two parallel (12- and 26-inch) steel natural gas pipelines beneath Flatbush Avenue from a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar in Floyd Bennett Field, Brooklyn and Beach 169th Street south of Beach Channel Drive on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens. The 12-inch pipeline is proposed to distribute natural gas to residential and commercial buildings as a distribution pipeline, and the 26-inch pipeline is intended to transmit natural gas over long distances at higher pressures as a transmission pipeline. However, the 26-inch pipeline would initially operate as a distribution pipeline at lower pressures until the Williams Transco project (described below) is completed. Phase I construction is scheduled to begin in September 2012 and the pipelines are to be operational in March 2013. Installing gas pipelines during the winter is unusual, but is necessary in this case to satisfy the expected natural gas demand on the Rockaway Peninsula. Construction equipment on the Rockaway Peninsula at the drill entry location (see Figure A-1) would include the drill rig, the control house, pumps, slurry mixers, and a slurry recovery unit. This equipment would be in operation through December 2012. On the Brooklyn side, the exit location area would be approximately 50 feet by 50 feet. The pipe segments would be laid out on the shoulder of Flatbush Avenue and welded together for a distance of about 6,200 feet. Slurry recovery and storage equipment would also be used. For the entry location on Rockaway Peninsula, the area of active construction would be within a fenced area of about 60 by 100 feet. All of the HDD construction activity would take place within this area. The 12-inch pipeline has been designed to operate at a typical transmission line maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP), but would be operated at the much lower household distribution pressure. The 26-inch pipeline has also been designed to operate at a typical transmission line MAOP. It would operate as a distribution pipeline until the Williams Transco project is operationalplanned for November 2014. If the Williams Transco project does not come to fruition, the 26-inch pipeline would continue to operate as a distribution line to feed the Rockaway Peninsula. In 2014, the 26-inch pipeline is planned for transmission operation, which would be at a much lower pressure than the design pressure for the Williams Transco Project. The majority of parallel pipelines would be installed under Rockaway Inlet using HDD. HDD is a trenchless method of installing underground pipes, conduits, and cables and is used when cut and cover installation or excavating is impractical (e.g., for road and waterway crossings). HDD minimizes or eliminates traffic disruptions and impacts to environmentally sensitive and urbanized areas. The remaining length of pipelines would be directly buried in the Flatbush Avenue right-of-way using conventional open cut and cover construction methods. The Phase I route would be parallel to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge within property in Brooklyn, beneath the Rockaway Inlet, and on the Rockaway Peninsula that was A-2
10.27.11
TIO AVIA
NR
A Y A W C K R O
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase I Phase II Directional Drill Entry Directional Drill Exit Approximate coordinates of Project Site: 43 34 54" N, 73 53 34" W
Area of Detail
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
USGS Topographic Map Coney Island Quadrangle

Figure A-2
10.27.11
TH 55TH ST
T TH 6 65
53RD ST
51S 51ST ST
63 RD
8 58 H TH ST
ST
N
Lindower Park
BAS SE
T ST
STR IC
LL
E AV
NU
V
I IO AT NA
T 64
NA
ST
TH ST
WHITM
AN DR
66
BELT
E AV
BARL OW D R
TT A VE
PKWY
E AV
LL B BA M KI
E NU
KLA
ND
E AV
NU
AVE
CO L LE AN M M S ST S ST T R S S D DE H H 8 R RY 38T H H 6T 36 ST
B BE VY N FA E CT
MAYFAIR DR
ISLAND CHANNEL
T ST
L L
DR
Long Pol Bar MILL BASIN
FL S S BU AT
IT R ER G N SE K EE R C
G R ER RI S TS N EN
CT
H E AV
M L IL EE CR K
Floyd Bennett Field
RA IR T CT
E AV
L RT BA
M
ET
PL
B AB
R DA E
VE AV
N NO
E BE
EL
Y T CT
CT
A AD O C E AV
DEEP CREEK GERRITSEN INLET
SHELL BANK CREEK
DEAD HORSE BAY
TIO AVIA
NR
IN AR MA EP
ROCKAWAY INLET
K KW Y YB G RID E E
Source of Aerial: 2006 Aerial Express
BAYSIDE
Breezy Point
INT BLV D
R BA
PO AY KAW
RE
TR
D
D
H CH EA ST BE TH S T 169
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase I Phase II ALLEY

YS BA
MU
R AY RR
Jacob Riis Park
E O HER
C RO
R RE
E ID
S AR
HA
LL
RD
MARKET ST
Directional Drill Entry Directional Drill Exit
NG RA
ER
Fort Tilden
R RD
VE ID A
IS DAV
RD
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
Aerial Photograph
Figure A-3
4.6.11
55TH ST
T TH 65
53R 53RD ST
ST 51ST ST
RD 63
N
Lindower Park
BAS SE
ST
H TH 58 ST
UE U
T ST
1
TH 36 3 ST S
E AV NU E V
2
T TI N NA
LL
T 64
ST
ST
BARLO W DR
WHITM AN DR
66
TH
NAT
ION
AL D
BELT
E AV
TT A VE
PKWY
T ST AN ST T M ST ST LE A LL R H DE 38T CO MB I RY KI
STR IC
K LA
E AV
ND
E NU
AVE
E AV
MAYFAIR DR
ISLAND CHANNEL
NA O L DR
Long Pol Bar

MILL BASIN
8 9
Four Sparrow Marsh Preserve
BU A AT F FL
Model Airplane Field
SH E E A AV
L IL M EE CR K
23
22 24 10 21
Floyd Bennett Field
I IR A T CT
L RT BA
TT
PL
R R D DA E
B AB
NO
E BE Y
EL E AV
CT
CT
M AD O C VE AV
DEEP CREEK
20 19
SHELL BANK CREEK
GERRITSEN INLET
DEAD HORSE BAY
18 11
T AVIA
ION
RD
Bennett Field USMC Armed Park Forces Entrance Reserve Center
12
Recreation Area
Floyd Bennett Field
A MA N RIN EP
YB K KW
ROCKAWAY INLET
13
IDG RID E
Riis Landing
BAYSIDE
RD 15 ET RR BA 16
17
Jacob Riis Park
14

YS BA
R RE
Breezy Point
C RO P AY K AW OIN
TB
LVD
MU
RR
AY
RD
E O HER R RD
E ID
H RS MA
AL
LR
Transit Ferry Dock MARKET ST Route and Ferry ALLEY

1
G AN
ER
Fort Tilden
VE ID A
IS DAV
RD
Photograph Location and Direction
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
Photograph Key
Figure A-4
2.8.11
Looking northwest on Hendrickson Street
Looking southeast on Hendrickson Street
Project Area Photos

Figure A-5
2.8.11
Looking northwest on Hendrickson Street at Avenue U
Looking east on Hendrickson Place at Flatbush Avenue
Project Area Photos

Figure A-6
2.8.11
Looking northwest on Hendrickson Place at Hendrickson Street
Looking east on Flatbush AvenueMill Basin
Project Area Photos

Figure A-7
2.8.11
Looking west on Flatbush AvenueParks Building
Looking northwest on Flatbush AvenueMarina
Project Area Photos

Figure A-8
2.8.11
Looking southeast on Flatbush Avenue
Looking southeast on Flatbush AvenueFloyd Bennett Field
10
Project Area Photos

Figure A-9
2.8.11
11
Looking south on Marine Parkway Bridge
12
Project Area Photos

Figure A-10
2.8.11
Looking east on Marine Parkway Bridge
13
Looking southwest on 169th StreetFirehouse
14
Project Area Photos

Figure A-11
2.8.11
Looking southeast on 169th Street
15
Looking east on Barret Road Entrance to Marine Parkway Bridge
16
Project Area Photos

Figure A-12
2.8.11
Looking southwest at park on 169th Street and Murray Road
17
Looking northwest on Flatbush AvenueHangar 6, Floyd Bennett Field
18
Project Area Photos

Figure A-13
2.8.11
Looking northwest on Flatbush AvenueFloyd Bennett Field
19
Looking northwest on Flatbush AvenueMarina
20
Project Area Photos

Figure A-14
2.8.11
Looking west on Flatbush AvenueRyan Visitor Center
21
Looking northeast on Flatbush AvenueEntrance of Belt Parkway East
22
Project Area Photos

Figure A-15
2.8.11
Looking northwest on Flatbush AvenueBelt Parkway entrance
23
24
Project Area Photos

Figure A-16
Attachment A: Project Description and Purpose and Need
irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, popularly known as the MTA Bridges and Tunnels (MTA B&T). The conveyance was pursuant to Chapter 162 of the Laws of 1934 and Public Authorities Law Sections 552 and 553 for so long as the corporate existence of MTA B&T by virtue of consolidations involving the Marine Parkway Authority shall continue. The pipelines would be installed within the U.S. Coast Guard-designated cable crossing area west of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge and at a safe distance apart. The pipelines would be installed well below the design dredge depth and the existing depth of the sea bed using HDD technology. HDD involves drilling a borehole approximately 1.5 times the diameter of the pipeline using an aboveground drill rig from a shallow entry pit to an exit pit. The entry and exit pits, commonly referred to as mud pits, are approximately 10 feet long by 10 feet wide by 4 feet deep in size and are used to recover drilling fluids and bore hole spoils. When the drill head reaches the exit area, it is connected to the pipeline, which has been welded together and supported on rollers in a straight line aboveground. The pipe string is pulled back to the entry pit by the drilling rods. The pullback operation involves more personnel and equipment than the drilling operations. The drill entry would be located on the Rockaway Peninsula, and the drill exit would be located behind the curbline of Flatbush Avenue in Brooklyn; the same entry and exit locations would be used to install both the 12-inch and 26-inch pipelines in Phase I. The drilling equipment would be located on the Rockaway Peninsula. The pipe and the welding equipment would be located on the Brooklyn side. The westernmost southbound lane of Flatbush Avenue would be closed during pullback operations. The temporary closure is estimated to take two separate 24- to 48hour periods for pullback of each pipeline. At all other times, two southbound lanes of Flatbush Avenue would remain open during the construction. The drill entry (see Figure A-1) would be located on the east side of Beach 169th Street south of Beach Channel Drive on property irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to the MTA B&T. The drill entry would be located in a grassy area bounded by Beach 169th Street and Beach Channel Drive and be approximately 690 feet south of the inlets shoreline at Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) elevation. The drill exit would be located north of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge toll plaza and across from Aviation Road. From the drill exit north to the termination of the pipelines, conventional cut and cover techniques would be used to install the pipelines. The pipelines would terminate on the north end of the Phase I project behind the east curb line of Flatbush Avenue at a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field and connect to the existing 8-inch pipeline located in the center median of Flatbush Avenue. In the future with Phase II, the two pipelines would connect to an inlet and outlet from the proposed M&R station to be built as part of the Williams Transco Project. On the Rockaway Peninsula, conventional cut and cover would be used between the drill entry and an existing 8-inch natural gas distribution pipeline on the west side of Beach 169th Street, a distance of about 250 feet. No street closings would be needed for this connection. Both the entry and exit locations and all associated construction disturbance are in previously disturbed areas and are outside the regulated area of any tidal wetlands. Prior to the pulling operation, the gas pipelines would be welded together in a continuous pipe string and staged aboveground on rollers supported by timbers along the sidewalk behind the west curbline of Flatbush Avenue. A 12-foot wide corridor along the western shoulder of Flatbush Avenue would be required for staging of the welded pipeline during construction. Installation of the pipelines would require the temporary closure of the 12-foot wide westernmost southbound shoulder on Flatbush Avenue. A-3
At its northern terminus, the 12-inch gas pipeline would connect to the existing 8-inch gas main at Flatbush Avenue and eventually to an outlet from the M&R station to be located in the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field. At its southern terminus, the 12-inch gas pipeline would connect to an existing 8-inch gas main at the intersection of Beach 169th Street and Beach Channel Drive. The connection of the 12-inch pipeline to the existing distribution pipelines would be in the street beds. This pipeline would provide a new natural gas supply to the western end of the Rockaway Peninsula that now has only one supply source on its eastern end. The 26-inch pipeline would initially be connected to existing pipelines on both the Brooklyn and Queens sides, and would also supply natural gas to the Rockaway Peninsula at distribution pressure. When the Williams Transco Project is built, the 26-inch pipeline would be disconnected from the 8-inch pipelines in Brooklyn and Queens, and connected to the interstate pipeline to supply natural gas to Brooklyn. If the Williams Transco project were not to be built, the 26-inch pipeline would remain in service as a distribution line moving natural gas from Brooklyn into the Rockaway Peninsula gas system. In this case the 26-inch line would serve as a redundant pipeline to the 12-inch pipeline. WILLIAMS TRANSCO PROJECT The National Grid Phase I 26-inch pipeline is planned for connection to a new branch of the existing Williams Transco interstate gas pipeline in 2014. National Grid requested Williams Transco build the new branch so that National Grid could meet the expected demand for natural gas in New York City and reinforce its existing system. The existing Williams Transco interstate gas pipeline originates in both Texas and Pennsylvania with smaller lines supplying gas from various states, and terminates in Long Beach, Long Island. The proposed Williams Transco Project would create a new branch from the existing offshore Lower New York Bay Extension pipeline at a point approximately 3 miles offshore that would connect to National Grids Phase I 26-inch pipeline in the Rockaway Peninsula. This project would also involve the installation of an M&R station for filtering, metering, regulation, and heating the natural gas inside the existing southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field. Construction activity for the M&R Station is expected to occur from August 2013 to October 2014, but would not be in Flatbush Avenue and would not conflict with the construction activity associated with installing the pipelines. The delineations between National Grid facilities and Williams Transco facilities are shown in Appendix V, Lateral Facilities Layout and M&R Facility Overview. The Williams Transco Project is scheduled to be operational in November 2014. Interstate pipeline projects, such as the Williams' Transco Project, require separate approval and their own environmental review by FERC. Under Section (7) of the Natural Gas Act, FERC has the authority to issue a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for interstate natural gas pipelines. For this new branch of the interstate pipeline, a full environmental review is being undertaken by the pipeline project sponsor following FERC environmental review procedures. FERC licensing also involves an environmental impact review prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which will be subject to public review and comment. Nothing in this EAS would bind a future natural gas supplier in the separate FERC regulatory process. The Williams Transco Project would launch an HDD toward the New York Bay Lateral pipeline using an entry pit in approximately the same location as National Grids Phase I HDD drill entry (although the drill would proceed in the opposite direction). While National Grid plans to construct Phase I from September 2012 to March 2013, the Williams Transco HDD operations on Rockaway Peninsula are expected to begin in September 2013 and
A-4
be completed in Spring of 2014 (approximately 6 months of activity). Therefore, the construction of both projects would not overlap or happen simultaneously on the Rockaway Peninsula. PHASE II The second phase of the National Grid project would be the installation of approximately 12,000 feet of a 30-inch steel natural gas pipeline from Avenue U to the 26-inch Phase I pipeline at a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field along Flatbush Avenue. Starting at the north, the Phase II pipeline would run beneath Hendrickson Street from the intersection of Avenue U to Hendrickson Place, turn 90 degrees eastward under Hendrickson Place to Flatbush Avenue, and then turn 90 degrees south to a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field (the northern terminus of Phase I). Installation of this part of the pipeline is scheduled to occur over a two-year period with a break in the construction. Construction is planned to begin in April 2013 and temporarily cease in November 2013. National Grid does not typically install natural gas pipelines during the winter because of delays and slow working conditions caused by cold weather and snow. Not installing pipelines during winter weather is typical of utility companies, although for Phase I, construction is scheduled for the winter in order to satisfy the expected demand on the Rockaway Peninsula. Construction would recommence in April 2014, and the pipeline would be operational in November 2014. The Phase II pipeline would be located entirely within Brooklyn. The 30-inch gas main would be designed to be able to allow for an increase in the natural gas supply as demand increases. With the exception of crossing under the Belt Parkway, the pipeline would be installed using conventional open cut and cover construction methods, at least 42 inches below grade. Pipeline installation would require temporary closure of a southbound lane on Flatbush Avenue from in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field to Hendrickson Place as well as partial, temporary lane closures on Hendrickson Street and Hendrickson Place. All roads would have travel lanes open and the roadway would not be closed to traffic. When construction is not active, any open cut excavation would be temporarily paved, allowing the lane affected by construction to also be used for travel. Occasionally, steel plates would be used to cover pits where the work cannot be completed in one day. For the segment of the pipeline route that would cross under the Belt Parkway, HDD would be used. If the HDD alignment remained alongside Flatbush Avenue, the space requirements for the entry and exit areas would block almost all of the travel lanes in Flatbush Avenue and the drill path would pass underneath the bridge foundation, potentially compromising the bridges integrity. A minimum clearance of 30 feet is generally maintained from a bridge foundation to a drill path. Therefore, for this segment, the pipeline would turn west onto Marine Park, which is owned by New York City Department of Parks and Recreation (NYCDPR).1 The exit and entry areas would be located in the vicinity of the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchange within Marine Park and would be about the same size as the Phase I areas, 60 by 100 feet for the entry area, and 50 feet by 50 feet for the exit area. The drill entry area would be on the north side of
1
Although this park area functions as a right-of-way, this area of the Belt Parkway is technically within Marine Park. A Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) application (080291MEK) has been filed in conjunction with an application to demap the majority of this of the parkland and to map it as a parkway.
A-5
the interchange, and the exit area on the south side. Approximately 2,000 feet of the pipeline would be placed along the east shoulder of Flatbush Avenue for the installation. The HDD operation within Marine Park is expected to take about 3 months. Using HDD, the pipeline would be about 40 to 50 feet below existing grade of the Belt Parkway. The 30-inch Phase II pipeline would tie into an existing 30-inch gas main at the intersection of Hendrickson Street and Avenue U at its northern terminus. To the south, it would connect to a 30-inch outlet located in the eastern shoulder of Flatbush Avenue. The outlet pipe would come from the Williams Transco M&R station, which would be located in the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field. The 26-inch pipeline installed during Phase I would be disconnected from the 8-inch distribution line and connected to the transmission connection at the Williams Transco M&R station. In addition, the 12-inch distribution main would be connected to a 12-inch outlet pipe from the M&R.
C. PURPOSE AND NEED

The proposed project would: (1) improve natural gas infrastructure in the New York metropolitan area, (2) reinforce the gas transmission and distribution systems in Brooklyn and Queens on the Rockaway Peninsula, (3) provide added reliability of service, (4) diversify the natural gas supply source for Brooklyn and Queens, (5) provide for projected future increases in energy demand (meeting both near- and longterm load growth in National Grids gas distribution system), (6) diversify overall energy supply sources in New York City, and (7) improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
New York City has an initiative to improve air quality. The Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP) has amended Chapter 2 of Title 15 of the Rules of the City of New York to prohibit the use of fuel oil grade Nos. 4 and 6 in heat and hot water boilers, unless it can be demonstrated that the emissions of particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) are equivalent or less than those from burning number 2 fuel oil. These regulations will effectively phase out the use of Nos. 4 and 6 oil over time, requiring new and existing combustion installations to use No. 2 oil or natural gas. Therefore, increased demand for natural gas is expected throughout New York City in the future. The demand for natural gas has grown significantly on the Rockaway Peninsula, as development has increased over the last decade. Natural gas is currently supplied via National Grids transmission system in Nassau County and transported via distribution mains that run east to west from Nassau County out onto the Rockaway Peninsula. The proposed project would provide additional supplies to the peninsula and serve as a secondary, or backup, supply in the event of an emergency. In the future, the pipelines could also provide additional gas supply to Brooklyn, improving system reliability and accommodating growth in energy demand. Greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas use are approximately 30 percent lower than the emissions from the use of fuel oil. By supplying natural gas to address the projected energy demand, the proposed project would reduce the demand for fuel oil, which has a larger carbon footprint than natural gas. It is estimated that the proposed project as it is planned to be operated
A-6
with the new natural gas supply from the Williams Transco Project could reduce daily greenhouse gas emissions by 11,357 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e) based on the displacement of fuel oil consumption and emission factors from The Climate Registry Local Government Operations Protocol. The new natural gas supply is estimated to have the long-term capacity of 530 million cubic feet of natural gas per day being transported through the 26-inch transmission pipeline. PHASE I The Rockaway Peninsulas main natural gas supply is a single 20-inch main from Hewlett to Inwood in Nassau County on Long Island. Gas flows west along the Rockaway Peninsula in a distribution system, and is projected to fall below the minimum acceptable distribution operating pressure on the west end of the Rockaway Peninsula in the near future. This loss of pressure would place up to 2,000 customers at risk of losing gas service in the vicinity of Breezy Point, the westernmost end of the Rockaway Peninsula. In addition, the loss of the one existing major supply main could put the Rockaway Peninsula customers at risk of losing natural gas service. The Phase I 12-inch pipeline would provide a new connection between the natural gas system in National Grids Brooklyn service territory and the Rockaway Peninsula, Queens service territory. This new connection would provide a second source of gas supply from Brooklyn to back feed the gas distribution system in the Rockaway Peninsula, in addition to Long Island. It would also ensure that minimum gas system pressures are maintained during peak load periods in Breezy Point, and would significantly enhance reliability of gas service to the entire Rockaway Peninsula. While the 12-inch pipeline has been sized to meet anticipated near-term load growth in the Rockaways, the 26-inch pipeline has been sized to meet anticipated long-term load growth in New York City. There have not been any new sources of natural gas into National Grids New York City territory in more than 40 years, and the system has become overly dependent on existing delivery points. Based on forecasted load growth rates, it is anticipated that system demand will begin to exceed peak day capacity by 2013. In the near term, the 26-inch pipeline would serve as an additional supply source to the Rockaways. In 2014, the 26-inch pipeline is planned for connection to the new interstate natural gas supply made available via the Williams Transco Project. As discussed above, the licensing of a new natural gas supply from Williams Transco to National Grids New York metropolitan service area is not part of this review because it is undergoing its own separate environmental review and approval process. As stated above, the new natural gas supply is not yet approved by FERC.1 Such approval would occur only after completion of the FERC licensing process, which involves extensive environmental impact analysis and permitting requirements. If the Williams Transco Project is not approved or for other reasons does not come to fruition, the 26-inch pipeline would continue to serve as a second natural gas distribution line to the Rockaway Peninsula.
This EAS is consistent with CEQR requirements providing for a full environmental review. The National Grid project is considered to be non-jurisdictional by FERC and environmental review of the National Grid project cannot be conducted by FERC. Therefore, the environmental review on the National Grid project is being conducted under CEQR. The Williams Transco Project is subject to a separate full environmental review by FERC, along with public comment and the potential for overlapping and cumulative impacts are assessed in this EAS. Pursuant to SEQRA, two separate environmental reviews are warranted under the circumstances and are allowed under SEQRA, CEQR, and NEPA.
A-7
Installation of the 26-inch pipeline is planned to be concurrent with installation of the 12-inch pipeline to minimize environmental impacts and construction disruptions. The two pipelines would be parallel and would begin and end at the same locations. All construction would take place at the same time. PHASE II As described above, the Phase II 30-inch main would tie into an existing 30-inch gas transmission main at the intersection of Hendrickson Street and Avenue U at its northern terminus. At the southern end, the 30-inch line would connect to the 30-inch outlet from the Williams Transco M&R Station in the street bed of Flatbush Avenue, in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field. In Phase II, the 26-inch pipeline that would be installed as part of Phase I under Rockaway Inlet would be disconnected from the 8-inch distribution lines at both its northern and southern termini and would no longer serve as a distribution line. The Williams Transco offshore pipeline would connect to the National Grid Phase I 26-inch pipeline on the Rockaway Peninsula. Williams Transco would build and own the offshore segment of the pipeline up to the point of connection to the 26-inch pipeline, but National Grid would be responsible for the maintenance and operation of the portion of the Williams Transco pipeline that is on property owned by MTA B&T. Figure A-17 shows the National Grid and Williams Transco components of the projects. At the northern end, the 26-inch Phase I pipeline would be connected to an inlet to the Williams Transco M&R station. The southern end of the Phase II 30-inch pipeline would be connected to an outlet from the Williams Transco M&R station. Natural gas would now flow from Williams Transco offshore New York Bay Lateral through the Phase I 26-inch pipeline under Rockaway Inlet and into the M&R Station, where it would be filtered, metered, heated, and reduced in pressure. Then the natural gas would flow out of the M&R and into the Phase II 30-inch pipeline which would transport it north and into National Grids Brooklyn transmission system located in Avenue U. Furthermore, an outlet from the M&R station would provide additional distribution pressure supplies through a connection with the 12-inch main installed as part of Phase I. However, if Phase II were not to occur, the 26-inch pipeline would continue to be a distribution pipeline.
D. PROJECT SCHEDULE
It is anticipated that installation of Phase I would commence in September 2012 and be completed by March 2013. The installation of Phase II would occur over 2 years with construction beginning in April 2013 and temporarily ceasing in November 2013. Construction would recommence in April 2014, and the pipeline would be operational in November 2014. National Grid typically suspends construction of gas pipelines in the winter because of delays caused by snow and cold weather. As discussed above, the construction schedules of the National Grid project and the Williams Transco project would not conflict. The construction activity on the Rockaway Peninsula would occur at different times, and the construction of the M&R station would not be in Flatbush Avenue.
E. REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS

Required federal, state, and local approvals are described below.
A-8
10.27.11
TH 55TH ST
T TH 6 65
53RD ST
51S 51ST ST
63 RD
8 58 H TH ST
ST
N
Lindower Park
BAS SE
T ST
STR IC
LL
E AV
NU
V
I IO AT NA
T 64
NA
ST
TH ST
WHITM
AN DR
66
BELT
E AV
BARL OW D R
TT A VE
PKWY
E AV
LL B BA M KI
E NU
KLA
ND
E AV
NU
AVE
CO L LE AN M M S ST S ST T R S S D DE H H 8 R RY 38T H H 6T 36 ST
B BE VY N FA E CT
MAYFAIR DR
ISLAND CHANNEL
T ST
L L
DR
FL S S BU AT
IT R ER G N SE K EE R C
G R ER RI S TS N EN
CT
H E AV
M L IL EE CR K
Floyd Bennett Field
RA IR T CT
E AV
L RT BA
M
ET
PL
B AB
R DA E
VE AV
N NO
E BE
M & R Station DEEP CREEK GERRITSEN INLET
EL
Y T CT
CT
A AD O C E AV
SHELL BANK CREEK
DEAD HORSE BAY
TIO AVIA
NR
IN AR MA EP
ROCKAWAY INLET
K KW Y YB G RID E E
Source of Aerial: 2006 Aerial Express
BAYSIDE
Breezy Point
R BA
PO AY KAW INT BLV D
RE
TR
D
D
H AC T B BE TH S 6 169
National Grid Phase I Phase II

ALLEY
YS BA
MU
R AY RR
Jacob Riis Park
E O HER
C RO
R RE
E ID
Williams Transco MARKET ST

0
S AR
HA
LL
RD
Directional Drill Entry Directional Drill Exit
N RA
GE
RD
Fort Tilden
DAV
D IS R Offshore
Pipeline from
R RD
SCALE
VE ID A
2000
4000 FEET
Project Components
Figure A-17
FEDERAL UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS The proposed pipelines would cross Rockaway Inlet, a part of the navigable waters of the United States, which fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). USACE Nationwide Permit 12 authorizes activities required for the construction, maintenance, repair, and removal of utility lines and associated facilities in waters of the United States, provided the activity does not result in the loss of greater than acre of waters of the United States. National Grid applied for a permit from USACE to directionally drill and install pipelines under Rockaway Inlet. Based on correspondence with USACE (see Appendix I), they concurred that the project can be constructed under Nationwide Permit 12 and an individual permit is not warranted. National Grid is in the process of renewing their General Nationwide Permit 12. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE A Special Use Permit would be needed from the National Park Service (NPS) for any incursions onto their property for construction purposes. None of the pipelines would be permanently on their property, but the southern Phase II HDD exit area may extend onto NPS property. STATE MTA BRIDGES AND TUNNELS The proposed pipelines would be located within a designated cable crossing area within property adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to MTA B&T. A lease agreement with MTA B&T must be obtained for the project to have the necessary property rights for the long term operation of the pipelines. The lease agreement is subject to approval by the MTA B&T Board. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE New York State Department of State (NYSDOS) has issued a general concurrence with coastal zone management policies for Phase I of the proposed project (see Appendix I). NYSDOS approval is necessary because of the USACE Nationwide Permit 12. The local coastal zone approvals are described below. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION In accordance with Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, projects that have the potential to impact the quality of United States waters and require a federal permit must also be certified by the agency with jurisdiction over state water quality. In New York, that agency is the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). NYSDEC has issued a 401 water quality certification as part of the Nationwide Permit with the USACE. Under the Phase II stormwater permitting program, site disturbance of more than 1 acre may require the development of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to NYSDEC. Because ground disturbance would be approximately 88,050 square feet, a SWPPP would be prepared and the NOI would be submitted prior to the start of any pipeline construction. A-9
NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF PARKS, RECREATION, AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION Floyd Bennett Field, a designated Historic District, is adjacent to the project site. In addition, sites sensitive for archaeological resources are located nearby. For these reasons, the analysis of potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources has been submitted to the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) for their review and concurrence. LOCAL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Pursuant to Section 553(14) of the New York State Public Authorities Law, the lease agreement between MTA B&T and National Grid is subject to approval by the Office of the Mayor as the successor to Board of Estimate for approving the lease. The Office of the Mayor will be the lead agency for the environmental review of the National Grid project pursuant to CEQR and will conduct a coordinated review of the Type I action with MTA B&T. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING A portion of the proposed pipeline route is located within New York Citys coastal zone boundary. Therefore, New York City Department of City Planning will review the project for consistency with the Citys Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) policies. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The upland portions of the project would be located within the right-of-way of Flatbush Avenue, Hendrickson Street, and Hendrickson Place. National Grid is required to obtain road opening permits from the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) to allow selective cuts in Flatbush Avenue. If any of the work proposed by National Grid to install pipelines under inalienable New York City property is not authorized under an existing franchise agreement with the City of New York, National Grid will need to petition the City of New York for a revocable consent for installation, operation, and maintenance of that portion of the pipeline. A portion of the Belt Parkway west of Flatbush Avenue is currently mapped as Marine Park, under the jurisdiction of NYCDPR and maintained by NYCDOT. A revocable consent would be required for long-term maintenance and operation of the portion of the pipeline passing through Marine Park and under the Belt Parkway. NYCDOT would lead the review of a petition for the revocable consent, to be issued either NYCDOT alone or jointly by NYCDPT and NYCDOT. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Although NYCDOT maintains the Belt Parkway, the land is owned by NYCDPR. A revocable consent will be required for the HDD and long-term maintenance and operation of the pipeline within Marine Park as well as a permit for tree removal in the temporary work area within Marine Park. NEW YORK LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION Floyd Bennett Field, a designated Historic District, is adjacent to the project site. The Marine Parkway Bridge (now the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge) has been determined eligible for listing on the State and National Register of Historic Places (S/NR) and is adjacent to A-10
the Phase I underwater portion of the pipeline and to upland portions of the pipelines on MTA B&T property on the Rockaway Peninsula and in Brooklyn. In addition, sites sensitive for archaeological resources are located nearby. For these reasons, the analysis of potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources has been submitted to the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) for review and concurrence. A Stage 1A Archaeological Survey has been submitted to LPC, and it recommended further study, with which LPC agreed. A Stage 1B Archaeological Survey of the project site was completed in January 2011. After a review of the Stage 1B report, LPC requested additional information regarding the depth of fill in the vicinity of the archaeological testing locations. Subsequent to their receipt of these additional materials, LPC issued a comment letter (see Appendices III and IV) concurring with the conclusions and recommendations of the Stage 1B report that, provided an Archaeological Monitoring Plan is developed, approved, and implemented, no significant adverse impacts would occur.
F. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

LAND USE AND ZONING LAND USE While the proposed pipeline route would be adjacent to a variety of land uses, the pipelines would be located entirely beneath the Flatbush Avenue right-of-way and MTA B&T property, including Rockaway Inlets underwater land, with the exception of a small portion of land within Marine Park near the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchange that would be used during construction for a period of about three months and long-term maintenance of the pipeline. A pipeline route beneath the existing Flatbush Avenue right-of-way and MTA B&T property eliminates the potential for impacts to surrounding land uses, as well as the need to alter or otherwise disturb existing land uses. There would be no impacts to land uses adjacent to the pipeline corridor except during the brief period of construction. Once completed, the project would have no significant adverse impacts on land uses within the study area. ZONING Approvals under local zoning would not be required in New York City. Since the proposed pipeline route would be located beneath the Flatbush Avenue right-of-way and MTA B&T property including Rockaway Inlets underwater land, similar to other underground utilities, the proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact on local zoning. HISTORIC RESOURCES ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES Within the 90-foot study area, architectural resources analyzed include properties listed on the State or National Register of Historic Places (S/NR) or properties determined eligible for such listing, New York City Landmarks and Historic Districts, properties determined eligible for landmark status, and National Historic Landmarks. The S/NR-listed Floyd Bennett Field is located within the study area. In addition, the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge has been found to be eligible for listing on the S/NR. However, since the proposed pipelines would A-11
be located beneath roadway rights-of-way and Rockaway Inlets underwater land, the project would not physically impact any portion of the S/NR-listed or eligible properties, nor would construction of the underground utility lines introduce any permanent visible features into the setting. Therefore, the project would have no significant adverse impacts on architectural or historic resources. The Williams Transco Project would place the proposed M&R station within one of the historic hangars on Floyd Bennett Field. That action is being reviewed by FERC under NEPA with Department of Interior Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act consultations and approvals for changes to the hangar. Within the street bed of Flatbush Avenue, the National Grid project would connect to an inlet and an outlet from the M&R station. The National Grid project would not affect nor intrude upon the historic hangar. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES A Stage 1A archaeological documentary study was completed for this project by the Institute for Long Island Archaeology in March 2008 (revised February 2009). An area of historic period archaeological sensitivity has been identified within the project site in the vicinity of the former Barren Island, which has since become incorporated into Floyd Bennett Field. Any prehistoric deposits that may be present on the site are most likely deeply buried. Further, the proposed pipeline would be located beneath roadway rights-of-way in a previously disturbed area as well as beneath Rockaway Inlets underwater land. Therefore, there is a low potential that the proposed project would impact levels with precontact period sensitivity. Remote sensing data for the Rockaway Inlet collected in 2007 by Ocean Surveys, Inc., was analyzed by a qualified archaeologist to determine the potential for the project to affect any historic shipwrecks that may be present in the study area vicinity. No evidence of historic shipwrecks was found and further, the proposed pipelines would be installed well below the bottom of the Rockaway Inlet channel. Those depths are deeper than the anticipated depth of cultural resources such as shipwrecks, which are found on the sea bed, thus eliminating the potential for impacts. A Stage 1B archaeological survey was completed for relatively undisturbed portions of the project site along Flatbush Avenue to determine the presence or absence of archaeological resources. The original design of the pipeline had the HDD exit area at a location further south than currently planned and therefore some portions of the pipeline, which were to be constructed in Flatbush Avenue using conventional cut and cover methods would now be installed using HDD. However, the survey did also include the portion of Flatbush Avenue where the pipelines would now be installed by conventional cut and cover techniques. The Stage 1B survey did not find any archaeological resources; therefore, the proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact on archaeological resources. NATURAL RESOURCES The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts to aquatic or terrestrial natural resources in the Jamaica Bay area. The terrestrial portion of the proposed project would include cut and cover within a roadway, staging areas, construction-related disturbance for directional drilling on managed habitats (access roads for Belt Parkway and Marine Parkway Bridge), and minimal impact for directional drilling within a small natural area northwest of the Marine Parkway Bridge toll plaza in Brooklyn.
A-12
It is unlikely that significant adverse impacts on aquatic habitat or biota would result from the proposed project under normal construction and operation, as the proposed pipelines would be directionally drilled beneath aquatic habitats. No wetlands would be disturbed as a result of construction or normal operation of the proposed project. During Phase II, installation of the 30-inch pipeline would be on the west side of Flatbush Avenue; Four Sparrow Marsh is located on the east side. Implementation of the SWPPP would prevent sediment from entering Four Sparrow Marsh and the surrounding waterways. The Tree Protection and Replacement Plan would prevent damage to the trees. Therefore, the project would not affect Four Sparrow Marsh, a NYCDPR Forever Wild Nature Preserve located east of Flatbush Avenue and north of the Belt Parkway. The HDD areas within Marine Park would be disrupted for a period of about 3 months, which would not cause longterm damage to the parkland. For terrestrial impacts, the majority of the route would be placed via cut and cover techniques along existing roadways. In these areas, appropriate measures would be observed to (1) prevent runoff of excavated material into terrestrial natural areas, wetlands, and waterways; (2) limit removal or damage of vegetation, including planted street trees by use of root protection measures; (3) ensure restoration/replacement of any trees removed or damaged on New York City property as a result of the proposed pipeline installation in accordance with Local Law 3 of 2010; (4) replace the nine trees that are expected to be removed from the HDD area in Marine Park in accordance with Local Law 3 of 2010; (5) prevent the passage of wildlife into the construction area by means of silt fencing; (6) ensure restoration of any open space or parkland disturbed as a result of the proposed project; and (7) ensure restoration/replacement of any trees removed or damaged on MTA B&T property in accordance with the MTA B&T construction permit. Several rare, special concern, threatened, and endangered species were noted to occur at or in the vicinity of the project site. However, for state and federally listed wildlife, no critical habitat areas for these species would be disturbed, and foraging activities could occur unimpeded. While no state- or federally listed plant species were observed within the proposed pipeline route, there are at least two areas that may contain suitable habitat for listed plant species. However, none of the listed plant species were identified during the field surveys. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS To identify potential sources of hazardous materials, a limited Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted. Because of the length of the pipeline route, the distance from the route was limited to keep the number of reports manageable. The limited Phase I ESA did not identify the potential for widespread contamination of the soil or groundwater in the study area. Nevertheless, localized pockets of contamination were identified by the ESA, and there is a potential for undocumented/unforeseen contamination to exist in other areas within the study area. Cut and cover excavation activities and directional drilling conducted as part of the proposed project could disturb these contaminants and increase pathways for human exposure. This potential for contamination exists in almost any urban area and is particularly common in New York City. National Grid and other utility service providers (e.g., Consolidated Edison, Empire City Subway, NYCDOT, and NYCDEP) regularly use cut and cover installation in the streets of New York City and have developed standard methods for dealing with potentially contaminated soils. National Grid will prepare a soil sampling and testing plan to further assess
A-13
the potential for encountering hazardous materials during construction. The sampling and testing plan will be submitted to NYCDEP and MTA B&T for review and approval. The potential for adverse impacts due to the presence of subsurface contamination would be avoided by ensuring that construction activities are performed in accordance with the Construction Health and Safety Plan (CHASP) that would be prepared for the proposed project, based on the results of the soil sampling and testing plan. This CHASP will outline measures for managing contaminated on-site soil and groundwater in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations. Contaminated soil management includes guidelines for temporary on-site stockpiling and off-site transportation and disposal. With the implementation of these measures, no significant adverse impacts related to hazardous materials would result from construction activities. Additionally, based on the implementation of protective measures described in Attachment I, Public Health and Safety, the risk of release of hazardous materials due to pipeline rupture after construction would be minimal. Accordingly, the proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts from hazardous materials. COASTAL ZONE CONSISTENCY The proposed project would be consistent with New York Citys coastal zone policies. A New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form (CAF) and NYSDOS Coastal Management Program CAF have also been completed for the proposed project. CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC Traffic generated by the project would include trucks delivering materials or removing debris, and workers vehicles. However, there would not be an extensive or prolonged delivery of equipment/materials to the proposed pipeline route. The increase in worker and truck traffic would be below the CEQR impact thresholds and would not cause a significant impact to traffic conditions in the area. Private vehicles may encounter roadway delays associated with certain construction operations, such as backing trucks into the active construction site. Delays would occur for a short period of time and are not considered significant. As part of the permitting process with NYCDOT for work within the roadway rights-of-way and for the Belt Parkway crossing, National Grid would prepare detailed Maintenance and Protection of Traffic plans for affected roadways in accordance with the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Variable message signs would warn drivers of upcoming lane closures, and flaggers would be used to manage traffic. During the majority of the construction period, two travel lanes in both directions would be maintained, but during certain periods, only one south bound lane would be available for traffic, because of width constraints in Flatbush Avenue. During those periods when only one south bound is open, construction would be done at night, when traffic is lightest. During Phase I, two south bound lanes would remain open during the HDD, but during the cut and cover construction, one south bound lane would be available. During Phase II, one south bound lane would be available south of the Belt Parkway to a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field. Entrances to businesses, open spaces, parks, and recreational facilities would be maintained at all times. Access to the Greenway along the west side of Flatbush Avenue, north of the Belt Parkway would also be maintained.
A-14
AIR QUALITY Minor air emissions would be generated during installation of the pipelines. Fugitive dust control measures, including watering of exposed areas and dust covers for trucks, would be employed to minimize fugitive dust emissions. Thus, no significant fugitive dust-related air quality impacts are anticipated during construction of the project. Mobile source emissions may result from construction equipment, construction worker vehicles, delivery vehicles, and private vehicles. Diesel engines on construction equipment would use ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel. Overall, the project would not cause any appreciable decrease in ambient air quality, and mobile source emissions during construction are not expected to be significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact on air quality. NOISE Impacts from noise during construction would include noise from construction equipment operation and noise from worker vehicles traveling to and from the work site. In general, construction of the project would result in some increased noise levels for a limited period of time. Federal guidance, the New York City Noise Code, and NYCDEP standards to reduce noise levels from construction would be followed during construction. Further, noise impacts would be short term in duration and would not be considered a significant adverse impact. NATURAL RESOURCES All project-related disturbances would occur within the MTA B&T property adjoining the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge and on the Rockaway Peninsula and within the Flatbush Avenue right-of-way as well as within a small portion of Marine Park at the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchange. All 97 trees found within 20 feet of proposed cut and cover and staging locations, and thus vulnerable to root damage or requiring removal, have been inventoried and measured. In addition to the 97 trees that were identified within 20 feet of the construction, it was determined that 9 trees (four eastern red cedars, three black cherries, one sweet gum, and one white ash, all 9 inches DBH or less) would be removed during the HDD under the Belt Parkway. A Tree Protection and Replacement Plan would be prepared and submitted by National Grid to NYCDPR for approval. The plan would be designed and implemented in accordance with Local Law 3 of 2010 to prevent damage to nearby trees and to replace trees that would be lost to the project. Replacement of the 9 trees that would be lost during construction would be on a basal diameter basis, and not on a one-to-one basis. The protection part of the plan would prevent or minimize damage to the 97 trees that are within 20 feet of the construction. If a tree is accidently damaged during construction, it would either be replaced, if too badly damaged to survive, or repaired and its health monitored. Other measures would be taken to (1) prevent runoff of excavated material into terrestrial natural areas, wetlands, and waterways; (2) prevent the passage of wildlife into the construction area by means of silt fencing; and (3) ensure restoration of any open space or parkland disturbed as a result of the proposed project. No wetlands would be disturbed as a result of construction or normal operation of the proposed project. Four Sparrow Marsh would not be affected by the proposed project as the installation of the 30-inch pipeline in Phase II would occur on the west side of Flatbush Avenue while Four Sparrow Marsh is located on the east side, a distance of about 600 feet between the construction and Four Sparrow Marsh. Implementation of a SWPPP (discussed below) would prevent sediment from entering Four Sparrow Marsh and the surrounding waterways.
A-15
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Erosion and sedimentation control measures and devices would be applied as needed during construction. Further, a SWPPP would be prepared before construction commences. Attachment H describes measures that would be implemented to minimize erosion and sediment runoff. With these measures in place, no significant adverse impacts are expected from construction of the proposed project, and there would be no significant adverse impacts to water quality during construction. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY The proposed project incorporates a number of measures, including quality assurance and safety precautions, to minimize any potential risk to the general public, in particular, users of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge, resulting from the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the gas mains. Attachment I describes public health and safety procedures that would be implemented as part of the proposed project and therefore, the proposed pipelines do not present an undue hazard to persons or property along the proposed route and no significant adverse impacts are expected.
A-16
Attachment B:
EAS Screening Analyses
A. INTRODUCTION
This analysis has been prepared to assess the impacts of the proposed project in accordance with the guidelines of the 2010 New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Technical Manual. As described below, in several technical areas, project does not meet the CEQR threshold criteria for a detailed analysis. However, there are several technical areas where expanded analyses have been prepared. They are provided as Attachment C, Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy, Attachment D, Historic Resources, Attachment E, Natural Resources, Attachment F, Hazardous Materials, Attachment G, Coastal Zone Consistency, Attachment H, Construction Impacts, and Attachment I, Public Health and Safety.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING ANALYSES

LAND USE AND ZONING An assessment of the proposed projects potential effects on land use and zoning is provided in Attachment C. As described in greater detail in Attachment C, it is concluded that the proposed project, to be located beneath roadway rights-of-way and adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge on the Rockaway Peninsula, beneath the Rockaway Inlet and in Brooklyn, pursuant to a lease between National Grid and MTA B&T in accordance with Public Authorities Law Section 553(14), would be compatible with existing and officially approved land uses in the specified 400-foot study area, and would not result in any significant adverse impacts to land use or zoning. SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS According to the CEQR Technical Manual, a socioeconomic assessment should be conducted if an action may be reasonably expected to create substantial socioeconomic changes in an area. This can occur if an action would directly displace a residential population, substantial numbers of businesses or employees, or a business or institution that is important to the community. It can also occur if an action would bring substantial new development that is markedly different from existing uses and activities in the neighborhood and therefore would have the potential to lead to indirect displacement of businesses or residents from the area. The proposed project would not conflict with existing uses in the study area, nor would it generate new employees, result in new residential or commercial uses, or displace any residential populations, businesses, institutions, or employees. The proposed project would not result in changes to population, housing stock, or economic activities in the study area. The project would improve both the availability of gas and the gas systems reliability. It is not expected to affect the rates for the 1.5 million customers that use natural gas in this National Grid service area. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts on socioeconomic conditions. Further, by increasing the availability of natural gas, the proposed B-1
project would increase energy supply and reliability and would therefore result in a positive impact on socioeconomic conditions for the region. COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES The CEQR Technical Manual specifies that actions that would add fewer than 100 residential units to an area generally do not need to consider community facilities and services unless the proposed action would have a direct effect on a community facility. The proposed project would not result in an increase in residential units, and therefore would not affect service delivery of community facilities, nor would it physically alter or displace any community facilities, such as public schools, libraries, hospitals, emergency facilities, police headquarters, or daycare centers. Attachment C, Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy, identifies community facilities located within 400 feet of the proposed pipelines. During construction, traffic flow to and from nearby community facilities would be disturbed as little as possible by adhering to traffic control measures specified by New York State Department of Transportation and New York City Department of Transportation. Once completed, the proposed project would have a positive impact on community facilities by increasing the existing regional energy supply and reliability. In accordance with the CEQR Technical Manual, the proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts on community facilities and services. OPEN SPACE The proposed project would not displace any public or private open space with the exception of a very small portion of land within Marine Park that would be temporarily displaced to serve as a construction staging area. The area that would be temporarily displaced (for about three months) within Marine Park is near the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchangea location that is not typically used for recreation. The entry pit as part of construction staging would require about 0.14 acres on the north side of the interchange, and the exit pit would require about the same acreage on the south side of the interchange). There would no displacement of permanent park uses; no restriction would be placed on the types of uses found or expected in parkland of this nature and location. The proposed project would not increase the residential population of the area by more than 200 residents, nor would it generate more than 500 new employees, which are CEQR Technical Manual thresholds requiring a quantified open space assessment. Therefore, a detailed open space assessment is not warranted, and no significant adverse open space impacts would occur as a result of the proposed action. Further, the temporary displacement of land within Marine Park that is not actively used would also not pose a significant adverse impact to open space resources. SHADOWS As stated in the CEQR Technical Manual, an adverse shadows impact is considered to occur when the shadow from a proposed project falls on a publicly accessible open space, historic landscape or other historic resource if the features that make the resource significant depend on sunlight, or important natural features, and adversely affects its use and/or important landscaping and vegetation. The proposed pipelines would be buried underground. Therefore, the proposed project would not create shadow impacts.
B-2
Attachment B: Environmental Screening Analyses
HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES An assessment of the proposed projects potential effects on cultural resources is provided in Attachment D, Historic Resources. As described in greater detail in Attachment D, there would be no significant adverse impacts to architectural resources. A Stage 1B Archaeological Survey was completed for relatively undisturbed portions of the project site along Flatbush Avenue to determine the presence or absence of archaeological resources. The Stage 1B survey did not find any archaeological resources and therefore the proposed project would not impact archaeological resources. URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL RESOURCES The guidelines of the CEQR Technical Manual state that an assessment of potential impacts to urban design is generally considered appropriate if an action would result in structures that are substantially different in height, bulk, form, setbacks, size, scale, use, or arrangement from those that already exist or if the action would change the form, arrangement, or use of blocks and streets to interrupt the general pattern of an area or jeopardize the consistency of street walls, curb cuts, pedestrian flow, or other streetscape elements. A visual resource assessment is generally appropriate when above-ground construction would limit or alter existing view corridors. The proposed project would not result in any new structures; change the prevailing bulk, form, and arrangement of buildings; change the form, arrangement, or use of blocks and streets; or jeopardize the consistency of street walls, curb cuts, pedestrian flow, or other streetscape elements. There are no scenic areas of statewide significance, Adirondack Park scenic vistas, scenic districts designated by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, state and national wild and scenic river areas, areas of exceptional scenic beauty acquired through Bond Act funds, or local visual resources in the vicinity of the proposed project. The proposed project would not affect designated visual resources, including scenic areas, vistas, and overlooks, nor would it limit or alter existing view corridors within the project vicinity. The proposed pipelines would be installed underground and would not be visible. For this reason, the proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts to urban design or visual resources. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER Neighborhood character is comprised of the various elements that define a community's distinct personality. According to the CEQR Technical Manual, these elements typically include land use, urban design, visual resources, historic resources, socioeconomics, traffic, and noise. As described in Attachment C, Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy, Attachment D, Historic Resources, Attachment E, Natural Resources, and above under Socioeconomic Conditions, and Urban Design and Visual Resources, the proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts to any neighborhood features, and thus, the proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts to neighborhood character. NATURAL RESOURCES Attachment E, Natural Resources, assesses potential impacts to natural resources as a result of the proposed project. With the inclusion of proposed protection measures described in Attachment E, the proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts on natural resources. B-3
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS The potential for significant impacts related to hazardous materials can occur when elevated levels of hazardous materials exist on a site; an action would increase pathways to their exposure; or an action would introduce new activities or processes using hazardous materials and the risk of human or environmental exposure is increased. As described in Attachment F, Hazardous Materials, no significant adverse impacts from hazardous materials are expected to occur with the proposed project. COASTAL ZONE CONSISTENCY The proposed project is located within New York Citys coastal zone boundary. Attachment G, Coastal Zone Consistency, provides an analysis of the proposed projects consistency with New York Citys Coastal Management Program. As described in that attachment, the proposed project would be consistent with New York Citys coastal policies. INFRASTRUCTURE WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS The proposed project would not introduce new residents or employees and therefore would not generate a new water demand. Thus, the proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts to municipal water supply systems. STORM AND SANITARY DRAINAGE SYSTEMS The proposed project would not introduce new residents or employees and would not generate additional sewage treatment demands. The proposed project also would not increase impervious coverage. Thus, the proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts to municipal wastewater treatment or storm systems. SOLID WASTE AND SANITATION SERVICES The proposed project would not introduce new residents or employees who would generate solid waste. Thus, with no increase in solid waste generation expected, the proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts to solid waste and sanitation services. ENERGY The proposed project would not create an additional demand for energy. While some energy demand would be required during the construction phase, this increase in energy use would be temporary and would not result in significant impacts to the consumption or supply of energy. The proposed project would have a positive impact on the local and regional energy systems by improving the existing energy supply and reliability. Specifically, the proposed project would provide additional supplies to the Rockaway Peninsula as part of Phase I, as well as provide for a secondary or backup supply in the event of an emergency. In the future, as part of Phase II, the pipelines would provide a new gas supply to Brooklyn, improving system reliability and accommodating growth in energy demand.
B-4
Attachment B: Environmental Screening Analyses
TRAFFIC AND PARKING An assessment of temporary traffic impacts during construction is provided in Attachment H, Construction Impacts. As described in Attachment H, with proposed traffic control measures in place, no significant adverse traffic impacts would occur with the proposed project. After construction, the proposed project would not create any new vehicular trips. The proposed project also would not result in any changes to parking facilities and, therefore, would not have a significant adverse impact on parking resources. TRANSIT AND PEDESTRIANS The proposed project would not result in any new pedestrians or rail or bus riders, nor would it affect rail or bus operations and, thus, would not have any significant adverse impacts on transit and pedestrians. AIR QUALITY The proposed project would not involve the addition of any new stationary emission sources, nor would the proposed project generate new vehicular trips or new mobile-source emissions. The proposed pipelines would not generate any odors or air or water pollutants. Attachment H, Construction Impacts, provides an analysis of the proposed projects effects on air quality conditions during construction. As described in that attachment, no significant adverse air quality impacts are expected to result from the proposed project. Moreover, greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas use are lower than the emissions from the use of fuel oil. By supplying natural gas to address the projected energy demand, the proposed project would reduce the demand for fuel oil, which has a larger carbon footprint than natural gas. NOISE The proposed project would not increase traffic, and therefore, would not increase noise levels due to traffic, and no new stationary sources of noise are proposed. The proposed pipelines would be underground and would not be audible. Attachment H, Construction Impacts, includes an analysis of the proposed projects noise effects during construction. As described in that attachment, no significant adverse noise impacts are expected to result from the proposed project. CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS Attachment H, Construction Impacts, describes proposed construction techniques and the anticipated construction schedule, and addresses construction-period traffic impacts, traffic management during construction, mobile source emissions from construction equipment and worker and delivery vehicles, potential emissions from construction activities, and noise conditions expected during construction. While the proposed project would generate some solid waste during construction, the amount of solid waste is minimal and would be handled by private contractors, who would dispose of the solid waste at licensed landfills. Thus with no increase in solid waste to be handled by New York City Department of Sanitation, there is no potential for significant adverse impacts on solid waste and sanitation services. As described in Attachment H, the proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts to traffic, air quality, or noise, nor would it result in significant adverse impacts to local water quality, public health, or worker health and safety.
B-5
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY An assessment of the proposed projects potential effects on public safety is provided in Attachment I. Public health can be compromised by poor air quality resulting from traffic or stationary sources, hazardous materials in soil or groundwater used for drinking water, significant adverse impacts related to noise or odors, solid waste management practices that attract vermin and pest populations, and actions that exceed local, State, or federal standards. The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts to traffic, air quality, or noise, nor would any applicable local, State, or federal environmental standards be exceeded. The proposed project would not involve solid waste management practices that would attract vermin or pest populations. Attachment I provides a discussion of the potential safety risks associated with the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed new gas transmission pipeline and concludes that the proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts to public health and safety.
B-6
Attachment C:
Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy
A. INTRODUCTION
This attachment describes the proposed projects relationship to existing land uses and local zoning and development standards within 400 feet of the proposed route for the pipelines. The attachment also examines the proposed projects consistency with public policy in the study area. As indicated in Attachment A, Project Description and Purpose and Need, National Grid is proposing to install new underground steel natural gas pipelines beginning at the intersection of Avenue U and Hendrickson Street, south along Hendrickson Street and east along Hendrickson Place to Flatbush Avenue in (Marine Park) Brooklyn, along areas adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge in Brooklyn, beneath the Rockaway Inlet, and on the Rockaway Peninsula to Beach 169th Street in (Rockaway Peninsula) Queens. The total length of the proposed pipelines is approximately 20,300 feet, and the project would be constructed in two phases. The analysis identifies current conditions in the study area, and then assesses any potential adverse impacts to land use, zoning, and public policy that would occur as a result of the proposed project. Potential impacts that may be experienced during construction are also discussed, and appropriate measures to be undertaken to reduce their effects are identified. As described below, the analysis concludes that the proposed project would be compatible with existing land uses in the study area, and would not result in any significant adverse impacts to land use, zoning, or public policy.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS
LAND USE EXISTING LAND USE Figure C-1 illustrates the land uses adjacent to and within 400 feet of the proposed gas pipelines. The pipelines would be located in the Marine Park section of Brooklyn and the Rockaway Peninsula section of Queens. In addition, the proposed pipelines would be installed under the Rockaway Inlet, west of the Marine ParkwayGil Hodges Memorial Bridge, see Figures C-2a through C-2c and C-3a through C-3c. Land uses in the vicinity of the proposed route include residential dwellings, commercial establishments, public facilities/institutional uses, parkland, parking facilities, and transportation-related uses (highway corridors, bridges, sidewalks). The proposed pipeline would be located beneath Hendrickson Street, Hendrickson Place, and Flatbush Avenue and would directly affect the roadway and sidewalks.
C-1
11.23.11
55TH ST
T TH 65
53R 53RD ST
T
STR IC
K LA
E AV
E AV
ND
NU
NU
AVE
ST 51ST ST
RD 63
N
Lindower Park
BAS SE
ST
H TH 58 ST
T ST
LL
E AV
NU
T 64
ST
BARLO W DR
WHITM AN DR
H 6T
ST
NAT
ION
AL D
BELT
E AV
TT A VE
PKWY
ST A AN ST M L L LE AL S ST CO IMB R M K ST DE RY 8TH 3 TH 36 3 ST S
MAYFAIR DR
ISLAND CHANNEL
T TI N NA NA O L DR

VE AV
U TB LA FL
SH
L IL M EE CR K
Floyd Bennett Field
I IR A T CT
L RT BA
ET
PL
R R D DA E
B AB
NO
E BE Y
EL E AV
CT
CT
M AD O C VE AV
DEEP CREEK
SHELL BANK CREEK
GERRITSEN INLET
DEAD HORSE BAY
T AVIA
ION
RD
Source of Base Map: 2007 NYCDCP Map Pluto Land Use Classi cations
Floyd Bennett Field

A MA
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase I Phase II Study Area Boundary (400-Foot Perimeter) Land Use Legend Residential Residential with Commercial Below Commercial and O ce Buildings Industrial and Manufacturing Transportation and Utility Public Facilities and Institutions E ID YS Open Space and Outdoor Recreation BA Parking Facilities MARKET ST ALLEY Vacant Land Transit Ferry Dock and Ferry Route
N RIN EP YB K KW
ROCKAWAY INLET
IDG RID E
Riis Landing
BAYSIDE
RE TR D
D
Jacob Riis Park

R BA
Breezy Point
C RO PO AY K AW INT
D BLV
MU
RR
R AY
H A AC BE H ST TH 169
E O HER R RD
H RS MA
AL
LR
N RA
GE
RD
Fort Tilden
R RE VE ID A
IS DAV
RD
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
Existing Land Use

Figure C-1
4.6.11
STRICKLAND AVE
AVENUE T
MILL AVE
64TH ST
66TH ST
AVIA TIO
53
RD
ST
NATIONAL DR
MILL BASIN
HENDERICKSON ST COLEMAN ST
AVENUE V
Ryan Visitor Center
Bennett Field Park Entrance
Recreation Area
ROCKAWAY INLET
Floyd Bennett Field
USMC Armed Forces Reserve Center
NR
Jacob Riis Park
FLATBUSH AVE
MAR
INE
PKW Y BR
IDGE
DEEP CREEK
KIMBALL ST RYDER ST
38TH ST
AVENUE U
SEE DETAIL BELOW

MILL CREEK
DEAD HORSE BAY

BEA 169T CH H ST
Park
GERRITSEN INLET
Key to Sanborn Map
2000
MURR AY RD
36TH ST
Brooklyn Marine
BAR RET RD
37TH ST
4000 FEET
SCALE
MILL BASIN
e Sanborn Building & Property Atlas, Twenty-Eighth Edition, 2007
BROOKLYN MARINE PARK
Source:
200
500 FEET
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase II Study Area Boundary (400-Foot Perimeter)
SCALE
Sanborn Map
Figure C-2a
For continuation
see Figure C-2b
4.6.11
STRICKLAND AVE
AVENUE T
MILL AVE
64TH ST
66TH ST
AVIA TIO
53
NATIONAL DR
RD
ST
MILL BASIN
FLATBUSH AVE
Ryan Visitor Center
Recreation Area
ROCKAWAY INLET
Floyd Bennett Field
NR
Jacob Riis Park
HENDERICKSON ST
AVENUE U
AVENUE V
MAR
INE
COLEMAN ST KIMBALL ST RYDER ST

38TH ST
SEE DETAIL BELOW

MILL CREEK
PKW Y BR
DEEP CREEK DEAD HORSE BAY
IDGE
Park
GERRITSEN INLET
Key to Sanborn Map
2000
MURR AY RD
36TH ST
Brooklyn Marine
BAR RET RD
37TH ST
BEA 169T CH H ST
4000 FEET
SCALE
FLOYD BENNETT FIELD
For continuation see Figure C-2a
FLOYD BENNETT FIELD

For continuation
see above right
Phase I Phase II Study Area Boundary (400-Foot Perimeter)

0 200 500 FEET
Source:
SCALE
Sanborn Map
Figure C-2b
For continuation see Figure C-2c
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines
RO C
K AW AY IN
LET
For continuation
see below left
4.6.11
STRICKLAND AVE
AVENUE T
MILL AVE
64TH ST
66TH ST
AVIA TIO
53
NATIONAL DR

FLATBUSH AVE
RD
ST
MILL BASIN
Ryan Visitor Center
Recreation Area
ROCKAWAY INLET
Floyd Bennett Field
NR
Jacob Riis Park
MAR
INE
HENDERICKSON ST
AVENUE U
AVENUE V
PKW Y BR
IDGE
SEE DETAIL BELOW

38TH ST
MILL CREEK

BEA 169T CH H ST
37TH ST 36TH ST

GERRITSEN INLET
Key to Sanborn Map
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
ROCKAWAY INLET
MAR
INE
PAR K
WAY BR
IDGE
JACOB RIIS PARK

For continuation see Figure C-2b
BLV
D.
Source:
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase I Study Area Boundary (400-Foot Perimeter)
RO CK A WAY P
OIN
N
100
250 FEET
SCALE
Sanborn Map
Figure C-2c
4.6.11
STRICKLAND AVE
MILL AVE
64TH ST
66TH ST
AVIA TIO
53
RD
ST
NATIONAL DR

FLATBUSH AVE
MILL BASIN
HENDERICKSON ST COLEMAN ST KIMBALL ST
AVENUE V
Ryan Visitor Center
Recreation Area
ROCKAWAY INLET
Floyd Bennett Field
NR
Jacob Riis Park
MAR
INE
PKW Y BR
IDGE
DEEP CREEK
RYDER ST
38TH ST
SEE DETAIL BELOW

MILL CREEK
DEAD HORSE BAY

BEA 169T CH H ST
AVENUE T
Park
GERRITSEN INLET
Key to Tax Map
2000
MURR AY RD
AVENUE U
36TH ST
Brooklyn Marine
BAR RET RD
37TH ST
4000 FEET
SCALE
MILL BASIN
Source:
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase I Phase II Study Area Boundary (400-Foot Perimeter)
200
400 FEET
SCALE
Tax Map
Figure C-3a
For continuation
see Figure C-3b
4.6.11
AVENUE T
AVIA TIO
Ryan Visitor Center Aviator Sports Complex
53
RD
ST
MILL BASIN
FLATBUSH AVE
Floyd Bennett Field
NR
Recreation Area
Jacob Riis Park

IDGE
MAR
INE
HENDERICKSON ST
AVENUE U
AVENUE V
PKW Y BR

38TH ST
MILL CREEK
ROCKAWAY INLET
BAR RET RD
MURR AY RD
37TH ST 36TH ST

GERRITSEN INLET
BEA 169T CH H ST
SEE DETAIL BELOW

0 2000
Key to Tax Map
4000 FEET
SCALE
FLOYD BENNETT FIELD
MILL BASIN
see Figure C-3c For continuation see Figure C-3a

For continuation
ROCKAWAY INLET
GERRITSEN INLET
Source:
400
N
1000 FEET
SCALE
Tax Map
Figure C-3b
4.6.11
STRICKLAND AVE
AVENUE T
MILL AVE
64TH ST
66TH ST
AVIA TIO
53
NATIONAL DR

FLATBUSH AVE
RD
ST
MILL BASIN
Ryan Visitor Center
Recreation Area
ROCKAWAY INLET
Floyd Bennett Field
NR
Jacob Riis Park
MAR
INE
HENDERICKSON ST
AVENUE U
AVENUE V
PKW Y BR
IDGE

38TH ST
MILL CREEK

BEA 169T CH H ST
37TH ST 36TH ST

GERRITSEN INLET
SEE DETAIL BELOW

0 2000 4000 FEET
Key to Tax Map

DR.
SCALE
H CHA
NNEL
ROCKAWAY INLET
For continuation see Figure C-3b
RO CK A WAY P
OIN
TB
LVD .
BEAC
JACOB RIIS PARK
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase I Study Area Boundary (400-Foot Perimeter)
N
100
250 FEET
Source:
SCALE
Tax Map
Figure C-3c
The majority of residential uses within the study area are located north of Avenue U and along Hendrickson Street. Four multi-unit residential dwellings are located along the west side of Hendrickson Street adjacent to the pipeline route. Commercial uses are located along Hendrickson Street and on the east and west sides of Flatbush Avenue within the study area. Retail stores are located on the west side of Flatbush Avenue between Avenues U and V and south of Avenue V. A large commercial center, Kings Plaza shopping center, is located on the east side of Flatbush Avenue south of Avenue U just on the study area border. The center includes several commercial establishments, a multistory parking garage and a boating/marina sales establishment along the west side of Mill Basin. Along the western shoreline of Mill Basin and on the east side of Flatbush Avenue is a commercial (restaurant) use with associated parking and a shopping center with a Toys R Us; both located north of the Belt Parkway and Four Sparrow Marsh Preserve. Other commercial uses along Flatbush Avenue include Aviator Sports and Recreation, located on the east side of Flatbush Avenue on the Floyd Bennett Field property; and Brooklyn Golf Center and a marina, both of which are located on the west side of Flatbush Avenue directly west of the Aviator Sports and Recreation Center. Open space and outdoor recreation, defined as parkland or publicly owned and operated outdoor recreation spaces, is the predominant land use within the study area (see Figures C-1 and C-4). As described in detail below, there are several New York City and federally owned parks within the study area, but only a fraction of the designated open spaces are located in the 400-foot study area. Areas adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge on the Rockaway Peninsula and in Brooklyn are public facilities irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to MTA B&T. Several public facilities and institutional uses are also located in the study area, including government uses and offices and places of worship. There are several federal, state, and city government office buildings located within the study area. On the Floyd Bennett Field property, there are four historic aircraft hangars currently owned by the National Parks Service (NPS). While three of the hangars remain vacant and managed by the NPS, one is leased by a private commercial use, namely the Aviator Sports and Recreation Center. Several government office buildings are located on the west side of Flatbush Avenue on the Brooklyn Marine Park site, and on the east side of Flatbush Avenue just south of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge toll plaza. South of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge at the southern end of the study area there is a U.S. Coast Guard facility located on Riis Landing on the north side of Rockaway Point Boulevard. A U.S. Postal Service center is located at the southwest corner of Beach 169th Street and Rockaway Point Boulevard and a fire house is located on the east side of Beach 169th Street south of the Beach Channel Drive access ramp, at the southern edge of the study area. Several of the open spaces in the study area have multiple public facilities for organized recreational uses, such as theaters and visitor centers. There are two places of worship located within the study area: Saint Columbia Church on Kimball Street and Parkside Memorial Chapel, located south of Avenue V on the west side of Flatbush Avenue. City-Owned Open Space The parks described below are owned and operated by New York City Department of Parks and Recreation (NYCDPR).
C-2
11.23.11
55TH ST
T TH 65
53R 53RD ST
ST 51ST ST
RD 63
H TH 58 ST
ST
T ST
K LA
E AV
ND
E NU
AVE
E AV
UE
IL
E AV
NU
T 64
ST
BARLO W DR
WHITM AN DR
66
TH
ST
NAT
ION
AL D
BELT
E AV
BAS SE
TT A VE
PKWY
ST T S ST AN ST R M M L L ST DE L LE A AL RY 8TH C CO IMB M 3 K TH 36 3 ST S
MAYFAIR DR
STR IC
Lindower Park ISLAND CHANNEL
T TI N NA NA O L DR

E E A AV
BU A AT F FL
SH

PL
L IL M EE CR K
Floyd Bennett Field

GATEWAY NATIONAL RECREATION AREA
DEEP CREEK
I IR A T CT
L RT BA
ET
R R D DA E
B AB
NO
E BE Y
EL E AV
CT
CT
M AD O C VE AV
Source: 2007 NYCDCP Map Pluto Land Use & NWI Wetland Classi cations & 2004 Aerial USGS
SHELL BANK CREEK
GERRITSEN INLET Plumb Beach Point Breeze

DEAD HORSE BAY
T AVIA
ION
RD
Floyd Bennett Field

A MA N RIN EP YB K KW
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase I Phase II 1/4-Mile Perimeter Transit Ferry Dock and Ferry Route Open Space Active Open Space Beach Bike Trail
ALLEY
YS BA E ID
R RE VE ID A
ROCKAWAY INLET
Riis Landing
IDG RID E
BAYSIDE
R R ET D
D
R BA
Jacob Riis Park

Breezy Point
C RO PO AY K AW
INT
D BLV
MU
RR
R AY
E O HER R RD
H RS MA
AL
LR
Wetland and Wildlife Preserves Public Facilities and Institution

0 2000
MARKET ST
G AN
D ER
Fort Tilden
IS DAV
RD
4000 FEET
SCALE
Open Space Resources

Figure C-4
Attachment C: Land Use and Zoning
Brooklyn Marine Park Brooklyn Marine Park is Brooklyns largest park at approximately 530 acres including both grassland and salt marsh.1 A portion of this park is part of the NYCDPR Forever Wild Nature Preserve program, but the proposed project would not affect the Forever Wild portion. The program, with 51 preserves, aims to protect and preserve the most ecologically valuable land within the five boroughs. Brooklyn Marine Park is located to the west of the proposed pipeline route both north and south of the Belt Parkway (see Figure C-4). For the segment of the pipeline route that would cross under the Belt Parkway, horizontal directional drilling (HDD) would be used2. Therefore, for this segment, the pipeline would turn west onto Marine Park. During construction, which is expected to last about three months, the proposed project would temporarily occupy about 0.14 acres on the north side of the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchange and 0.14 acres on the south side of the interchange. Portions of the park were originally transferred to New York City in 1917, with additional purchases adding to the park system in 1937. A portion of the larger park system was transferred to the NPS in 1974 to be incorporated as part of the Gateway National Recreation Area (GNRA). After this transfer, the park acreage was 798 acres, including land underwater.3 Salt Marsh Nature Center is located at the Avenue U entrance to the park, which is located outside of the -mile open space study area. In addition to the natural areas of the park that are used for passive recreation (hiking, birding, picnicking, canoe and kayak launch), the park provides numerous active recreation opportunities, including bike trails and greenways; basketball, tennis, and handball courts; bocce courts; baseball, cricket, soccer, and football fields; a model airplane field; dog runs; and playgrounds. Marine Park Golf Course, a municipal 18-hole golf course, is located within the eastern portion of the park. Four Sparrow Marsh Preserve Four Sparrow Marsh Preserve, located about 600 feet east of the proposed pipeline route and north of the Belt Parkway, is one of two original salt marshes that remain on the north shore of the Jamaica Bay estuary system. Transferred to New York City in 1994,4 the 64.7-acre preserve is also part of the NYCDPR Forever Wild Nature Preserve program. Due to its isolated location, separated from residential development and bordered to the north by Mill Basin and to the south by the Belt Parkway and Floyd Bennett Field, this preserve has been left to flourish in its natural state. The preserves undisturbed state and plethora of plant and bird species only allow for passive recreation opportunities. State-Owned Open Space There are no New York State-owned open space areas within the study area.
1 2
www.nycgovparks/parks/marinepark If the HDD alignment remained alongside Flatbush Avenue, the space requirements for the entry and exit areas would block almost all of the travel lanes in Flatbush Avenue and the drill path would pass underneath the bridge foundation, potentially compromising the bridges integrity. A minimum clearance of 30 feet is generally maintained from a bridge foundation to a drill path. Ibid. www.nycgovparks.org/parks/foursparrowmarsh/
3 4
C-3
Federally Owned Open Space Gateway National Recreation Area GNRA, encompassing more than 26,000 acres in New York and New Jersey, was added to the NPS system in 1972.5 Specifically, GNRA includes areas in Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island in New York, and Monmouth County, New Jersey. GNRA provides both active and passive open space opportunities ranging from swimming and boating to birding and hiking. This National Recreation Area is separated into three distinct units: Jamaica Bay, Staten Island, and Sandy Hook. The Jamaica Bay unit is located within the project vicinity with the following gateway sites (located in Brooklyn and Queens) within the project study area: Jacob Riis Park, Fort Tilden, and Floyd Bennett Field. The entire Jamaica Bay unit encompasses about 9,155 acres.6 Jacob Riis Park Jacob Riis Park is located on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens County at the southern end of the Marine ParkwayGil Hodges Memorial Bridge just south and east of the proposed pipelines within the -mile open space study area. This park was opened in 1932 and transferred to NPS in 1972 as part of the greater GNRA. Jacob Riis Park provides both active and passive open space opportunities including the Riis Park Pitch and Putt Golf Course, playground, picnic area, beach, swimming, boardwalks, courtyards, landscaped walkways, food concessions, and a bathhouse with ranger-led programs and historic exhibits.7 Fort Tilden This gateway site, known as Fort Tilden, was a former US Army post8 located on the Rockaway Peninsula, also at the southern end of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge just south and west of the proposed pipelines within the -mile open space study area. The Army post was closed in 1974 and the site was transferred to NPS.9 Fort Tilden, now known for its reclaimed natural areas, provides largely passive open space activities including birding, hiking, picnicking, and biking. This site also provides fishing opportunities as well as public arts programming in several former military buildings that have been converted into art centers. NPS also maintains a visitor center and both soccer and baseball fields at this site. Floyd Bennett Field This NPS park is located both east and west of the proposed pipeline route, with the majority of the park located to the east of Flatbush Avenue and thus, the proposed pipelines. Floyd Bennett Field, opened in 1931, was New Yorks first municipal airport.10 Approximately 10 years later, the site was converted to a U.S. Naval Air Station. In 1971, the site was transferred to NPS and the former historic control tower was converted to a visitor center. The former runways are now used to fly model planes and provide paths for cyclists. The parks shoreline provides
5 6 7 8 9
www.nyharborparks.org/visit/gana.html www.vanalen.org/gateway/site_gatewayatlas.php www.nyharborparks.org/visit/jari.html www.nps.gov/gate/planyourvisit/thingstodojamaciabay/htm www.nyharborparks.org/visit/foti.html www.nyharborparks.org/visit/flbe.html
10
C-4
opportunities for fishing and swimming, as well as canoe and kayak launching. The site, totaling about 1,358 acres11, also provides a venue for camping, hiking, and picnicking. Specifically, the North Forty Natural Area located within the northeastern portion of the park includes a trail system that connects to the Rockaway Gateway Greenway, located along Flatbush Avenue adjacent to Floyd Bennett Field. Throughout the park, there are several structures dedicated to various activities, including, but not limited to, a ranger station, aircraft hangars, park administration, U.S. Park Police field office, Gateway Environmental Study Center, and Park Nursery. With the exception of the visitor center, aircraft hangars, and ranger station, most of these structures are located outside the project study area. As described in detail in Attachment D, Historic Resources, the Floyd Bennett Field Historic District is located within Floyd Bennett Field to the east of the proposed pipelines within the -mile open space study area. ZONING The Zoning Resolution of the City of New York applies to the majority of the area in which the pipelines are proposed. It does not apply, however, to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge, to land beneath the Rockaway Inlet, or to land irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to MTA B&T in areas adjacent to the bridge, on the Rockaway Peninsula, and in Brooklyn. As illustrated in Figure C-5, the proposed pipelines would be located within or adjacent to the following zoning districts, from the northern to the southern end: C8-1, R4, M3-1, C3, and M1-1. In addition to these districts, a portion of the proposed pipeline route would be adjacent to dedicated parkland (Brooklyn Marine Park). The dedicated parkland is not subject to or within the jurisdiction of New York Citys zoning regulations. The parkland is owned by NYCDPR. According to Article I of the Zoning Resolution, Section 11-13 Public Parks, district designations indicated on zoning maps do not apply to public parks, except as set forth in Section 105-91 Special District Designation on Public Parks. According to the New York City Zoning Handbook, C3 commercial districts permit waterfront recreational activities. The commercial floor area ratio (FAR) permitted in C3 districts is 0.5. All residential development in this district is governed by R3-2 district regulations, which allow a residential FAR of 0.5. C8 districts bridge commercial and manufacturing uses. Typical uses in this district include automotive and other heavy commercial services. The FAR for the C8-1 district is 1.0 for commercial uses and 2.4 for community facilities. The R4 residential district is a low-density residence district that allows all types of housing at an FAR of 0.75 plus an attic allowance of up to 20 percent. M1-1 districts permit all industrial uses if they meet stringent performance standards. For this reason, the district is often associated with light industrial uses such as woodworking shops, auto storage and repair, and wholesale service. The M1-1 district allows a maximum FAR of 1.0. M3 districts are associated with heavy industries that generate noise, traffic, or pollutants. Typical uses include power plants, solid waste transfer facilities, and recycling plants. The maximum FAR permitted in a M3-1 district is 2.0.
11
www.vanalen.org/gateway/site_gatewayatlas.php
C-5
4.6.11
R5
C8
R4
-1
PARKLAND
R O C K A W A Y
I N L E T
R4
0 1000 2000 FEET
SCALE
Zoning
Figure C-5
PUBLIC POLICY According to the CEQR Technical Manual, recognized public policies describe the intended use of an area of a particular site(s) in the City. Public policies include public documents and reports that may have regulatory status or simply describe the general goals of a public agency or jurisdiction. The proposed project site is located within the boundaries of New York Citys coastal zone. An analysis of the proposed projects consistency with the Citys Local Waterfront Revitalization Program is provided in Attachment G, Coastal Zone Consistency. In addition, the recently released policies of the New York City Department of Environmental Protection regarding management of the Jamaica Bay watershed as described in the Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan also apply to this project. These policies are described in Attachment E, Natural Resources. NEW YORK STATE ENERGY PLAN Executive Order No. 2, issued by Governor David A. Paterson in March 2008, directed the creation of a State Energy Plan2009 New York State Energy Plan (2009 Energy Plan). In September 2009, a law was passed that statutorily established the State Energy Planning Board and required it to complete a State Energy Plan on or before March 15, 2013. Provided below is a summary of the 2009 Energy Plan. The 2009 Energy Plan established a vision for a clean energy economy that would stimulate investment, create jobs, and meet the energy needs of New York residents and businesses. The Energy Plan included the following five policy objectives: 1. Assure that New York has reliable energy and transportation systems; 2. Support energy and transportation systems that enable the state to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, both to do the states part in responding to the dangers posed by climate change and to position the state to compete in a national and global carbonconstrained economy; 3. Address affordability concerns of residents and businesses caused by rising energy bills, and improve the states economic competitiveness; 4. Reduce health and environmental risks associated with the production and use of energy across all sectors; and 5. Improve the states energy independence and fuel diversity by developing in-state energy supply resources. The Energy Plan also included the following five strategies to accomplish these objections: 1. Produce, deliver, and use energy more efficiently; 2. Support development of instate energy supplies; 3. Invest in energy and transportation infrastructure; 4. Stimulate innovation in a clean energy economy; and 5. Engage others in achieving the states policy objectives. The 2009 Energy Plan recognizes that the use of existing rights-of-way may reduce the time and costs to the developer, and would obviate the need to acquire rights to private and/or public
C-6
lands. Moreover, the plan suggests that the use of existing rights-of-way may present several environmental advantages from the states perspective. A recommendation of the 2009 Energy Plan is to prepare a study to inventory existing transportation corridors that could be used for new energy infrastructure facilities and existing utility corridors that are underutilized or could be re-configured to accommodate new facilities. Another recommendation is to improve and coordinate efforts to identify and promote the use of linear property interests for use of existing and siting new electric and gas transmission facilities. A GREENWAY PLAN FOR NEW YORK CITY In 1993, the New York City Department of City Planning (NYCDCP) released A Greenway Plan for New York City, which established a framework for building a 350-mile greenway system in the City. A greenway is defined as a multi-use pathway for non-motorized transportation along natural and built linear spaces, such as rail and highway ROW, parklands, waterfront esplanades, and, where necessary, city streets. Greenways serve as open space connectors linking origins and destinations such as parks, cultural areas, historic sites, employment centers, retail stores, and schools. A successful greenway offers easy accessibility, connects to the existing bicycle network, and is direct, continuous, and safe for pedestrians, joggers, cyclists, in-line skaters, and wheelchair users. The Shore Parkway Greenway and the Rockaway Gateway Greenway are located within or in close proximity to the proposed project. The Shore Parkway Greenway follows the edge of New York Bay, passing underneath the Verrazano Bridge. A significant stretch of this greenway is interrupted, but starts again at the Gateway National Recreation Area, passing along the edge of the marshlands of Jamaica Bay. The Rockaway Gateway Greenway follows the Rockaway beaches, Floyd Bennett Air Field, and Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge. The Rockaway Gateway Greenway makes a circuit of the Rockaway peninsula, and includes the Rockaway Boardwalk. NEW YORK CITY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN In 1997, DCP and the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) released the New York City Bicycle Master Plan, which identified a 909-mile citywide bicycling and greenway network of existing and recommended routes. The Shore Parkway Greenway Connector was identified as a priority link. Under the Bicycle Network Development program, NYCDCP, NYCDOT and NYCDPR prepared area-specific master plans such as this one to advance the implementation of bikeways and greenways, particularly along the citys 578-mile waterfront. Within the project vicinity, along the Rockaway Gateway Greenway, connecting with the Shore Parkway bicycle path, there is a 20 mile route loop around Jamaica Bay along Flatbush Avenue. PLANYC 2030 (2007) In April 2007, the Mayors Office of Long Term Planning and Sustainability released PlaNYC: A Greener, Greater New York. An update to PlaNYC in April 2011 built upon the goals set forth in 2007 and provided new goals and strategies. PlaNYC was prepared to create an environmentally sustainable city over the next two decades. PlaNYC focuses on the many facets of New Yorks physical environmentits transportation network, housing stock, land and park system, energy network, water supply and air qualityand sets a course to achieve 10 goals to create a more sustainable New York by the year 2030. Specific goals of the plan include:
C-7
Create enough housing for almost a million more people, and find ways to make housing more affordable and sustainable. Ensure that every New Yorker lives within a 10-minute walk of a park. Clean up all contaminated land in New York City. Improve the quality of waterways to increase opportunities for recreation and restore coastal ecosystems. Ensure high quality and reliability of the water supply system. Expand sustainable transportation choices and ensure the reliability and high quality of the transportation network. Reduce energy consumption and make energy systems cleaner and more reliable. Achieve the cleanest air quality of any big city in America. Divert 75 percent of the solid waste generation away from landfills. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by more than 30 percent. Increase the resilience of communities, natural systems, and infrastructure to climate risks.
Related to the proposed project, PlaNYC recommends the City do the following: Work with pipeline developers, regulators, and community stakeholders to facilitate the permitting and development of appropriately sited natural gas transmission lines; Work with utilities, regulators, and stakeholders to accelerate natural gas distribution upgrades in areas where they can have the most impact in reducing residual fuel usage and improving air quality; and Work with utilities to streamline permitting and interconnection processes and to improve coordination of electric and gas distribution planning.
C. PROBABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

LAND USE While the proposed pipeline route would be adjacent to a variety of land uses, the pipelines would be located almost entirely beneath the Flatbush Avenue right-of-way and MTA B&T property including land beneath Rockaway Inlet adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge. Construction is anticipated to include the temporary opening of trenches across public roadways and driveways as well as within a small portion of Marine Park near the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchange and within a small portion of land at the southern end of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge. The applicable practices and methods outlined in National Grids Environmental Guidance will be followed during the installation of the pipelines. Specifically, Natural Resources Protection guidance related to work within protected waters, right-of-way access, maintenance, and construction Best Management Practices will be followed (see Appendix II, National Grid Environmental Guidance). Road shoulders may be closed for short intervals in the immediate area of pipe-laying operations. Construction-related impacts such as noise, dust, disturbance of traffic, and temporary disruption to manmade features (e.g., sidewalks, guardrails, curbs, utilities, etc.) would occur within the Flatbush Avenue right-of-way where the proposed pipeline would be buried and within temporary staging areas located within the Flatbush Avenue right-of-way and MTA B&T property on the C-8
Rockaway Peninsula. To minimize, to the extent practicable, potential construction impacts on adjacent land uses, measures including, but not limited to the following would be implemented: Timely information would be provided to the owners and/or tenants of affected properties regarding planned construction activities and schedule. To minimize traffic impacts and associated impacts to adjacent land uses, National Grid or its contractors would employ directional drilling, jacking, or other acceptable construction methods approved by the MTA B&T, New York State Department of Transportation, and NYCDOT. In addition, trench sizes and the amount of vegetation disturbed would be kept to a minimum. National Grid and its contractors would coordinate with appropriate City and State agencies, including MTA B&T, to develop and implement a Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Plan to ensure safe and adequate traffic operations along affected roadways, as well as to provide adequate ingress and egress to commercial establishments adjacent to the proposed gas pipeline route. Measures may include designation of alternative circulation routes around work areas, channelization of traffic with barriers and signs, covering of trenches with steel plates, and installation of barricades and fencing to secure construction work areas and dissuade vehicles and pedestrians from entering construction zones. Temporary disturbances to existing sidewalks, pavements, guardrails, etc. would be addressed by compliance with conditions of required permits. Manmade structures that are damaged, removed, or relocated would be restored to original or equivalent condition. To avoid impacts related to the loss of essential services, National Grid or its excavation contractors would identify all known existing utilities along the route and would notify appropriate utility companies prior to conducting excavation activities within 100 feet of an underground facility, as well as conduct in-the-field meetings with appropriate local utility representatives (e.g., gas, electric, sewer, storm drain, water, traffic control, telephone, and cable television) and local officials, as needed, to detail all utility and roadway crossings. All contractors would adhere to New York State regulations related to utility construction. Contractors would adhere to National Grids guidance for the installation of natural gas pipelines, which meet or exceed federal and state regulations Compliance with City and State regulations would also avoid impacts to adjacent land uses.
National Grid or its contractors would perform cleanup and final restoration in accordance with its existing environmental guidance documents (see Appendix II, National Grid Environmental Guidance), as well as the requirements and conditions of project permits. Backfilling of trenches, soil stabilization, and surface restoration would immediately follow pipeline installation. All cleared areas would be re-graded to pre-construction grade. A buried pipeline route that follows existing rights-of-way and within MTA B&T property eliminates the potential for impacts to surrounding land uses, as well as the need to alter or otherwise disturb existing land uses. Although development of the MTA B&T property would be restricted in areas above the pipelines, no development in these areas is projected for the build year absent the proposed actions. Thus, no significant adverse impacts to land uses present along the route are anticipated. Additionally, provisions will be included in the lease between MTA B&T and National Grid that allocate to National Grid responsibility for increased costs of construction at the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge facility that result from the presence of the pipelines. Implementation of the program described above and adherence to the construction practices detailed in Attachment H, Construction Impacts, would minimize
C-9
potential impacts to land uses. There would be no impacts to land uses adjacent to the pipeline corridor or within the small portion of Marine Park near the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchange or the small portion of land south of the bridge except during the brief period of construction. Construction would be conducted in such a manner as to preserve access to abutting land uses. All driveways would be plated during construction and access to all properties would be made available. Property owners would be notified prior to construction commencement. Temporary interference with access to properties would be minimized through adherence with terms of NYCDOT and MTA B&T permits. Once completed, the project would have no impact on land uses within the study area. There would be no impact to utilization of adjacent land for future use. The pipelines would be underground and would not be visible or audible. Operation of the proposed pipelines would not generate any air or water pollutants, odors, traffic, or disturbance to visual resources. Because the proposed pipelines would be entirely underground and would not cause the need to acquire any open space; change the existing user population; change access to open space; or change existing air emissions, noise, odor, or shadow conditions, no direct significant adverse open space impacts would be expected from the proposed project. Similarly, the proposed pipelines would not diminish the existing open space resources due to an increase in population. Therefore, no indirect significant adverse open space impacts would be expected from the proposed project. ZONING The proposed pipelines would be located entirely below grade and would not be visible. Similar to other utilities, approvals under local zoning would not be required in New York City. The proposed project would be buried underground and thus would not conflict with existing and previously approved uses along the proposed route and within the 400-foot study area as presently zoned. The proposed project would not impact zoning districts within 400 feet of the proposed route, nor would it prevent the orderly and reasonable use of permitted or legally established uses in surrounding zoning districts. The proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact on zoning in the study area. PUBLIC POLICY As described in Attachments E and G, the proposed project is consistent with the Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan as well as the New York Citys coastal zone policies. With regard to public policies that pertain to greenways and bikeways in the project vicinity, because the proposed project would be constructed below ground and would not impact these resources, the proposed project would be consistent with these public policies. However, the bikeway in the vicinity of the HDD entry location on the Rockaway Peninsula would be closed for 4 months during the winter months during construction of Phase I. This short-term closure is not considered to be significant. The proposed project is consistent with the 2009 Energy Plan by utilizing an existing utility ROW and Coast Guard designated cable crossing under Rockaway Inlet. Moreover, the proposed project is consistent with and would advance the goals of PlaNYC to make energy systems more reliable, facilitate appropriately sited natural gas transmission lines, reduce residual fuel usage, and improve air quality.
C-10
Attachment D:
Historic Resources
A. INTRODUCTION
As described in Attachment A, Project Description and Purpose and Need, National Grid proposes to install new steel natural gas pipelines beneath Flatbush Avenue from Hendrickson Place in Brooklyn south to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens. The pipeline also would be installed beneath Hendrickson Place and Hendrickson Street between Avenue U and Flatbush Avenue. The portion of the pipeline proposed under Rockaway Inlet and the Belt Parkway would be installed using a trenchless technology method called horizontal directional drilling (HDD), and the remainder of the pipeline route installation would be using conventional cut and cover techniques. This attachment considers the potential of the proposed project to affect historic resources. Historic resources consist of both architectural resources (including buildings, structures, objects, landscapes, and historic districts) and archaeological resources. This historic resources analysis has been prepared in accordance with Executive Order 91 of 1977, as amended, and the Rules of Procedure for City Environmental Quality Review found at Title 62, Chapter 5 of the Rules of New York City (CEQR), following the methodologies in the 2010 City Environmental Quality Review Technical Manual. This analysis has also been prepared in accordance with the New York State Historic Preservation Act and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Environmental review of the proposed project was initially being conducted under New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), because it appeared that a New York State agency would be the lead agency. At that time, environmental review coordination for cultural resources was conducted with the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Phase I of the project would involve the installation of two (12- and 26-inch) natural gas pipelines from Rockaway Peninsula under the Rockaway Inlet to a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar and Floyd Bennett Field. Phase II consists of the installation of a 30-inch gas pipeline along Flatbush Avenue from the northern end of the Phase I pipeline to Hendrickson Place and along Hendrickson Place and Hendrickson Street between Hendrickson Place and Avenue U. All of the proposed pipelines would be installed below ground (and below water where the project route traverses the Rockaway Inlet). Using HDD, the pipelines would be installed well below the channels design dredge depth and the existing depth of the sea bed.
B. METHODOLOGY
To assess the potential effects of the project on historic resources, a study area for the project was identified. In general, potential impacts to architectural resources can include both direct physical impacts (e.g., demolition, alteration, or damage from construction on nearby sites) and indirect contextual impacts, such as the isolation of a property from its surrounding environment, or the introduction of visual, audible, or atmospheric elements that are out of character with a property or that alter its setting. In this case, the proposed pipelines would be installed below D-1
ground, and therefore no long-term visual effects would be expected. The study area for architectural resources extends 90 feet on each side of the project site to account for any potential construction-period impacts (see Figure D-1). The study area for archaeological resources is defined as the area where subsurface construction would occur, the project site itself (see Figure D-2). Once the study area was determined, an inventory of historic resources within the study area was compiled. Within the study area, architectural resources analyzed include properties listed on the State or National Register of Historic Places (S/NR) or properties determined eligible for such listing (S/NR-eligible), New York City Landmarks (NYCLs) and Historic Districts, properties determined eligible for landmark status, and National Historic Landmarks (NHLs). A survey was conducted to identify any previously undesignated properties in the study area, which were then evaluated for their potential S/NR or NYCL eligibility. No such resources were identified. A Stage 1A archaeological documentary study was completed for this project by the Institute for Long Island Archaeology (ILIA) in March 2008 (revised March 2009). The Stage 1A study, attached as Appendix III, evaluates the sensitivity of the study area. The results and recommendations of the Stage 1A study are summarized in this attachment. The Stage 1A was submitted to SHPO for review and comment in February 2009. In comments dated March 30, 2009, SHPO concurred with the conclusions of the Stage 1A (see Appendix IV). The Stage 1A was also submitted to the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) for their records in February 2009, as the project was only under SEQRA review at the time. A Stage 1B Archaeological Survey of the project site was completed by ILIA in January 2011. The Stage 1B report was submitted to SHPO and LPC for review and comment. In a comment letter dated February 28, 2011, SHPO concurred with the conclusions of the Stage 1B report (see Appendix IV). After a preliminary review of the Stage 1B report, LPC requested additional information regarding the depth of fill in the vicinity of the archaeological testing locations and as a result additional materials were submitted to LPC on February 24, 2011. Subsequent to their receipt of these additional materials, LPC issued a comment letter dated March 16, 2011 concurring with the conclusions and recommendations of the Stage 1B report (see Appendix IV). The Stage 1A and 1B reports were prepared in accordance with SHPOs standards and guidelines and the New York Archaeological Councils current Standards for Cultural Resources Investigations and Curation of Archaeological Collections in New York State.
C. EXISTING CONDITIONS
ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES PROJECT SITE The project site is not located in a New York City Historic District or S/NR Historic District, nor does it contain structures that are NHLs or have been listed on or determined eligible for listing on the S/NR or as NYCLs. No potential architectural resources were identified on the project site. STUDY AREA Two previously identified architectural resources are located within the study area for the project (see Figure D-1).
D-2
10.27.11
55TH ST
T TH 65
53R 53RD ST
ST 51ST ST
RD 63
N
Lindower Park
BAS SE
ST
H TH 58 ST
T ST
UE EN AV
M
E V
T TI N NA
LL
T 64
ST
ST
BARLO W DR
WHITM AN DR
E AV
NU
66
TH
NAT
ION
AL D
BELT
E AV
TT A VE
PKWY
T ST AN ST T M ST ST LE A LL R H DE 38T CO MB I RY KI TH 36 3 ST S
STR IC
K LA
E AV
ND
NU
AVE
MAYFAIR DR
ISLAND CHANNEL
NA O L DR
Long Pol Bar

MILL BASIN
Model Airplane Field

E E A AV
BU A AT F FL
SH

L IL M EE CR K
Floyd Bennett Field
I IR A T CT
L RT BA
TT
PL
R R D DA E
B AB
NO
E BE Y
EL E AV
CT
CT
M AD O C VE AV
DEEP CREEK
SHELL BANK CREEK
GERRITSEN INLET
DEAD HORSE BAY
GNRA Park Administration Headquarters Bennett Field Park Entrance Dead Horse Bay Natural Area
T AVIA
ION
RD
Floyd Bennett Field

A MA N RIN EP
YB K KW
ROCKAWAY INLET
Proposed Natural Gas Pipeline Phase I Phase II Directional Drill Entry Directional Drill Exit 90-Foot Architectural Resources Study Area Boundary S/NR-Listed Floyd Bennett Field Historic District BoundaryE D S/NR-eligible Marine ParkwayMARKET ST ALLEY Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge Transit Ferry Dock and Ferry Route
I YS BA
R RE VE ID A
IDG RID E
Riis Landing
BAYSIDE
RE TR D
D
Jacob Riis Park

R BA
Breezy Point
C RO PO AY K AW
INT
D BLV
MU
RR
R AY
E O HER R RD
H RS MA
AL
LR
D
RA NG ER
Fort Tilden
IS DAV
RD
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
Architectural Resources
Figure D-1
10.3.11
Source: A Stage 1A Archaeological Survey for the Key Span Jamaica Bay Gas Transmission Project. Prepared by the Institute for Long Island Archaeology - March 2008, Revised March 2009 (See Appendix I)
*NOTE: STP - Shovel Test Pit
Bergen Island
SCALE
Barren Island
2000
4000 FEET
Areas of Archaeological Sensitivity
Figure D-2
Attachment D: Historic Resources
Floyd Bennett Field Historic District (S/NR-Listed) The Floyd Bennett Field Historic District, located on Barren Island in Jamaica Bay, is significant for its contribution to aviation history and municipal airport construction. Floyd Bennett Field was the first municipal airport in New York City, and was constructed between 1928 and 1931 by the City Department of Docks. The airport was designed to attract air traffic to the New York City area from Newark Airport, where most New York-bound flights landed, and in 1933 it was the second busiest airport in the country. Floyd Bennett Field was closed to commercial use and conveyed to the U.S. Navy in 1941, following the opening of Municipal Airport 2, now LaGuardia Airport, in 1939. Although the Navy enlarged the Field, the original complex of steel frame and brick hangars and support buildings has not been substantially altered. Thus it retains integrity of as an example of an early municipal airport design. Floyd Bennett Field is also historically significant due to its association with individuals significant in early aviation. The Fields prime location, unusually long runways, and clement weather conditions attracted experimental fliers who sought to establish speed and distance records. The Floyd Bennett Field Historic District is comprised of Hangar Complex (Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6), the Administration Building, two concrete runways and one concrete taxiway, and additional structures of lesser importance that related to the use of Floyd Bennett Field during the historic period (1931-1941), including the Garage and Maintenance shop, Pump House, Fire Pump House, Transformer Building, Electrical Vault, and Gasoline Pump Station. Marine Parkway Bridge (S/NR-Eligible) The Marine Parkway Bridgenow the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridgeis a distinctive example of an intact, early 20th century vertical lift bridge in New York City. The bridge was built between 1936 and 1937 by the Marine Parkway Authority (Robert Moses, sole member) with Works Progress Administration funds and bonds issued by the Marine Parkway Authority. The bridge extended Flatbush Avenue to the Rockaway Peninsula and included an interchange on the Belt Parkway. The opening of the bridge marked the beginning of a new wave of automobile-dependent development on the Rockaway Peninsula, including the completion of Jacob Riis Park. Built by the American Bridge Company to the design of prominent engineers Robinson & Steinman and Waddell & Hardesty, and consulting architect Aymar Embury II, the Marine ParkwayGil Hodges Memorial Bridge illustrates a streamlined aesthetic that relates clearly to the engineering of the structure. The 3,840-foot-long, four-lane bridge consists of a central 540-foot lift span (at the time the second longest in the world) flanked by distinctive curved-top tower drives and matching Warren camelback through trusses. Six deck trusses flank the main spans, with two reinforced-concrete spans forming the land approaches. Machinery houses are located at the top of each tower. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES PREHISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Four previously identified Native American archaeological sites are located within one mile of the project area. These include the Ryders Pond site (NYSM 7459/SHPO A04701.000112), the largest known Native American archaeological site in Kings County located 0.6 miles west of the northern end of the project site, which was a large precontact village or campsite that contained shell middens (shell heaps) and human burials. Another site, NYSM 3608, which also featured shell middens and human burials, was located near (and may have been part of) the Ryders Pond site. The Equendito site (SHPO A04701.000114), a Native American village, was D-3
formerly located on Barren Island which is now part of Floyd Bennett Field, approximately 0.6 miles east of the project site (see Figure D-2). Finally, immense shell middens were identified on Bergen Island (NYSM 7391), approximately 0.6 to 1.2 miles east of the northern end of the project site (see Figure D-2). The exact locations of Native American sites are generally not disclosed so as to prevent potential disturbance or looting of archaeological sites. The project sites location near the shoreline and its adjacent marshes and uplands would have provided numerous exploitable resources and would therefore have created an ideal setting for Native American habitation sites during the precontact period (the period prior to European contact). Therefore, any undisturbed areas within the project site are determined to have moderate to high sensitivity for archaeological resources dating to the precontact period. However, the majority of the project site has been covered with landfill since the precontact period, and intact prehistoric deposits are most likely deeply buried beneath the levels of landfill, which topographic maps suggest could exceed 10 feet in depth throughout much of the site. HISTORIC PERIOD ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Although southern Brooklyn was purchased from the Native Americans by European settlers in the mid-17th century, it was not heavily populated until the 19th century, at which time railroads made the once-remote area easily accessible. However, whereas many areas in southern Brooklyn became resort communities, Barren Island, which has since been incorporated into the southern end of Floyd Bennett Field, became a landfill where much of New York Citys refuse was dumped during the mid- to late 19th century. The island was developed with industrial waste-processing facilities, including a rendering plant where dead animals recovered from the streets of New York City were transformed into glue and other products, and a fish processing factory. The landfill was staffed by individuals who resided in a small colony that sprang up on the island, most of whom were immigrants from Poland, Italy, or Ireland, while others were African-American. The landfill was closed in 1918, although the glue factory remained open until the early 1930s. Any remaining residents of the employees colony were evicted in 1936 in advance of the construction of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge. The creation of land in the vicinity of the project site began in the early 20th century and the area around Barren Island was filled out using earth dredged from the bottom of Jamaica Bay. The construction of Floyd Bennett Field, the Citys first municipal airport, began in 1928 and it remained in operation until 1941 when it was purchased by the U.S. Navy and used as a naval air station. In addition, throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, numerous ships were wrecked within the Rockaway Inlet and may still be submerged in the vicinity of the project site. The Stage 1A documentary study determined that the portion of the project site in the vicinity of the former Barren Island (the only undisturbed location within the project site that was originally composed of fast land and was not created through landfilling) had moderate to high sensitivity for historic period archaeological resources, most importantly those associated with the former rendering plant. The remainder of the project site was determined to have experienced sufficient disturbance to potential archaeological resources or to have been landfilled to the extent where potential archaeological resources are very deeply buried.
D-4
As part of the Stage 1B survey, 30 shovel test pits and 8 auger cores were excavated within the area of sensitivity identified in the Stage 1A study.1 The shovel test pits contained dredged marine fill and no artifacts or features dating to either the precontact or historic period were encountered during subsurface testing. Only recent trash (e.g., modern bottle glass, plastic), asphalt, ceramic utility pipe, and a light density of material likely dating to the 20th century (e.g., window and bottle glass fragments, wire nails, brick, coal and slag) was recovered. The Institute for Long Island Archaeology (ILIA) determined that the material has no research potential. In addition, the Stage 1A report concluded that there was a possibility that historic shipwrecks may be present at the bottom of the Rockaway Inlet in the path of the proposed gas pipelines. Remote sensing data of this area was collected in 2007 by Ocean Surveys, Inc., and requires analysis by a qualified archaeologist. This information was provided to ILIA during the preparation of the Stage 1B archaeological survey. ILIA determined that none of the 32 sonar targets identified by the Ocean Surveys field work appeared to be shipwrecks and likely represented modern debris or dilapidated pilings. Further, under the updated proposed work scope, the pipeline is to be installed using directional drilling at depths well below the bottom of the Rockaway Inlet channel bottom, far deeper than the anticipated depth of cultural resources such as shipwrecks. Therefore, it was determined that the proposed project would not impact cultural resources within the Rockaway Inlet. The Stage 1B report concluded that the project as it was then proposed would not impact archaeological resources and that no additional archaeological investigations were necessary. The Stage 1B survey was submitted to SHPO and LPC for review and comment. As mentioned previously, both SHPO and LPC concurred with the conclusions of the Stage 1B report and its recommendation that no additional archaeological analysis is required (see Appendix IV). Since the completion of the Stage 1A and Stage 1B studies, the design of the proposed project has been revised. The original design of the pipeline had the HDD exit area on the Brooklyn side at a location further south than is currently proposed, and therefore some portions of the pipeline, which were to be constructed in Flatbush Avenue, using conventional cut and cover methodology would now be installed using HDD. The majority of the HDD as currently proposed would be below the depths of archaeological sensitivity. However, as the HDD rises to existing grade, the HDD would pass through potentially sensitive areas in the vicinity of former Barren Island as identified in the Stage 1A study. Soil borings completed in the area identify a former tar-based road surface at a depth of approximately 13.5 to 14.5 feet below the ground surface. This may indicate the approximate location of the former Barren Island ground surface, suggesting that the historic period archaeological resources may be at depths of approximately 12 to 16 feet below ground surface. However, the exact location of the historic ground surface cannot be precisely determined based on the data recovered from soil borings.
The original design of the pipeline had the HDD exit pit at a location further south than currently proposed, therefore some additional portions of the pipeline in Flatbush Avenue would now be installed using HDD. The survey did include the portion of Flatbush Avenue where the pipelines would now be installed by conventional cut and cover techniques.
D-5
D. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES As described above, two identified architectural resources, the S/NR-listed Floyd Bennett Field and the S/NR-eligible Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge, are located within the 90foot study area. The project would not physically impact any portion of the S/NR-listed Floyd Bennett Field Historic District, nor would construction of the underground utility lines introduce any permanent visible features into the setting of this resource. The Williams Transco Project would place the metering and regulation (M&R) station within one of the historic hangers on Floyd Bennett Field. That action is being reviewed by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Historic Preservation Act. Within the street bed of Flatbush Avenue, the National Grid project would connect to an inlet and an outlet from the M&R station. The National Grid project would not affect nor intrude upon the historic hanger. The Phase I route would be parallel to the S/NR-eligible Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge for the portions of the pipelines under the Rockaway Inlet and within upland areas on the Rockaway Peninsula and in Brooklyn that were irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority Bridges & Tunnels (MTA B&T). The pipelines would be installed west of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge within a designated cable crossing area within Rockaway Inlet below the mud line using HDD. The drill exit would be located on the west side of the bridge north of the toll plaza, in a previously disturbed area; from the drill exit area north, conventional trenching would be used to install the pipelines. HDD, drill exit, and conventional trenching are not anticipated to physically impact any portion of the bridge. Furthermore, construction of the utility lines would not introduce any permanent visible features into the bridges setting and therefore would not adversely impact the Bridges setting. Finally, a risk assessment has been prepared, which demonstrates based on the implementation of specific protective measures, that the risks to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge from the proposed pipelines would be minimal. Therefore, the project would have no significant adverse impacts on architectural resources. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES The Stage 1A Archaeological Documentary Study identified an area of potential historic archaeological sensitivity in the vicinity of the former Barren Island, which is now incorporated into the landfill that makes up Floyd Bennett Field. The Stage 1A determined that archaeological resources dating to the precontact period may be deeply buried below the landfill at depths of 10 feet or more. However as the cut and cover (trenching) activities are not expected to impact depths greater than 6 feet below ground surface, the Stage 1A concluded that there was a low potential that the proposed project as it was then proposed would impact levels with precontact period sensitivity. For the HDD, two boreholes would have approximate diameters of 18 and 39-inches respectively (about 1 times the diameter of the pipelines). As a result, archaeological resources in the sensitive areas could be disturbed. Although the design drawings show exactly where the lines would be horizontally and vertically, the exact intersection with the sensitive areas cannot be predicted with precision for two reasons. First, because of the great depth of fill covering the potential archaeological resources in the historic location of Barren Island and the unknown
D-6
extent to which the area was disturbed in the 19th and 20th centuries, it is unclear exactly where the historic ground surface would be impacted by the HDD. Soil borings suggest that the historic period ground surface may have been situated approximately 12 to 16 feet below the current grade. Second, variations in location from the design drawings can be expected with the HDD technique. Boulders and other obstacles could cause the HDD to deviate vertically or horizontally to avoid the obstacles. In addition, differences in the resistance of the soil to drilling could cause the HDD to deviate from the design. Because of the depth of the sensitive area and the uncertainty about the location of both the historic ground surface and the area where the HDD would impact potentially sensitive levels, additional Stage 1B testing in the form of direct exposure and examination of the sensitive depths is not practical. The amount of excavation required (both horizontal and vertical) to investigate such resources in a safe and appropriate manner would be significantly larger than the area of impact, potentially resulting in unnecessary disturbance to archaeological resources outside the location of impacts associated with the proposed project. In consultation with LPC and SHPO, an alternate plan to investigate the archaeologically sensitive areas identified in the Stage 1A study has been developed. While not a replacement for Phase 1B testing, the soil borings that have already been completed in the vicinity of former Barren Island contribute to our understanding of the buried ground surfaces in the area. In order to add to this knowledge of the subsurface conditions in the archaeologically sensitive portion of the project site, a monitoring program will be implemented in the event that excavation below the depth of fill becomes necessary during the course of the project. An Archaeological Monitoring Plan was prepared and submitted to LPC and SHPO for review and comment in October 2011. In a comment letter dated November 3, 2011, LPC concurred with the implementation of the monitoring plan in the event that excavation to the depth of archaeological sensitivity becomes necessary. SHPO is currently reviewing the Archaeological Monitoring Plan, and its recommendation would be incorporated and implemented. Therefore, in concurrence with SHPO and LPC and with the implementation of the Archaeological Monitoring Plan if necessary (See Appendix III, Archaeology), the proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact on archaeological resources.
D-7
Attachment E:
Natural Resources
A. INTRODUCTION
As described in Attachment A, Project Description and Purpose and Need, National Grid proposes to install new natural gas pipelines beneath the following roads: Hendrickson Street between Avenue U and Hendrickson Place, Hendrickson Place, and Flatbush Avenue from the intersection of Hendrickson Place and Flatbush Avenue in Brooklyn, along areas adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge in Brooklyn, under Jamaica Bay/Rockaway Inlet to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens. All of the proposed pipelines would be installed below ground (and below water where the project route traverses the Rockaway Inlet). The portion of the pipeline proposed under Jamaica Bay/Rockaway Inlet adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge and under the Belt Parkway would be installed using a trenchless technology method called horizontal directional drilling (HDD). The entry area is about 60 feet by 100 feet, and the exit area is about 60 feet by 100 feet. For the HDD under Rockaway inlet, the entry area would be in the grassy area formed by the ramp between Beach Channel Drive and the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge. The exit area would be in the west shoulder of Flatbush Avenue at Aviation Drive. For crossing under the Belt Parkway, if the pipeline were to continue beneath Flatbush Avenue, the space requirements for the HDD entry and exit areas would block almost all of the travel lanes in Flatbush Avenue. Therefore, for this segment, the pipeline would turn west from Flatbush Avenue onto Marine Park, which is owned by New York City Department of Parks and Recreation (NYCDPR). The exit and entry pits would be located in the vicinity of the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchange. The staging areas for the entry and entry pits would require about 0.14 acres each on the north and south side of the interchange, respectively. This area would be used for about three months during spring of 2013 for construction. The proposed route is illustrated in Figures A-1 through A-3. The purpose of this attachment is to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed project on natural resources. The 2010 City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Technical Manual defines natural resources as (1) the Citys biodiversity (plants, wildlife and other organisms); (2) any aquatic or terrestrial areas capable of providing suitable habitat to sustain the life processes of plants, wildlife, and other organisms; and (3) any areas capable of functioning in support of the ecological systems that maintain the Citys environmental stability.
B. METHODOLOGY
STUDY AREA Due to the highly developed nature of the surrounding land uses and the relatively small areas to be impacted, natural resources field observations were restricted to the pipeline route and proposed staging and impact areas for equipment used for directional drilling, trenching, and other construction-related purposes. A combination of field observations and existing literature was used to describe natural resources within the -mile study area.
DRAFT
E-1
ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Methods presented in the 2010 CEQR Technical Manual for assessing natural resources were used to characterize existing conditions and assess potential impacts to natural resources located throughout the natural resources study area. The existing conditions of floodplains, surface water, groundwater, wetlands, terrestrial resources, and significant, sensitive, or designated resources within the project site were considered on the basis of the following field observations, databases, reports, maps, and other sources: Preliminary field observations were conducted in the autumn 2008, and the New York Natural Heritage Program (NHP) was contacted for information on rare, threatened, and endangered species habitat within the project boundaries; Additional field observations were conducted on February 4, 2009 and May 1, 2011. The purpose of these surveys was to establish a general understanding of aquatic and terrestrial resources along the proposed pipeline route in order to assess any impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed project. Particular attention was paid to trees within 20 feet of the proposed pipeline route, which were identified to species level and measured (diameter at breast height [DBH]); Ecological Communities of New York State (Reschke 1990, Edinger et al. 2002); United States Geological Survey (USGS)topographic map for the Coney Island Quadrangle; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC): Breeding Bird Atlas, Herp Atlas Project, Wetlands Maps, and sensitive species fact sheets; United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map for the Coney Island Quadrangle; Existing information identified in literature and obtained from governmental and nongovernmental agencies; and Agency responses from information requests on rare, threatened, or endangered species within the vicinity of the project site submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS-New York office), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the NYSDECs NHP. The NHP maintains an up-to-date inventory of rare plants and animals native to New York State, USFWS maintains information for federally listed threatened or endangered freshwater and terrestrial plants and animals, and NMFS for federally listed threatened or endangered marine organisms and aquatic habitats. See Appendix I for agency correspondence. (In the time since the letters were sent to the agencies, the proposed project has changed, with the Brooklyn side exit pit being moved inland to the vicinity of Aviation Road and away from the sensitive habitat of Jamaica Bay.)
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON NATURAL RESOURCES Potential impacts on natural resources from the proposed project were assessed by evaluating: The existing natural resources within the proposed pipeline route area; Potential impacts to aquatic and terrestrial flora and fauna as a result of the proposed project; and Potential impacts to sensitive species and habitats as a result of the proposed project.
E-2
Attachment E: Natural Resources
C. EXISTING CONDITIONS
AQUATIC RESOURCES FLOODPLAINS Figure E-1 shows the 100- and 500-year floodplain boundaries for the study area. The terrestrial portions of the Phase I and Phase II pipeline routes are outside of the 100- and 500-year floodplains, with the exception of the area immediately south of Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge along the Phase I portion of the pipeline. The 100- and 500-year floodplain boundaries that overlap the pipeline route north of the bridge are within a segment of the pipeline that would be placed underground through directional drilling. The floodplain boundaries on the south side of the bridge would be north of where the directionally drilled (HDD) pipeline segment would be connected to a trenched segment that heads west to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula. WETLANDS Within the -mile study area, there are a variety of USFWS NWI mapped tidal wetlands, including both estuarine and marine wetlands and deepwater habitats (Figure E-2). The waters of Rockaway Inlet/Jamaica Bay and associated tidal wetlands within the pipeline route include marine subtidal waters with an unconsolidated bottom (M1UBL) and a regularly flooded, intertidal estuarine wetland with an unconsolidated shore (E2USN) along the northern (Brooklyn) shore of Rockaway Inlet. NYSDEC-mapped tidal wetlands that exist within the -mile study area include coastal shoals, intertidal marsh, high marsh, and littoral zone (Figure E-3). Within the pipeline route, the waters in the Rockaway Inlet/Jamaica Bay area are classified as littoral zone (LZ). The New York State Tidal Wetland Regulations (6 NYCRR Part 661.4) define LZ as the tidal wetlands zone designated LZ on an inventory map, that includes all lands under tidal waters which are not included in any other category except as otherwise determined in a specific case as provided in section 661.16. Provided there shall be no littoral zone under waters deeper than 6 feet at mean low water. The nearest wetlands are to the west of Flatbush Avenue at Deep Creek. Between Flatbush Avenue and Deep Creek is a planted area and an asphalt parking lot about 100 feet wide. Four Sparrow Marsh is located east of Flatbush Avenue and north of the Belt Parkway. Approximately 600 feet separate the proposed construction area along the west side of Flatbush Avenue and Four Sparrow Marsh. It is important to note, however, that the proposed pipelines would be placed beneath the waters and seabed of Rockaway Inlet/Jamaica Bay via HDD, and no construction activity would occur within the waterbody itself. According to USFWS NWI data, no freshwater wetlands are present within the proposed pipeline route, and two permanently flooded, impounded palustrine wetlands (PUBHh) exist within the North 40 area of Floyd Bennett Field south of the Belt Parkway and east of the proposed pipeline, one of which is located within the -mile study area (Figure E-2). There are no NYSDEC-mapped freshwater wetlands located within the proposed pipeline route or within the -mile study area (Figure E-3).
E-3
10.27.11
H 55TH ST
53RD ST
65
51ST ST
D D 3R 63
TH
T TH 58 ST
ST
ST
STR ICK LA
E AV
NU
ND AV
E AV
NU
N
MAYFAIR DR
BELT
M
H 6T 36 T ST
E AV N UE V
IL
E AV
TH ST
ST
BAS SE
BARLO W DR
AN DR WHITM
TT A VE
PKWY
ST T A AN ST M ST L S ST LE ALL A E ER O TH CO MB M 3 38 YD RY KI
Lindower Park
ISLAND CHANNEL
64
NA O T TI N NA L DR
66
TH
NAT
ION
AL D
MILL BASIN
Long Pol Bar
G ER R N SE IT C R K EE
BE VY AN FA E E CT
L RT BA ET T PL
U US TB AT FL H H

G G R ER S IT RI EN
T CT
L IL M CR EE K
VE AV
Floyd Bennett Field
IR A C CT
E AV
B AB E BE Y CT
AR DA E E CT
O NO L EL
M AD O C C VE AV
SHELL BANK CREEK
VE AV
DEEP CREEK
GERRITSEN INLET
DEAD HORSE BAY
TIO AVIA
NR
Floyd Bennett Field

MA
Source: Digital Flood Insurance rate Map Database, FEMA, 2007
N RIN EP YB K KW
ROCKAWAY INLET
ID RID GE
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase I Phase II Directional Drill Entry Directional Drill Exit 1/4-Mile Perimeter Transit Ferry Dock and Ferry Route FEMA Flood Zone 500-Year Floodplain 100-Year Floodplain
MARKET ST
R RE AVE ID A
Riis Landing
BAYSIDE
RE TR D
D
H AC BE H ST 6 T 169
Jacob Riis Park
Breezy Point
C RO P AY K AW OIN TB
R BA
LVD
MU
RR
R AY
R RO HER
MA
H RS
AL
LR
N RA
GE
RD
Fort Tilden
IS DAV
RD
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
Floodplains
Figure E-1
10.27.11
H 55TH ST
53RD ST
65
51ST ST
D D 3R 63
TH
T TH 58 ST
ST
ST
STR ICK LA
E AV
NU
ND AV
E AV
NU
N
MAYFAIR DR
BELT
M
H 6T 36 T ST
E AV N UE V
IL
E AV
TH ST
ST
BAS SE
BARLO W DR
AN DR WHITM
TT A VE
PKWY
Lindower Park
ISLAND CHANNEL
64
NA O T TI N NA L DR
66
TH
NAT
ION
AL D
MILL BASIN
Long Pol Bar
BE VY AN FA E E CT
L RT BA ET T PL
U US TB AT FL H H

G G R ER S IT RI EN
T CT
L IL M CR EE K
VE AV
Floyd Bennett Field
IR A C CT
E AV
B AB E BE Y CT
AR DA E E CT
O NO L EL

Source: National Wetlands Inventory 2008
NWI Wetlands Estuarine and Marine Deepwater (M) Estuarine and Marine Wetland (E) Freshwater Emergent Wetland (PE) Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland (PS) MARKET ST Freshwater Pond (PU) 150 Tital Wetlands Regulated Bu er 100 Freswater Wetlands Regulated Bu er
M AD O C C VE AV
SHELL BANK CREEK
Directional Drill Entry Directional Drill Exit 1/4-Mile Perimeter Transit Ferry Dock and Ferry Route
Breezy Point
C RO P AY K AW OIN TB
VE AV
DEEP CREEK
GERRITSEN INLET
DEAD HORSE BAY
TIO AVIA
NR
Floyd Bennett Field

MA N RIN EP YB K KW
ROCKAWAY INLET
ID RID GE
Riis Landing
BAYSIDE
RE TR D
D
Jacob Riis Park
R BA
LVD
MU
RR
R AY
R RO HER
MA
H RS
AL
LR
R RE AVE ID A
N RA
GE
RD
Fort Tilden
IS DAV
RD
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
NWI Tidal and Freshwater Wetlands

Figure E-2
10.27.11
H 55TH ST
53RD ST
65
51ST ST
D D 3R 63
TH
T TH 58 ST
ST
ST
STR IC
KLA N
E AV
NU
D AV E
E AV
NU
N
MAYFAIR DR
M
H 6T 36 T ST
E AV NU E V
IL
VE LA
64 TH ST
TH ST
BAS
SET
BARLO
T AV
W DR
BELT PKWY
ST T A AN ST M ST L S ST LE ALL A E ER O TH CO MB M YD 3 38 RY KI
Lindower Park
ISLAND CHANNEL
66
WHI
TMAN DR
NA O T TI N NA L DR
NAT
ION
AL D
MILL BASIN
Long Pol Bar
ER G R IT N SE C R K EE
BE VY AN FA E E CT
B TL AR ET T PL
TB AT FL U US H H

G G R ER I RI TS EN E AV
M L IL CR EE K
VE AV
Floyd Bennett Field
T CT
IR A C CT
B AB E BE Y CT
A DA E RE CT
O NO
L EL

Source: NYSDEC Wetlands 2005 & 2007
NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands Formerly Connected Marsh High Marsh Intertidal Marsh Littoral Zone Coastal Shoals
R RE
150 Tital Wetlands Regulated Bu er
M AD O C C VE AV
SHELL BANK CREEK
Directional Drill Entry Directional Drill Exit 1/4-Mile Perimeter Transit Ferry Dock and Ferry Route
Breezy Point
RO YP WA CKA OIN
VE AV
DEEP CREEK
GERRITSEN INLET
DEAD HORSE BAY
TIO AVIA
NR
Floyd Bennett Field

MA P NE RIN K KW
ROCKAWAY INLET
Riis Landing
BAYSIDE
BA
TB LVD
YB ID RID GE
RR ET RD
D
H AC BE H ST H 6 T 169
Jacob Riis Park
MU
RR
R AY
R HER OR
MA
RS
HA
LL
RD
MARKET ST
N RA
GE
RD
Fort Tilden
AVE ID A
DAV
IS R
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands

Figure E-3
FAUNA The Jamaica Bay area is an important breeding and foraging spot for a wide variety of aquatic biota, including but not limited to marine and estuarine species and both anadromous (i.e., species living in and migrating from salt water to breed in fresh water) and catadromous species (i.e., species living in and migrating from fresh water to breed in salt water) (JBWPP 2008). Marine Species Common finfish found in Jamaica Bay include winter flounder, scup, and bluefish. Winter flounder is an important commercial and recreational fish species that prefers cold water. Adults have a short migration pattern, moving offshore in spring and returning to shallow inshore or estuarine waters in late fall to spawn (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953). Winter flounder spawn in the lower estuary during winter and early spring and prefer sandy bottoms in shallow water (Pereira et al. 1999). This species has a varied diet of small invertebrates and fish fry (Grimes et al. 1989). Scup, or porgy, is a marine species that migrates inshore during late spring. It stays close to the coast during the summer months before moving offshore during the fall. Scup is a bottom feeder that spawns from May through August (Franz 1990, Bigelow and Schroeder 1953). Bluefish are pelagic fish whose young migrate into estuaries and harbors along the coast during late spring or early summer. Their major spawning grounds are located in the outer half of the continental shelf, and the resulting young move inshore in late spring. Estuarine Species Atlantic silverside, striped killifish, mummichog, and white perch have been found in abundance in the bay. These species are important as forage species for larger predator fish and are commonly used as bait by fishermen (PAS 1985). Atlantic silversides are small fish that school in shallow water and are permanent residents of the estuary. They spawn in May through early July and mature in one year. Atlantic silversides are omnivorous and feed chiefly on copepods, mysids, shrimp, amphipods, cladocerans, fish eggs, young squid, annelid worms, and mollusk larvae (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953). Mummichogs spawn primarily in fresh or brackish water, usually from spring to late summer or early autumn, and adults generally mature during their second year. Striped killifish spawn in shallow, shoreline waters from June through August and also mature in their second year. Both species feed primarily on crustaceans and polychaetes (Abraham 1985). White perch migrate to shallow, fresh, and slightly brackish water in spring and early summer to spawn and then return to the lower estuary. The demersal eggs hatch in 3 to 5 days, and after approximately 1 month, they begin to look like small adults. Juveniles inhabit creeks and inshore areas until they are about a year old (Heimbuch et al. 1994). Small white perch primarily eat invertebrates. Larger white perch in salt and brackish water feed on fish fry, crabs, shrimp, and other invertebrates. White perch longer than 200 millimeters eat mostly fish (Stanley and Danie 1983). Anadromous Species Anadromous species that use Jamaica Bay include striped bass. Striped bass migrate into the bay from fall through spring (PAS 1985) and spawn before migrating back to salt waters. The young use the brackish waters as nursery and wintering area, and juveniles migrate to marine waters when nearing maturity. The majority of adults spend much of their time in coastal, bay, and river mouth
E-4
waters before returning to spawn in the spring each year (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953). Juvenile striped bass eat invertebrates, and adults eat fish and sometimes shrimp (Fay et al. 1983). Catadromous Species The single catadromous species common to the bay is American eel. Eels spawn at sea and the young move into the bay as elvers in the spring (Fahay 1978). American eels are opportunistic feeders, and juveniles eat crustaceans, polychaetes, bivalves, and fish. They grow slowly and, at sexual maturity, they move out to sea (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953). TERRESTRIAL RESOURCES FLORA Figure E-4 illustrates the terrestrial resources that are present within the area of the proposed pipelines (according to a National Park Service habitat map) and the terrestrial resources that were observed during field surveys within the impact zone of the proposed project, or the maximum area that would be disturbed by construction and operation of the proposed pipelines. Historically, this area was a group of islands and marshlands (including Mill Island, Riches Meadows, and Barren Island) with east-west creek systems (such as Deep Creek) used for industrial purposes and refuse dumps. These areas were filled in the 1920s and 1930s to create upland areas, including Floyd Bennett Field in the 1930s (Black 1981). The general habitat characteristics of these zones are noted briefly within Figure E-4. There is no vegetation within existing roadways where the proposed pipeline route segments would be placed via trenching (noted as Zone 1 in Figure E-4). However, the route segments would be adjacent to trees located west and south of Hendrickson Street and Hendrickson Place, respectively, and planting strips along the western edge of the roadway along Flatbush Avenue. No planting strips are present along Hendrickson Street or Hendrickson Place. Along Hendrickson Street, two mature willow oaks (each approximately 30 inches DBH) are present within the fenced Marine Park Golf Course property west of the roadway. Along the southern edge of Hendrickson Place, two white mulberry trees (both multi-stemmed; total DBH of 79 and 37 inches, respectively) are present within the sidewalk, with limbs overhanging the street. The planting strips along Flatbush Avenue are principally covered with turf grasses and common herbaceous species (e.g., English plantain, clover species), but also include numerous street trees. The most common street tree present is the London plane (Platanus x acerifolia ). Fortyeight London plane trees, ranging from 5.1 to 25.3 inches DBH, are within 20 feet of the proposed pipeline route along Flatbush Avenue in Zone 1. Other trees within 20 feet of the proposed pipeline in this zone include six Japanese pagoda trees (Sophora japonica; DBH range 8.3 to 10.9 inches), five trees of heaven (Ailanthus altissima; DBH range 10.1 to 29.7 inches), and two more white mulberry trees (Morus alba; DBH 36.8 and 78.8inches). Zone 2 (Figure E-4) is entirely within the Belt Parkway and associated on- and off-ramps. The area largely consists of expanses of manicured lawn with sparse woody thickets (principally scrub-shrub thicket with Asiatic bittersweet, sumac species, and other woody vegetation) and a few scattered trees (primarily black cherry, white ash, and eastern red cedar). The pipeline in this zone would be trenched within Flatbush Avenue for only a short distance (about 500 feet) on the northern side of the Belt Parkway, and the remaining portion (about 2,000 feet) would be installed by HDD. The HDD areas within Marine Park at the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchange would be about 0.14 acres each for the entry area on the north side and the exit area on the south side. Most trees present in Zone 2 occur above the HDD area and would be unaffected. Trees occurring within 20 feet of the trenching segment or the HDD area include one E-5
4.6.11
H 55TH ST
53RD ST
65
51ST ST
D D 3R 63
TH
N
Lindower Park
BAS SE
T TH 58 ST
ST
ST
STR ICK LA
E AV
E NU
ND AV
E AV
NU
BELT
M
H 6T 36 T ST
E AV N UE V
IL
E AV
TH ST
ST
BARLO W DR
AN DR WHITM
TT A VE
PKWY
MAYFAIR DR
ISLAND CHANNEL
64
NA O T TI N NA L DR
66
TH
NAT
ION
AL D
MILL BASIN
1
Long Pol Bar
1. Street Trees (principally London Plantree) and mowed vegetation along curb edge. Trenching to occur within roadway.
U US TB AT FL
2. Mowed lawn with sparse woody vegetation; street trees along curb edge. Directional drilling to occur under Belt Parkway, with entry and exit points in mowed lawn areas.
BE VY AN FA E E CT
L RT BA ET T PL
G G R ER S IT RI EN
T CT
H H

B AB E BE Y
L IL M CR EE K
VE AV
Floyd Bennett Field
IR A C CT
E AV
O NO L EL
AR DA E E
CT
CT
1
DEEP CREEK
Plumb Beach
M AD O C C VE AV
SHELL BANK CREEK
VE AV
GERRITSEN INLET
DEAD HORSE BAY
T AVIA
ION
RD
Source: 2006 National Parks Service Vegetation Inventory, 2009 AKRF Field Notes
Point Breeze
3
3. Scrub-shrub and grassland habitat. Directional drilling to occur within natural area.
Floyd Bennett Field

MA N RIN EP YB K KW
ROCKAWAY INLET
Terrestrial Urban Habitat Types Mowed Lawn Grassland Shrubland Forest Beach/Dune Wetland Vacant Lot Impact Zones
1 2 3 4 5
MARKET ST
R RE AVE ID A
ID RID GE
4. Jamaica Bay. Directional drilling to occur under Bay.
Riis Landing
BAYSIDE
RE TR D
D
5
R BA
Jacob Riis Park
Breezy Point
5. Open field with sparse woody vegetation and rip-rap T BLVD shoreline. IN PO Directional drilling to occur. AY AW
C RO K
MU
RR
R AY
R RO HER
MA
H RS
AL
LR
1/4-Mile Perimeter Transit Ferry Dock and Ferry Route
N RA
GE
RD
Fort Tilden
IS DAV
RD
2000
4000 FEET
SCALE
Terrestrial Resources
Figure E-4
sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua; DBH 4.2 inches), two white ashes (Fraxinus americana; DBH 8.6 and 9.5 inches), two London plane trees (DBH 20.8 and 21.1 inches), and four eastern red cedars (Juniperus virginiana; DBH range 6.1 to 9.0 inches). Vegetation in Zone 3 is primarily limited to unmanaged scrub-shrub and grassland habitat with sandy soils occurring within property adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge that was irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority Bridges & Tunnels (MTA B&T), west of Flatbush Avenue. The segment of pipeline in this zone would include trenching from Flatbush Avenue to the exit point of the HDD coming up from beneath Rockaway Inlet/Jamaica Bay in the vicinity of Aviation Road. The only trees present in this zone are in and around the HDD area. Black cherry is the dominant tree species, with an understory of sumac, multiflora rose, bayberry, and poison ivy. Herbaceous species and grasses include mugwort, broom sedge, tall reed, and American beach grass. Trees occurring in the proposed staging area or within 20 feet of its boundaries include 14 black cherry trees (DBH range 7.0 to 42.8 inches), one hackberry (DBH 4.9 inches), and one white ash (DBH 4.4 inches). Zone 4 represents the pipeline segment that would be placed beneath Rockaway Inlet/Jamaica Bay, and includes no terrestrial resources. The area around Zone 5 includes manicured lawns surrounding the access roads to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge, sparse areas of woody and scrub-shrub species, and street trees. Both HDD and trenching (from the entry pit to Beach 169th Street) would be used to place the pipelines in this segment. Only one tree is present within 20 feet of the proposed trenching area (London plane, DBH 25 inches), and no trees are present within 20 feet of the proposed HDD staging area. The proposed staging area contains mowed turfgrass only. FAUNA The majority of the pipeline route would be principally used by urban-tolerant species, as the pipeline would be placed within or near major, busy roadways, including Hendrickson Street, Hendrickson Place, Flatbush Avenue, the Belt Parkway, and access roads to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge. Species observed in this area during the field surveys included eastern gray squirrel, house sparrow, rock pigeon, European starling, and raccoon. A greater richness of fauna would be expected in the natural habitats in the vicinity of the proposed project, including the scrub-shrub uplands near the northern end of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge and the shoreline and open water habitat of Rockaway Inlet/Jamaica Bay. Species observed during the field surveys within the scrub-shrub habitat included wintering species such as northern harrier (foraging), peregrine falcon (foraging), American and fish crows, blue jay, northern cardinal, yellow-rumped warbler, savannah sparrow, white-throated sparrow, song sparrow, and pine siskin. Within Rockaway Inlet, a wide array of gulls and waterfowl were observed, including ring-billed gull, herring gull, greater and lesser black-backed gulls, bufflehead, red-breasted merganser, common goldeneye, and ruddy duck. During the breeding season, these areas are known to support over 50 species of breeding birds (NYSDEC Breeding Bird Atlas Blocks 5849B and 5849D), and would likely support a variety of mammals, insects (i.e., dragonflies, damselflies, butterflies, moths and others), and perhaps amphibians (i.e., Fowlers toad). One estuarine reptile, the northern diamondback terrapin, breeds and forages within Jamaica Bay; it is considered a game species in New York State. Within the vicinity of the project site, terrapins would be expected to forage within the waters of Rockaway Inlet, and may potentially nest along the sandy shoreline of the northern edge of the inlet. The area of disturbance for E-6
directional drilling on the north side of the inlet, however, would be located beyond any suitable terrapin nesting sites. The southern side of the inlet is covered with debris, wrack, and riprap, and would not likely be suitable nesting habitat for northern diamondback terrapins. RARE, SPECIAL CONCERN, THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES AND HABITATS HABITATS NYNHP did not note any sensitive habitat communities within the project area (Salerno 2009). The New York State Department of State (NYSDOS) has designated Jamaica Bay as a Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat (Block NY-22, NYS Coastal Management Program Atlas 2002). Jamaica Bay has exceptional value for a variety of aquatic and terrestrial wildlife. It is an important breeding site, migratory stopover site, and overwintering site for over 300 species of birds. Finfish biodiversity is high in the bay and is composed of species that either migrate through or breed in its waters, and the bay serves as a nursery and feeding area for a variety of fish species (NYSDOS 1992). The boundary for the Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat includes the marine and estuarine habitats within the -mile study area and beyond. FLORA Table E-1 notes all New York State and federally listed plant species previously recorded at, or in the vicinity of, the project site. NYNHP noted six species as occurring within the vicinity of the proposed project (Salerno 2009, PS&S 2008). USFWS listed one plant species as occurring within Kings and Queens Counties (USFWS 2009).
Table E-1 New York State and Federally Listed Plants in the Vicinity of the Proposed Project
Common Name Red Pigweed Schweinitzs Flatsedge Retrorse Flatsedge Slender Crabgrass Seabeach amaranth Seabeach Knotweed Sources: Scientific Name Chenopodium rubrum Cyperus schweinitzii Cyperus retrorsus Digitaria filiformis Amaranthus pumilus Polygonum glaucum NY Legal Status NY Threatened NY Rare NY Endangered NY Threatened NY Endangered/Fed threatened NY Rare NYS Rank Imperiled Vulnerable Critically Imperiled Critically Imperiled Imperiled Vulnerable Location(s) Floyd Bennett Field Floyd Bennett Field Marine Park Rockaways Jacob Riis Rockaways
Salerno 2009, Colligan 2009, USFWS 2009.
FAUNA Table E-2 notes all New York State and federally listed wildlife species previously recorded at, or in the vicinity of, the project site. NYNHP noted five bird species and one butterfly species as rare, special concern, threatened, or endangered species occurring within the vicinity of the proposed project (Salerno 2009). USFWS listed one fish species as occurring within Kings and Queens Counties (USFWS 2009). NMFS noted four species of threatened or endangered sea turtles as potentially occurring within the waters of Rockaway Inlet/Jamaica Bay (NMFS 2009).
E-7
Table E-2 New York State and Federally Listed Terrestrial and Aquatic Wildlife in the Vicinity of the Proposed Project
Common Name Short-eared Owl Northern Harrier Scientific name Asio flammeus Circus cyaneus NY/Federal Status NY Endangered NY Threatened Location(s) At, or in the vicinity of site At, or in the vicinity of site; observed during AKRF field observations on February 4, 2009 At, or in the vicinity of site; observed during AKRF field observations on February 4, 2009. Confirmed breeder on the Marine Parkway Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge in late April 2009. Open terrestrial habitat around Jamaica Bay. Nest boxes used by breeding populations present in woodlands in Floyd Bennett Field.
Peregrine Falcon
Falco peregrinus
NY Endangered
Barn Owl
Tyto alba Sterna dougallii dougallii Charadrius melodus Calycopis cecrops Caretta caretta Lepidochelys kempi
Unlisted
Roseate tern Piping Plover Red-banded Hairstreak Loggerhead Turtle Kemps ridley turtle Green sea turtle Leatherback turtle Shortnose sturgeon Sources:
NY/Fed Endangered Jamaica Bay area NY Endangered/Fed Jamaica Bay area Threatened Unlisted Floyd Bennett Field area Waters of Rockaway Inlet/Jamaica Bay Waters of Rockaway Inlet/Jamaica Bay Waters of Rockaway Inlet/Atlantic Ocean Waters of Rockaway Inlet/Atlantic Ocean Waters of Rockaway Inlet/Atlantic Ocean
NY/Fed Threatened NY/Fed Endangered NY Threatened/Fed Chelonia mydas Endangered Dermochelys coriacea NY/Fed Endangered Acipenser NY/Fed Endangered brevirostrum
Salerno 2009, Colligan 2009, USFWS 2009
There is a Peregrine Falcon nest in the south tower of the lift span of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge. Peregrine Falcons nesting season is generally between December and July.
D. PROBABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts to aquatic or terrestrial natural resources in the Jamaica Bay area. The terrestrial activities of the proposed project would include trenching within a busy roadway and the establishment of directional drilling staging sites in areas containing heavily disturbed habitat adjacent to access roads for the Belt Parkway and Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge. All project-related disturbances would occur within MTA B&T property for the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge on Rockaway Peninsula, Flatbush Avenue, Hendrickson Place, Hendrickson Street, and Avenue U as well as within a small portion of Marine Park at the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchange. All 97 trees found within 20 feet of proposed trenching and staging locations, and thus vulnerable to root damage or requiring removal, have been inventoried and measured. It was determined that four eastern red cedars, one sweet gum, and one white ash, all 9 inches DBH or less, would be removed within Zone 2 as part of the staging area. Three black cherry trees, 7 inches DBH or less, would be removed within Zone 3 as part of the staging area. A Tree Protection and Replacement Plan would be prepared and submitted by National Grid to NYCDPR for approval. E-8
The plan would be designed and implemented in accordance with Local Law 3 of 2010 to prevent damage to nearby trees and to replace trees that would be lost to the project. Replacement of the 9 trees that would be lost during construction would be on a basal diameter basis, and not on a one-to-one basis. The protection part of the plan would prevent or minimize damage to 88 (97 total trees within 20 feet and 9 being removed and replaced) trees that are within 20 feet of the construction. If a tree is accidently damaged during construction, it would either be replaced if too badly damaged to survive, or repaired and its health monitored. Other terrestrial measures would be taken to (1) prevent runoff of excavated material into terrestrial natural areas, wetlands, and waterways; (2) prevent the passage of wildlife into the construction area by means of silt fencing; and (3) ensure restoration of any open space or parkland disturbed as a result of the proposed project. Trees removed or damaged on MTA B&T property would be restored or replaced in accordance with the MTA B&T construction permit. Due to the depths of the directional drilling, there would be no significant adverse impacts to aquatic habitat or aquatic organisms, including transient marine turtles or northern diamondback terrapins. The pipelines would be installed well below the design dredge depth and the existing depth of the sea bed. No wetlands would be disturbed as a result of construction or normal operation of the proposed project. Four Sparrow Marsh would not be affected by the proposed project as the installation of the 30-inch pipeline in Phase II would occur on the west side of Flatbush Avenue while Four Sparrow Marsh is located on the east side, a distance of about 600 feet between the construction and Four Sparrow Marsh. Implementation of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would prevent sediment from entering Four Sparrow Marsh and the surrounding waterways. In terms of impacts to marine and estuarine waters and littoral zone, as the proposed pipelines would cross Rockaway Inlet, a part of the navigable waters of the United States, this project is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). USACE Nationwide Permit 12 authorizes activities required for the construction, maintenance, repair, and removal of utility lines and associated facilities in waters of the United States, provided the activity does not result in the loss of greater than acre of waters of the United States. In May 2009 National Grid was issued a two-year permit from USACE to directionally drill and install pipelines under Rockaway Inlet. USACE concurred that the project can be constructed under Nationwide Permit 12. USACE is actively processing the renewal of the Nationwide Permit 12 for the project. Compared to the expired Nationwide Permit 12, the exit area of the HDD is now further north in the vicinity of Aviation Road and away from Jamaica Bay. Therefore, the proposed project is even less likely to affect the resources that the USACE is mandated to protect. Additionally, NYSDEC has issued a Section 401 water quality certification as part of the Nationwide Permit 12 with the USACE. Pipeline construction would involve heavy equipment, which can be noisy and create a disturbance to wildlife. However, construction activities would take place in an area that already experiences high levels of disturbance due to heavy traffic volume and other human activities. The wildlife species occurring in the project site are primarily urban-adapted, disturbancetolerant species that are unlikely to be adversely affected by the added construction noise. Further, ample habitat is available in close proximity to the project site, to which wildlife could easily disperse. Several rare, special concern, threatened, and endangered species were noted to occur near the project site, primarily in the Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge. However, for State and federally listed wildlife, no critical habitat areas for these species would be disturbed, and foraging
E-9
activities could occur unimpeded. While no State or federally listed plant species were observed within the proposed pipeline route, there are at least two areas (the scrub-shrub/grassland area [Zone 3] and the shoreline south of Rockaway Inlet [Zone 5]) that may contain suitable habitat for listed plant species (i.e., retrorse and Schweinitzs flatsedges, seabeach knotweed). None of the listed plant species were identified during spring, autumn, or winter field observations at the project site. In spite of the timing of the field observations occurring during the inactive period for most of the list species, it is highly unlikely that populations of these species would be present in any of the areas that would be disturbed during construction. A preconstruction site inspection would be conducted prior to installation of the proposed pipelines, particularly directed towards identifying the presence of any flora or fauna of concern (including listed plant species, dispersing reptiles or amphibians and bridge-nesting Peregrine Falcons) and determining the need for the placement of structures to discourage the movement of wildlife into areas of construction disturbance. Where necessary, protective, silt fencing would be placed along the shoreline to prevent any wildlife from entering the construction site. Because the proposed pipeline would be installed under Rockaway Inlet, no significant adverse impacts to aquatic resources would occur from the proposed project. JAMAICA BAY WATERSHED PROTECTION PLAN The New York City Department of Environmental Protections Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan (JBWPP) (as required by New York City Local Law 71 of 2005 [to amend the administrative code of the City of New York, in relation to developing a watershed protection plan for the watershed/sewershed of Jamaica Bay, signed July 20, 2005]) was developed to ensure a comprehensive watershed approach toward restoring and maintaining the water quality and ecological integrity of Jamaica Bay. The Plan identifies six principal areas critical to the restoration of Jamaica Bay, including water quality, restoration ecology, stormwater management through sound land use, public education and outreach, public use and enjoyment, and implementation and coordination. The construction phase of the proposed project would involve ground disturbance in terrestrial areas during trenching and directional drilling, and the potential exists for sediment to be suspended and carried into the bay during storm events. As described in Attachment H, Construction Impacts, proposed erosion and sediment control practices would minimize the possibility that sediment produced during construction would reach the bays waters. The project would involve HDD beneath Rockaway Inlet/Jamaica Bay in the vicinity of the Marine ParkwayGil Hodges Memorial Bridge. The proposed pipelines would be placed beneath the bay. The safety of the proposed project is discussed in Attachment I, Public Health and Safety. A portion of the directional drilling would occur in a natural area within the MTA B&T property adjacent to Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge; however, this activity would involve minimal ground disturbance and no freshwater or tidal wetlands would likely be adversely impacted by construction or operation of the proposed project. For these reasons, the proposed project would comply with policies defined in the JBWPP, and would not adversely impact the water quality or ecological integrity of the bay. Additionally, the proposed project would not conflict with any JBWPP Implementation Strategies as defined within the Plans Table ES-1, nor would it conflict with any implementation strategies identified for future consideration (JBWPP, Volume 2, Chapter 9).
E-10
Attachment F:
Hazardous Materials
A. INTRODUCTION
This section assesses the possibility that hazardous materials may be found in soil or groundwater on-site and evaluates the potential impacts associated with the National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect project. To identify potential sources of hazardous materials, a limited Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted that included: An environmental database search of categories that are consistent with current industry standards, including ASTM E1527-05 (the search radii for off-site properties were modified given the extent of the study area and its location); A review of historical Sanborn maps from 1907, 1930, 1950, 1968, 1981, 1989, and 2007 to determine previous on-site and adjacent land uses; A site reconnaissance and general characterization from public rights-of-way; and A determination of the need for further investigations to identify and quantify potential contamination and related liabilities.
B. HISTORICAL AND EXISTING CONDITIONS

Results of the limited Phase I ESA are summarized in Table F-1 and discussed in this attachment. The study area consists of an area of proposed construction along Hendrickson Street between Avenue U and Hendrickson Place, Hendrickson Place, and Flatbush Avenue from Hendrickson Place in Brooklyn, to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula, Queens. The proposed development encompasses an approximately 20,300-foot corridor. The northern approximately 0.5-mile portion of the corridor comprises a higher concentration of development, including commercial and residential properties. An urban mixture of residential and commercial properties, including gasoline stations, is located beyond the northern terminus of the corridor. The central 2.5 miles leading to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge consists of more sparse development and includes retail/commercial properties, marinas, a golf course, and Floyd Bennett Field. The southern portion of the site includes the approximately 0.75-mile Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge (the pipelines would be installed beneath Rockaway Inlet parallel to the bridge, west of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Bridge within the designated cable area). A listing of specific sites located along the study area is provided in Table F-1.
F-1
Table F-1 Environmental Issues

Location Map ID # Facility / Address Distance / Direction Environmental Issue Active Hazardous Spill Database Review A release of gasoline was reported in November 1993. Ongoing remediation included an Anaerobic Biostimulation Pilot Study in 2007 and 2008. Site Reconnaissance (north to south) Vee Arnis Jujitsu, Kings Diner, Advanced Footcare Group, parking lot, Sleepy's, NY Nasal Treatment Center, North Fork Bank, residences, Midas Auto Repair, Parkside Memorial Chapel, two vacant retail unit (formerly Kristal Auto Mall and Sam Ash Music) Sanborn Map Review (north to south)
16
1907: Undeveloped land
22
BP Amoco Station #551 4100 Avenue U
West-adjacent
Closed Status Tank Failure Petroleum Bulk Storage
A tank test failure was closed on 6/13/03. Three 4,000-gallon gasoline USTs and one 550-gallon UST with unknown contents were removed from the site. Five 4,000-gallon gasoline USTs and one 550-gallon UST with unknown contents were listed in service. Ignitable solid waste was generated in 1994. The facility generates emissions of volatile organic compounds. Gasoline contamination was first discovered in 1990. Additional releases have been reported and remedial activities are reported to continue. A tank test failure was closed on 4/17/92. Three spills were reported at this address. Free product was discovered during a groundwater sampling event. The spill was closed 12/22/06. Releases of used oil and petroleum were cleaned and closed on 12/7/04. Six releases of gasoline were closed on 11/2/92, 8/3/89, 5/19/03, 11/13/06, 12/7/04, and 5/19/03. Five 4,000-gallon gasoline USTs, two 1,000-gallon #2 fuel oil USTs, one 1,000gallon waste oil UST, and one 1,000gallon UST with unknown contents are registered at the site. 1930: Single-family residences, Auto Repair Garages, Marine Swimming Pool Inc., United Dry Docks Inc. (marine supply storage), JP Duffy Co. Mason Supplies
133
142 Northern Section 1 (1/2mile) 147
Hazardous Waste Generator/ Transporter Air Discharge Site Active Hazardous Spill
1950: Filling Station, Single-family residences, Auto Repair Garages, Former Swimming Pool 1968: Filling Stations, Town & Country Club, residential and commercial properties 1981 & 1989: Commercial properties (Bank, Undertaker, Auto Sales, Offices)
15 Closed Status Tank Failure Closed Status Spill (other cause) Mobil Station #17 2474 Flatbush Avenue Northeast-adjacent Closed Status Spill (miscellaneous cause) Petroleum Bulk Storage 131
21
44 through 46 105 through 110
2007: Commercial properties (Bank, Undertaker, Auto Sales, Offices)
F-2
Attachment F: Hazardous Materials
Table F-1 (contd) Environmental Issues

Location Northern Section 1 (1/2mile) Map ID # 140 146 7 10 Facility / Address Mobil Station #17 2474 Flatbush Avenue Midas 2560 Flatbush Avenue Distance / Direction Northeast-adjacent Environmental Issue Hazardous Waste Generator/ Transporter Air Discharge Site Active Hazardous Spill Closed Status Spill (other cause) Database Review Ignitable solid waste was generated in 1992. The facility generates emissions of volatile organic compounds. A petroleum release was reported on 9/18/08. Leaking transformers were removed from vault. The spill was cleaned and closed on 11/28/01. Illegal asbestos dumping was reported and closed on 4/29/87. A motor oil release was cleaned and closed on 11/4/02. A PCB-containing oil release in a ConEd vault was cleaned and closed on 1/18/01. Lead was generated in 2001 by the New York City Department of Transportation. A petroleum release in the nearby water body was reported and closed on 2/9/04. A petroleum release in the nearby water body was reported and closed as of 11/17/94. A sunken vessel released petroleum; the spill was closed on 7/22/03. Three 4,000-gallon gasoline and two 4,000-gallon diesel fuel USTs were administratively closed in 1999. A 1,500-gallon #2 fuel oil UST was closed in 2003, and a 2,000-gallon #2 fuel oil UST is reported as in service. The site is listed as a Large Quantity Generator. No further information was available. Gasoline contamination was reported in 1996, and a dual phase extraction system is in place. The release is being remediated under a NYCDDC consent order. Site Reconnaissance (north to south) Sanborn Map Review (north to south)
East-adjacent
32 through 34
Belt Parkway and Flatbush Avenue*
On-Site
Closed Status Spill (miscellaneous causes)
Nick's Lobster Fish Market and Restaurant, Sea Travelers Marina, Toys R Us, Marine Park Golf Course, Gateway National Recreation Area, Floyd Bennett Field, Gateway Marina
1907: Waterway (Flatlands Bay and Mill Creek) 1930: Mill Basin, FJ Kerner Coal Co. Inc., N Ryan Co. Inc. Sand Stone & Gravel, Bureau of Highways, Mahoney & Busch Sand & Gravel, Burns Bros. Coal, Floyd Bennett Field Municipal Airport, Public Park
57 Corvette Marina 2727 Flatbush Avenue 2773 Flatbush Avenue Nick's Lobster House 2777 Flatbush Avenue Allan Profeta 2801 Flatbush Avenue West-adjacent
Hazardous Waste Generator/ Transporter Closed Status Spill (other cause) Closed Status Spill (miscellaneous cause) Closed Status Spill (other cause) Petroleum Bulk Storage
11
West- adjacent
Middle Section 2 (2.5-mile)
35
1950: Mill Basin, Brooklyn Marine Park, N Ryan Co. Inc. Sand Stone & Gravel, Burns Bros. Coal, Floyd Bennett Field U.S Govt. Occupancy (not corrected since 1941), U.S. Naval Reservation and Sewage Treatment Plant, Tribourough Bridge Authority Toll Gates
West-adjacent
12 45 53 and 54 60
West-adjacent
Petroleum Bulk Storage Hazardous Waste Generator/ Transporter West-adjacent
1968: Mill Basin, Brooklyn Marine Park, N Ryan Co. Inc. Boat Sales and Storage, Floyd Bennett Field U.S Govt. Occupancy (not corrected since 1941), U.S. Naval Reservation and Sewage Treatment Plant, Triborough Bridge Authority Toll Gates
Marine Park Golf Course 2900 Flatbush Avenue
1 through 3
Active Tank Failure
1981 & 1989: Mill Basin, Brooklyn Marine Park, Golf Course, Marina Boat Sales and Storage, Floyd Bennett Field U.S Govt. Occupancy (not corrected since 1941), U.S. Naval Reservation and Sewage Treatment Plant, Triborough Bridge Authority Toll Gates
F-3

Location Map ID # Facility / Address Distance / Direction Environmental Issue Database Review A 2,500-gallon #2 fuel oil tank failure was closed on 4/24/03. A 1,000-gallon gasoline tank failure was closed on 10/31/03. Site Reconnaissance (north to south) Nick's Lobster Fish Market and Restaurant, Sea Travelers Marina, Toys R Us, Marine Park Golf Course, Gateway National Recreation Area, Floyd Bennett Field, Gateway Marina Sanborn Map Review (north to south) 1981 & 1989: Mill Basin, Brooklyn Marine Park, Golf Course, Marina Boat Sales and Storage, Floyd Bennett Field U.S Govt. Occupancy (not corrected since 1941), U.S. Naval Reservation and Sewage Treatment Plant, Triborough Bridge Authority Toll Gates 2007: Mill Basin, Brooklyn Marine Park, Golf Course, Boat Sales and Storage, Floyd Bennett Field U.S Govt. Occupancy (not corrected since 1941), U.S. Naval Reservation and Sewage Treatment Plant, Triborough Bridge Authority Toll Gates
8 and 9
Closed Status Tank Failure
20 through 23 Marine Park Golf Course 2900 Flatbush Avenue West-adjacent
Closed Status Spill (other causes)
41 and 42
Closed Status Spill (miscellaneous causes)
Middle Section 2 (2.5-mile)
Petroleum Bulk Storage 50 and 51 59 14 through 19 39 46 and 47 Hazardous Waste Generator/ Transporter Closed Status Spill (other causes) Gateway Marina 3260 Flatbush Avenue West-adjacent Closed Status Spill (miscellaneous cause) Petroleum Bulk Storage Closed Status Spill (miscellaneous cause) East-adjacent Petroleum Bulk Storage Wastewater Discharge Facilities
40 52 61
Aviation Unit Floyd Bennett Field*
A gasoline release with MTBE was closed on 11/3/03. A #2 fuel oil release was closed on 10/28/96. A gasoline release was closed on 4/25/03. An unknown release was closed on 2/13/03. Two spills were reported at this address. A gasoline release was closed on 10/31/03. A hydraulic oil release was closed on 12/28/04. Eight gasoline and diesel fuel USTs were removed between 1996 and 2000. Two #2 fuel oil ASTs, one kerosene AST, three 4,000-gallon gasoline USTs, and two 2,500 #2 fuel oil USTs were registered at the property. The site is listed as a generator. No further information was available. Six minor petroleum spills were reported and closed in 1992, 1999, 2002, 2003, and 2005. A jet fuel release into the waterway was closed on 8/6/97. Five 4,000-gallon gasoline and diesel fuel USTs were administratively closed in 1999. (listed twice) A petroleum release into the nearby waterway due to an overfilled tank was closed on 12/31/97. A 25,000-gallon #2 fuel oil UST was registered at the site. A permit for minor discharge was issued in 1995.
F-4

Site Reconnaissance Database Review (north to south) Three tank failures were reported at this address. A gasoline tank failure Closed Status Tank 4, 5 and was closed on 12/23/03. A waste oil Failure 7 tank failure was closed on 1/2/04. Failure of a #2 fuel oil tank was closed on 12/9/03. Closed Status Spill A diesel fuel release was closed on 13 (other cause) 12/9/03. Three spills were reported at this address. A gasoline release was 36 Closed Status Spill Marine Parkway closed on 11/19/99. A transformer oil Middle through Bridge 2901 East-adjacent (miscellaneous causes) release was closed on 12/23/03. A Section 2 38 Flatbush Avenue petroleum release was closed on (2.5-mile) 11/15/89. Four petroleum USTs were removed in 1998. One 170-gallon #2 fuel oil AST, one 5,000-gallon #2 fuel oil AST, 48 and Petroleum Bulk Storage one 1,000-gallon diesel fuel UST, one 49 280-gallon waste oil AST, and one 1,600-gallon gasoline UST were registered at the site. Hazardous Waste The site is listed as a generator. No 58 Generator/ Transporter further information was available. Two spills were reported at this Marine Parkway Gil Hodges Closed Status Spill address. A petroleum release was Memorial Bridge 1 and 2 (other causes) closed on 9/2/94. A petroleum release from a barge was closed on 9/26/00. Southern Two spills were reported at this Marine Parkway Section 3 On-Site Closed Status Spill address. A diesel fuel release was 6 and 7 Bridge* (miscellaneous causes) closed on 5/8/07. A diesel fuel release (3/4-mile) into the sewer was closed on 7/9/03. Hazardous Waste Lead, benzene, corrosive solid waste, 10 Generator/ Transporter and ignitable solid waste were generated between 1996 and 2008. Note: *These sites were mapped with a general address, which may not be an accurate location of the associated environmental issue. Location Facility / Address Environmental Issue Map ID # Distance / Direction Sanborn Map Review (north to south)
1907 and 1930: Waterway (Flatlands Bay and Mill Creek) 1950, 1968, 1981, 1989 & 2007: Bridge over waterway (Rockaway Inlet)
F-5
A review of historic Sanborn maps indicates that the northern 1-mile portion of the site was first developed sometime between 1907 and 1930 and the area had a history of residential and commercial uses. South of this area to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge, historic site uses along the corridor included commercial marinas, coal yards, sand and stone yards, the U.S. Naval Reservation and Sewage Treatment Plant, Floyd Bennett Field, commercial sites, and parks. A portion of the study area (the southern end of Floyd Bennett Field) was previously Barren Island, which became a landfill during the mid- to late-19th century until its closure in 1918. The creation of land by infilling began in the early 20th century, and the area around Barren Island was filled using earth dredged from the bottom of Jamaica Bay. The construction of Floyd Bennett Field, New York Citys first municipal airport, began in 1928. The Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge was built in 1936, connecting Flatbush Avenue to the Rockaway Peninsula. Commercial properties along the northern portion of the corridor were constructed sometime between 1907 and 1930, and more commercial and auto-related facilities are present in the later maps. A review of regulatory records indicates that the project area contains Hazardous Waste Generators/Transporters, Hazardous Material Spills, underground storage tanks (USTs), and Petroleum Bulk Storage Sites, which are summarized in Table F-1. It should be noted that in some cases, the locations of sites of concern identified by the regulatory database search were based on incomplete or incorrect address information and their exact locations cannot be verified. Petroleum storage tanks and reported spills were identified by the regulatory database search within the northern portion of the site. In this northern section, petroleum releases were reported for the northeast-adjacent Mobil Station, the west-adjacent Amoco station, and the east adjacent Midas facility. In the central 2.5-mile section leading to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge, petroleum releases were reported for the commercial properties along the corridor, including the west-adjacent Marine Park Golf Course, the west-adjacent Gateway Marina, and east-adjacent Floyd Bennett Field. Several hazardous waste generators were identified within and adjacent to the northern portion of the study area. Lead waste was generated within the corridor from sand blasting and bridge repainting by the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) near the intersection of Flatbush Avenue and Belt Parkway. Illegal asbestos dumping, since cleaned up, was reported near the intersection of Flatbush Avenue and the Belt Parkway. The length at the southern end of the corridor is approximately -miles-long and is within the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge corridor (as noted above, the pipelines would be installed beneath Rockaway Inlet parallel to the bridge west of bridge in the designated cable area). Petroleum releases were identified by the regulatory database search within the roadway and waterway. Lead, benzene, and corrosive and ignitable solid waste were generated within the corridor from repair work and maintenance of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge by the MTA Bridges & Tunnels (MTA B&T). The limited Phase I ESA identified the following Recognized Environmental Conditions in connection with the study area: Sites within and adjacent to the project area currently have, or once had, petroleum aboveground storage tanks and/or USTs, containing heating oil and gasoline. Boating and boat maintenance activities at other past or present marinas along the waterfront areas of the central portion of the study area have the potential to have released petroleum, solvents, and metals into the surrounding area. F-6
Pesticides and herbicides were likely used along the entire land bound portion of the study area as part of road landscaping activities at both the Marine Park Golf Course and Floyd Bennett Field. The site is underlain by urban fill. Although the Barren Island landfill area (Floyd Bennett Field) is known to have been developed using dredged material from Jamaica Bay, additional sources of fill may have been used, as well. Electrical equipment and transformers along the project corridor may include PCBcontaining components and/or mercury-containing components. In addition to materials within existing structures, subsurface utility lines may be coated with asbestos or encased in transite, an asbestos-containing material (ACM). Depending upon their age, structures in the project area, including roadways and bridges, may contain lead-based paint. Auto-related and commercial facilities have historically occupied the area surrounding the northern and central portions of the study area.
C. PROBABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

The limited Phase I ESA conducted did not identify the potential for widespread contamination of the soil or the groundwater at the study area. Nevertheless, localized pockets of contamination were identified by the ESA, and there is a potential for undocumented/unforeseen contamination to exist in other areas within the study area. A limited Phase II sampling and testing program would be undertaken to further characterize the soils that would be encountered during construction. The Phase II program would target those areas identified in the Phase I EAS as having previous spills or industries that used hazardous materials, such as dry cleaners. Tests for hazardous materials commonly found in urban soils, such as metals and semivolatile organic compounds, would be specified as well as chemicals of public health concern, such as polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB). The Phase II protocol would be submitted to the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP) for review and approval prior to conducting the Phase II sampling and testing. Conventional cut and cover excavation activities and horizontal directional drilling (HDD) conducted as part of the proposed project could disturb contaminants and increase pathways for human exposure. This potential for contamination exists in almost any urban area and is particularly common in New York City. National Grid and other utility service providers (e.g., Consolidated Edison, Empire City Subway, and NYCDOT and NYCDEP) regularly perform cut and cover activities in the streets of New York City and have developed standard methods for dealing with potentially contaminated soils along these linear projects. The potential for adverse impacts due to the presence of subsurface contamination would be avoided by ensuring that construction activities are performed in accordance with the following commonly used protocols that have been developed and proven effective over the course of many years: To minimize the potential for impacts to the community and construction workers, all excavation and construction work involving soil disturbance would be performed under a Construction Health and Safety Plan, to be reviewed and approved by NYCDEP and MTA B&T. The Construction Health and Safety Plan would be informed by the results of the Phase I ESA and Phase II sampling and testing program. The Construction Health and Safety Plan would be prepared by the contractor, conforming to National Grids
F-7
environmental policies, and modified for the specific site conditions. A Construction Health and Safety Plan outlines measures for managing contaminated on-site soil and groundwater in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations. Contaminated soil management includes guidelines for temporary on-site stockpiling and off-site transportation and disposal. Excavated soil requiring off-site disposal, if any, would be managed in accordance with applicable laws and requirements, and, as necessary, tested in accordance with the requirements of the intended receiving facility. Transportation of all material leaving the site would be in accordance with applicable requirements covering licensing of haulers and trucks, placarding, truck routes, manifesting, etc. Areas where contamination, if any, is discovered during excavation activities would be delineated and remediated in accordance with all applicable regulations. Any petroleum storage tanks encountered during cut and cover activities would be properly closed and removed in accordance with all applicable regulations. Any associated soil and/or groundwater contamination would be remediated as required by New York State Department of Environmental Conservations Petroleum Spill Program. If dewatering is required, testing would be performed to ensure compliance with NYCDEP discharge permit/approval requirements and, if necessary, pre-treatment would be conducted prior to discharge. Unless there is labeling or test data that indicates that electrical equipment, including transformers, are not mercury- and/or PCB-containing, removal and disposal of these items would be performed in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations and guidelines. Prior to any construction activities required as part of the proposed project that may disturb potential asbestos-containing materials, an asbestos survey of such structures would be conducted. Based on the findings of the survey, the identified ACMs, if any, would be removed and disposed of in accordance with all applicable regulations. Any activities with the potential to disturb structures with lead-based paint, if any, would be performed in accordance with the applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulation (OSHA 29 CFR 1926.62 - Lead Exposure in Construction). With the implementation of these measures, no significant adverse impacts related to hazardous materials would result from construction activities. Additionally, based on the implementation of the protective measures described in Attachment I Public Health and Safety, the risk of release due to pipeline rupture following construction would be minimal. Accordingly, the project would not result in any significant adverse impacts from hazardous materials.
F-8
Attachment G:
Coastal Zone Consistency
A. NEW YORK CITY COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

This attachment examines the consistency of the proposed project with New York Citys Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP). The proposed project would install new natural gas pipelines under Hendrickson Street between Avenue U and Hendrickson Place, under Hendrickson Place, and under Flatbush Avenue from Hendrickson Place, Brooklyn, along areas adjacent to Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula, Queens. The property, on which the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge is situated, was irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, popularly known as Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Bridges and Tunnels (MTA B&T). The total length of the proposed route is approximately 20,300 feet. The proposed project would take place in two phases. Phase I of the pipeline would be the installation of two parallel natural gas pipelines below Rockaway Inlet. Although some of the area surrounding the pipelines is federal parkland and not subject to New York State Coastal Zone Management Program, the MTA B&T property is subject to the New York State Coastal Zone Management Program. Phase II would be the installation of a natural gas pipeline between Flatbush Avenue and a point in the vicinity of the southern most airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field (the northern terminus of Phase I) and Flatbush Avenue and Hendrickson Place then along Hendrickson Place and Hendrickson Street between Avenue U and Hendrickson Place. A portion of the Phase II route north of the federal parklands would be within the coastal zone boundary (see Figure G-1). Therefore, the proposed project is subject to the Citys Coastal Zone Management Program. The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 was established to support and protect the distinctive character of the waterfront, and to set forth standard policies for reviewing proposed development projects along coastlines. The program addressed local, state, and federal concerns about the deterioration and inappropriate use of the waterfront. In response, New York State adopted its Coastal Management Program, designed to balance economic development and preservation by promoting waterfront revitalization and water-dependent uses while protecting fish and wildlife, open space and scenic areas, public access to the shoreline, and farmland; and minimizing adverse changes to ecological systems and in erosion and flood hazards. The program provides for local implementation when a municipality adopts a local waterfront revitalization program, as is the case in New York City. The New York City WRP encourages coordination among all levels of government to promote sound waterfront planning and requires consideration of the programs goals in making land use decisions. The New York State Department of State administers the program at the State level, and the New York City Department of City Planning administers it in the City.
G-1
12.2.11
H 55TH ST
53RD ST
65
51ST ST
D D 3R 63
TH
T TH 58 ST
ST
ST
STR ICK LA
E AV
NU
ND AV
E AV
NU
N
MAYFAIR DR
BELT
M
H 6T 36 T ST
E AV N UE V
IL
E AV
TH ST
ST
BAS SE
BARLO W DR
AN DR WHITM
TT A VE
PKWY
Lindower Park
ISLAND CHANNEL
64
NA O T TI N NA L DR
66
TH
NAT
ION
AL D
MILL BASIN
Long Pol Bar
BE VY AN FA E E CT
L RT BA ET T PL
U US TB AT FL H H

G G R ER S IT RI EN
T CT
L IL M CR EE K
VE AV
Floyd Bennett Field
IR A C CT
E AV
B AB E BE Y CT
AR DA E E CT
O NO L EL
M AD O C C VE AV
SHELL BANK CREEK
VE AV
DEEP CREEK
GERRITSEN INLET
DEAD HORSE BAY
TIO AVIA
NR
Source: New York State Department of State, Division of Coastal Resources
Floyd Bennett Field

MA N RIN EP YB K KW
ROCKAWAY INLET
ID RID GE
Riis Landing
BAYSIDE
RE TR D
D
Jacob Riis Park
Breezy Point
R BA
P AY K AW OIN TB LVD
MU
RR
R AY
R RO HER
Proposed Natural Gas Pipelines Phase I Phase II Coastal Zone Boundary

MARKET ST
C RO
MA
H RS
AL
LR
Transit Ferry Dock and Ferry Route

0 2000
R RE AVE ID A
N RA
GE
RD
Fort Tilden
IS DAV
RD
4000 FEET
SCALE
Coastal Zone Boundary

Figure G-1
The WRP is the Citys principal coastal zone management tool. The original WRP, adopted in 1982, included 44 State policies and 12 City policies. It established the Citys policies for development and use of the waterfront and provided a framework for evaluating discretionary actions in the coastal zone. A revised WRP was approved by the City Council in October 1999. The overhaul of the WRP was the result of the numerous plans and studies focusing on New York Citys waterfront that led to a better understanding of the conditions and issues facing the waterfront. The goal was to simplify and clarify the review process. This attachment reviews the 10 New York City coastal zone policies, which constitute the new WRP, and assesses, where applicable, the general consistency of the proposed project with those policies. A completed New York City WRP Consistency Assessment Form is also provided below.
B. NEW YORK CITY WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION POLICIES

New York Citys new WRP includes 10 policies designed to maximize the benefits derived from economic development, environmental preservation, and public use of the waterfront, while minimizing the conflicts among those objectives. Each policy is presented below, followed by a discussion of the consistency of the proposed project with the policy. Policy 1: Support and facilitate commercial and residential redevelopment in appropriate coastal zone areas. Policy 1.1: Encourage commercial and residential redevelopment in appropriate coastal zone areas. The project does not propose new commercial or residential development. Therefore, the above policy does not apply. However, the proposed project would reinforce natural gas delivery to sites within the coastal zone area, which would allow for appropriate development. Policy 1.2: Encourage non-industrial development that enlivens the waterfront and attracts the public. The proposed project does not propose any non-industrial development along the waterfront. Therefore, the above policy does not apply. However, the increased natural gas supply could foster non-industrial development that would enliven the waterfront. Policy 1.3: Encourage redevelopment in the coastal area where public facilities and infrastructure are adequate or will be developed. As stated above, the project does not propose any new development; therefore this policy does not apply. The proposed project would reinforce the existing natural gas infrastructure in New York City. Policy 2: Support water-dependent and industrial uses in New York City coastal areas that are well-suited to their continued operation. Policy 2.1: Promote water-dependent and industrial uses in Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas. The project site is not located in a Significant Maritime and Industrial Area (SMIA). Therefore, this policy does not apply to the proposed project. Policy 2.2: Encourage working waterfront uses at appropriate sites outside the Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas.
G-2
Attachment G: Coastal Zone Consistency
The project does not propose new working waterfront uses. However, as stated above, the proposed project would reinforce natural gas delivery to sites within the coastal zone, allowing for working waterfront uses at appropriate sites. Policy 2.3: Provide infrastructure improvements necessary to support working waterfront uses. The proposed project consists of infrastructure improvements that would enhance gas system supply and reliability to support working waterfront uses. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the above policy. Policy 3: Promote use of New York Citys waterways for commercial and recreational boating and water-dependent transportation centers. Policy 3.1: Support and encourage recreational and commercial boating in New York Citys maritime centers. Policy 3.2: Minimize conflicts between recreational, commercial, and ocean-going freight vessels. Policy 3.3: Minimize impact of commercial and recreational boating activities on the aquatic environment and surrounding land and water uses. The proposed project would not affect recreational and commercial boating activities in New York Citys waterways; therefore, the above policies are not applicable. Policy 4: Protect and restore the quality and function of ecological systems within the New York City coastal area. Policy 4.1: Protect and restore the ecological quality and component habitats and resources within the Special Natural Waterfront Areas, Recognized Ecological Complexes and Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats. A portion of the project site would be located within the Jamaica Bay Special Natural Waterfront Area. The proposed project would be wholly located within previously disturbed landscaped areas and beneath paved roadways, as well as below the seabed in areas adjacent to the MTA B&Ts Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge. Therefore, the quality and function of ecological systems would not be affected, and the proposed project would be consistent with the above policy. Policy 4.2: Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands. The proposed gas pipelines would be installed well below the design dredge depth and the existing seabed of Rockaway Inlet via directional drilling. Therefore, the wetlands, waters, and estuarine environment of Rockaway Inlet and Jamaica Bay would not be affected. Drill entry and exit pits would be located upland and would not impact the tidal wetlands associated with the inlet and bay. The drill entry and exit pits would be located outside of tidal wetlands jurisdiction, and no equipment and materials would be placed or operated within the wetlands and littoral zone. Therefore, the proposed project would not have an adverse impact on tidal wetlands and would be consistent with the above policy. Policy 4.3: Protect vulnerable plant, fish, and wildlife species, and rare ecological communities. Design and develop land and water uses to maximize their integration or compatibility with the identified ecological community.
G-3
As described in detail in Attachment E, Natural Resources, the proposed project would not adversely impact any vulnerable fish and wildlife species or rare ecological communities. By placing the pipelines below ground and below the seabed, the project would be compatible with the coastal ecology. Policy 4.4: Maintain and protect living aquatic resources. As described in Attachment E, the project would have no significant adverse impacts on living aquatic resources. The proposed project would be consistent with this policy. Policy 5: Protect and improve water quality in the New York City coastal area. Policy 5.1: Manage direct or indirect discharges to waterbodies. The proposed project would avoid impacts to water quality during both construction and operation, utilizing the protection mechanisms described in Attachment H, Construction Impacts. The proposed project would not adversely impact any groundwater, streams, or sources of water for wetlands. For all of the above reasons, the proposed project would be consistent with this policy. Policy 5.2: Protect the quality of New York Citys waters by managing activities that generate non-point source pollution. The proposed project would not have any adverse impacts on local water quality. Attachment H describes measures proposed to protect against impacts during construction. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any adverse impacts on local water quality. Policy 5.3: Protect water quality when excavating or placing fill in navigable waters and in or near marshes, estuaries, tidal marshes or wetlands. The proposed project would not excavate or place fill in navigable waters or in marshes, estuaries, tidal marshes, or wetlands. The closest the Phase II pipeline comes to a wetland is Four Sparrow Marsh, which is about 600 feet from the pipeline at its closest point. At this distance, no fill would reach the wetlands. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with this policy. Policy 5.4: Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater, streams, and the sources of water for wetlands. The proposed project would not affect groundwater or sources of water for wetlands. Therefore, this policy does not apply. Policy 6: Minimize the loss of life, structures, and natural resources caused by flooding and erosion. Policy 6.1: Minimize losses from flooding and erosion by employing non-structural and structural management measures appropriate to the condition and use of the property to be protected and the surrounding area. The project site would be located within 100- and 500-year floodplains. The gas pipelines would be designed for flooding conditions and could be submerged without harm. Because the proposed pipelines would be underground, they would not have an effect on the surrounding area. The proposed project would therefore be consistent with this policy. Policy 6.2: Direct public funding for flood prevention or erosion control measures in those locations where the investment will yield significant public benefit. G-4
The proposed project would be privately funded and is not a flood prevention or erosion control project; therefore this policy does not apply. Policy 6.3: Protect and preserve non-renewable sources of sand for beach nourishment. The proposed project would not affect any beach nourishment activities, nor sand for beach nourishment. Therefore, this policy does not apply. Policy 7: Minimize environmental degradation from solid waste and hazardous substances. Policy 7.1: Manage solid waste material, hazardous wastes, toxic pollutants, and substances hazardous to the environment to protect public health, control pollution, and prevent degradation of coastal ecosystems. The proposed project would not generate solid or hazardous wastes or toxic materials during project operations. During construction, all suitable soils would be placed back in the trench. Unsuitable soils would be disposed of at a licensed landfill. To the extent that any contaminants exist on the site, excavated material would be tested and properly transported and disposed. With these measures in place, the proposed project would be consistent with this policy. Policy 7.2: Prevent and remediate discharge of petroleum products. The proposed project would not discharge any petroleum products. Therefore this policy does not apply. Policy 7.3: Transport solid waste and hazardous substances and site solid and hazardous waste facilities in a manner that minimizes potential degradation of coastal resources. The proposed project does not involve siting of waste facilities. Any potential hazardous materials from excavation would be transported in accordance with all local, State, and federal regulations. With these measures in place, the proposed project would be consistent with this policy. Policy 8: Provide public access to and along New York Citys coastal waters. Policy 8.1: Preserve, protect and maintain existing physical, visual, and recreational access to the waterfront. The proposed project would be underground and would not affect or hinder access to the waterfront, either physically or visually. The proposed project would be consistent with this policy. Policy 8.2: Incorporate public access into new public and private development where compatible with proposed land use and coastal location. No development would result from the proposed project; therefore this policy does not apply. Policy 8.3: Provide visual access to coastal lands, waters, and open space where physically practical. The proposed project would not affect visual access to coastal lands, waters, and open space; therefore this policy does not apply. Policy 8.4: Preserve and develop waterfront open space and recreation on publicly owned land at suitable locations. G-5
As stated previously, the proposed project would not develop or affect any waterfront open space and recreation. Therefore this policy is not applicable. Policy 8.5: Preserve the public interest in and use of lands and waters held in public trust by the state and city. The proposed project would have no effect on MTA B&Ts Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge, nearby parks, or Gateway National Recreation Area. These lands would remain in the public trust, and the proposed project would be consistent with this policy. Policy 9: Protect scenic resources that contribute to the visual quality of the New York City coastal area. Policy 9.1: Protect and improve visual quality associated with New York Citys urban context and the historic and working waterfront. The proposed project would be underground and would not affect visual quality. Therefore the proposed project would be consistent with this policy. Policy 9.2: Protect scenic values associated with natural resources. The proposed pipelines would be underground and would not affect the scenic values associated with Jamaica Bay. The proposed project would be consistent with this policy. Policy 10: Protect, preserve, and enhance resources significant to the historical, archaeological, and cultural legacy of the New York City coastal area. Policy 10.1 Retain and preserve designated historic resources and enhance resources significant to the coastal culture of New York City. As described in Attachment D, Historic Resources, the proposed project would not affect nearby historic resources located in the coastal area. The proposed project would be consistent with this policy. Policy 10.2: Protect and preserve archaeological resources and artifacts. During the horizontal directional drilling (HDD), the relatively small boreholes have the potential of disturbing remains in an archaeological sensitive area about 14 to 16 feet below existing grade. Because of the depth and the uncertainty about where the boreholes and the sensitive area would intersect, direct investigation and observation is not practicable. In consultation with New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) and New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), an alternate plan to investigate the archaeologically sensitive areas identified in the Stage 1A study has been developed. While not a replacement for Phase 1B testing, the soil borings that have already been completed in the vicinity of former Barren Island contribute to our understanding of the buried ground surfaces in the area. In order to add to this knowledge of the subsurface conditions in the archaeologically sensitive portion of the project site, a monitoring program will be implemented in the event that excavation below the depth of fill becomes necessary during the course of the project. An Archaeological Monitoring Plan was prepared and submitted to LPC and SHPO for review and comment in October 2011. In a comment letter dated November 3, 2011, LPC concurred with the implementation of the monitoring plan in the event that excavation to the depth of archaeological sensitivity becomes necessary. SHPO is currently reviewing the Archaeological Monitoring Plan, and its recommendation would be incorporated and implemented. Therefore, in concurrence with SHPO and LPC and with the
G-6
implementation of the Archaeological Monitoring Plan if necessary (See Appendix III, Archaeology), the proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact on archaeological resources.
G-7
For Internal Use Only: Date Received:______________________
WRP no.____________________________ DOS no.____________________________
NEW YORK CITY WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM Consistency Assessment Form

Proposed action subject to CEQR, ULURP, or other Local, State or Federal Agency Discretionary Actions that are situated within New York City's designated Coastal Zone Boundary must be reviewed and assessed for their consistency with the New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP). The WRP was adopted as a 197-a Plan by the Council of the City of New York on October 13, 1999, and approved in coordination with local, state and Federal laws and regulations, including the State's Coastal Management Program (Executive Law, Article 42) and the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-583). As a result of these approvals, state and federal discretionary actions within the city's coastal zone must be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the WRP policies and the city must be given the opportunity to comment on all state and federal projects within its coastal zone. This form is intended to assist an applicant in certifying that the proposed activity is consistent with the WRP. It should be completed when the local, state, or federal application is prepared. The completed form and accompanying information will be used by the New York State Department of State, other State Agency or the New York City Department of City Planning in its review of the applicant's certification of consistency.
A.
1.
APPLICANT
Name: John Stavrakas c/o National Grid Address: 40 Sylvan Road Waltham, Massachusetts 02451
3.
Telephone: (781) 907-2759 E-mail Address: John.Stavrakas@us.ngrid.com
Fax:
4.
Project site owner: New York City, New York City Department of Transportation, New York City Department of Parks and Recreation, the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, popularly known as MTA Bridges and Tunnels.
B.
1.
PROPOSED ACTIVITY
Brief description of activity: National Grid proposes to install new underground natural gas pipelines on Avenue U, Hendrickson Street between Avenue U and Hendrickson Place, Hendrickson Place, and Flatbush Avenue from Hendrickson Place in Brooklyn along areas adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge in Brooklyn beneath the Rockaway inlet, and to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens. The total length of the proposed pipelines is approximately 20,300 feet. See Attachment A, Project Description and Purpose and Need, for a more detailed description of the proposed project. Purpose of activity: The proposed project would improve natural gas system infrastructure in the New York metropolitan area, reinforce gas transmission and distribution systems, provide added reliability of service, diversify supply sources, and provide for projected future increases in energy demand. Location of activity: Borough: Brooklyn and Queens Street Address or Site Description: The project site would extend from Avenue U down Hendrickson Street, along Hendrickson Place, then along Flatbush Avenue from Hendrickson Place in Brooklyn along areas adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge in Brooklyn, beneath the Rockaway inlet, and to Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens. See Attachment A, Project Description and Purpose and Need, for a detailed description and maps.
2.
3.
G-8
Proposed Activity Continued

4. If a federal or state permit or license was issued or is required for the proposed activity, identify the permit type(s), the authorizing agency and provide the application or permit number(s), if known: United States Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 12; New York State Department of State Coastal Zone Management Concurrence; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 401 Water Quality Certification; lease and construction permit from MTA B&T Is federal or state funding being used to finance the project? If so, please identify the funding source(s). N/A Will the proposed project result in any large physical change to a site within the coastal area that will require the preparation of an environmental impact statement? If yes, identify Lead Agency:
5. 6.
Yes
No
7.
Identify City discretionary actions, such as zoning amendment or adoption of an urban renewal plan, required for the proposed project. The proposed pipeline route along Flatbush Avenue and Hendrickson Street and Place, and under the Belt Parkway is New York City owned lands. National Grid will be required to petition the City of New York for a revocable consent for any portion of the pipeline that is not covered by an existing franchise with the City of New York. Pursuant to New York Public Authorities Law 553(14), the lease between MTA B&T and National Grid for the portions of the pipelines on property irrevocably assigned and conveyed to MTA B&T adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Bridge in Brooklyn, under the Rockaway Inlet, and in on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens is subject to the approval of the Office of the Major on the City of New York as successor to the Board of Estimate.
C.
COASTAL ASSESSMENT
The following questions represent, in a broad sense, the policy of the WRP. The number in the parentheses after each question indicated the policy or policies that are the focus of the question. A detailed explanation of the Waterfront Revitalization Program and its policies are contained in the publication the New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program. Check either "Yes" or "No" for each of the following questions. Once the checklist is completed, assess how the proposed project affects the policy or standards indicated in "( )" after each question with a Yes response. Explain how the action is consistent with the goals of the policy or standard.
Location Questions:
1. 2. 3. Is the project site on the waterfront or at the water's edge? Does the proposed project require a waterfront site? Would the action result in a physical alteration to a waterfront site, including land along the shoreline, land underwater, or coastal waters?
Yes
No
Yes No
Policy Questions:
The following questions represent, in a broad sense, the policies of the WRP. Numbers in parentheses after each question indicate the policy or policies addressed by the question. The new Waterfront Revitalization Program offers detailed explanations of the policies, including criteria for consistency determinations. Check either Yes or No for each of the following questions. For all yes responses provide an attachment assessing the effects of the proposed activity on the relevant policies or standards. Explain how the action would be consistent with the goals of those policies and standards. 4. Will the proposed project result in revitalization or redevelopment of a deteriorated or under-used waterfront site? (1) 5. Is the project site appropriate for residential or commercial redevelopment? (1.1) 6. 7. Will the action result in a change in scale or character of a neighborhood? (1.2) Will the proposed activity require provision of new public services or infrastructure in undeveloped or sparsely populated sections of the coastal area? (1.3)
G-9
Policy Questions Continued

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. Is the action located in one of the designated Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas (SMIA): South Bronx, Newtown Creek, Brooklyn Navy Yard, Red Hook, Sunset Park, or Staten Island? (2) Are there any waterfront structures, such as piers, docks, bulkheads, or wharves, located on the project sites? (2) Would the action involve the siting or construction of a facility essential to the generation or transmission of energy, or a natural gas facility, or would it develop new energy resources? (2.1) Does the action involve the siting of a working waterfront use outside of a SMIA? (2.2) Does the proposed project involve infrastructure improvement, such as construction or repair of piers, docks, or bulkheads? (2.3, 3.2) Would the action involve mining, dredging, or dredge disposal, or placement of dredged or fill materials in coastal waters? (2.3, 3.1, 4, 5.3, 6.3) Would the action be located in a commercial or recreational boating center, such as City Island, Sheepshead Bay, or Great Kills, or an area devoted to water-dependent transportation? (3) Would the proposed project have an adverse effect upon the land or water uses within a commercial or recreation boating center or water-dependent transportation center? (3.1) Would the proposed project create any conflicts between commercial and recreational boating? (3.2) Does the proposed project involve any boating activity that would have an impact on the aquatic environment or surrounding land and water uses? (3.3) Is the action located in one of the designated Special Natural Waterfront Areas (SNWA): Long Island Sound-East River, Jamaica Bay, or Northwest Staten Island? (4 and 9.2) Is the project site in or adjacent to a Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats? (4.1) Is the site located within or adjacent to a Recognized Ecological Complex: South Shore of Staten Island or Riverdale Natural Area District? (4.1and 9.2) Would the action involve any activity in or near a tidal or freshwater wetland? (4.2) Does the project site contain a rare ecological community or would the proposed project affect a vulnerable plant, fish, or wildlife species? (4.3) Would the action have any effects on commercial or recreational use of fish resources? (4.4) Would the proposed project in any way affect the water quality classification of nearby waters or be unable to be consistent with that classification? (5) Would the action result in any direct or indirect discharges, including toxins, hazardous substances, or other pollutants, effluent, or waste, into any waterbody? (5.1) Would the action result in the draining of stormwater runoff or sewer overflows into coastal waters? (5.1) Will any activity associated with the project generate nonpoint source pollution? (5.2) Would the action cause violations of the National or State air quality standards? (5.2) Would the action result in significant amounts of acid rain precursors (nitrates and sulfates)? (5.2C) Will the project involve the excavation or placing of fill in or near navigable waters, marshes, estuaries, tidal marshes or other wetlands? (5.3) Would the proposed action have any effects on surface or ground water supplies? (5.4) Would the action result in any activities within a Federally designated flood hazard area or State designated erosion hazards area? (6) Would the action result in any construction activities that would lead to erosion? (6) Would the action involve construction or reconstruction of flood or erosion control structure? (6.1) Would the action involve any new or increased activity on or near any beach, dune, barrier island, or bluff? (6.1) Does the proposed project involve use of public funds for flood prevention or erosion control? (6.2) Would the proposed project affect a non-renewable source of sand? (6.3)
Yes
No
G-10
Attachment H:
Construction
A. INTRODUCTION
This attachment addresses the potential for short term impacts from construction activities associated with installation of new natural gas pipelines. The construction schedule and construction methods for the project are described, and potential construction impacts and controls are analyzed. In particular, short-term effects of construction on traffic, air quality, and noise are addressed. Measures that would be implemented to minimize erosion and sediment runoff are also described. Attachment I, Public Health and Safety, addresses safety procedures during design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed pipelines.
B. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
As described in Attachment A, Project Description and Purpose and Need, the project would occur in two phases. Phase I includes installation of two parallel pipelines (a 12-inch and a 26inch pipeline) between a point in Flatbush Avenue in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field, Brooklyn and Beach 169th Street at Beach Channel Drive on the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens. This phase is scheduled to begin in September 2012, and be operational in March 2013. Utilities do not normally install pipelines during the winter months, but Phase I is necessary to meet the expected demand for natural gas on the Rockaway Peninsula. Phase II includes installation of a 30-inch pipeline from the northern terminus of Phase I northerly under Flatbush Avenue to Hendrickson Place where the pipeline would turn west to Hendrickson Street and then north to Avenue U. Construction is planned to begin in April 2013 and temporarily cease by the end of November 2013. National Grid does not typically install natural gas pipelines during the winter because of delays and slow working conditions caused by cold weather and snow. Construction would recommence in April 2014, and the pipeline would be operational in November 2014. At the request of National Grid, Williams Transco would construct a pipeline from their existing offshore Lower New York Bay Extension expected to be operational in November 2014 that would connect with the National Grid project. As part of its construction, Williams Transco would rehabilitate a hanger on Floyd Bennett Field to use for its meter and regulator (M&R) station, which would contain pig launcher and receiver assemblies (used for inspecting the inside of the pipeline) for internal inspections of the pipeline, filtration, metering, regulating, and heating equipment. Floyd Bennett Field is on the National Historic Register, and the rehabilitation of the hangar is being coordinated with the Department of Interior through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) proceedings. The majority of the Williams Transco Projects construction would be offshore and would not have any effect on the National Grid construction. The onshore portion on the Rockaway Peninsula of the Williams Transco pipeline would occur latter than the National Grid construction on the Rockaway Peninsula, and the two construction periods would not overlap. Construction of the M&R station would be H-1
within an existing airport hanger and the only in-the-street work would involve short inlet and outlet pipes for National Grids connection to the M&R station. Horizontal directional drilling (HDD) would be used to bring the offshore pipeline onto the Rockaway Peninsula. National Grid would return to the Rockaway Peninsula to disconnect the Phase I 26-inch pipeline from the gas distribution system and connect it to the Williams Transco transmission pipeline.
C. CONSTRUCTION METHODS
The pipelines would be constructed of coated steel pipe with all joints welded and radiographed. National Grid would design and procure all materials in connection with the gas mains. The pipelines would be installed by an approved contractor and/or National Grid. All contractor activities would be monitored by National Grid. For the majority of the pipeline to be installed under the streets, open conventional cut and cover methods would be used. However, under the Rockaway Inlet and the Belt Parkway, HDD would be employed. In open cut and cover construction, a trench is dug and the welded pipeline lowered into the trench and installed. The trench would be about three to eight feet wide at the surface and about six feet deep. At all points, the 26-inch and 30-inch pipelines would be buried deeper than required by regulations. The bottom of the pit would be lined with sand to ensure a continuous bed and support for the pipeline. Each segment of pipe would be welded together, and the welds inspected by x-ray to ensure the soundness of the weld. The pipeline is laid next to the trench as it is being dug and lowered into the trench. Construction equipment would include excavators, payloaders, and dump trucks to dig and backfill trenches, mobile cranes to lift the pipe, and welding equipment. Trucks for moving soil, pipe, workers, supplies, and equipment would also be used. The crew would have about 20 workers on site. It is expected that the work would be done during one 812 hour shift a day, five to six days a week. At the end of each days work and during any non-working day, any open section of the trench would be temporarily paved. HDD involves drilling underground to create a micro tunnel large enough to accommodate the pipe. Drilling pits are excavated at each end of the pipeline route to contain drilling fluid, and a directional drilling rig begins to drill the micro tunnel. The entry pit, where the control house, drilling machine, and slurry equipment are located, is about 60 by 100 feet and fenced in. The drilling machine has a large diesel engine in the entry area and it provides the torque to turn the drill bit and bore through the soil. A control house holds the controls for the engine and indicating devices that show the location of the end of the drill bit and its vertical and horizontal location. Instruments are located behind the drill bit and hardwired back through the inside of the drill bit to determine the horizontal and vertical location of the drill, sending that information to the control house. The rate of drilling and the vertical and horizontal direction of the drill bit are controlled using these instruments. The bore hole is held open by a clay slurry commonly referred to as bentonite. The bentonite is held in tanks with mixing equipment to control the consistency of the slurry. The bentonite is continuously pumped into the bore hole and returns to a shallow pit excavation in the drill entry area where it is pumped into another tank. The soil particles are removed from the return bentonite, and the refreshed bentonite is reused. When the drill bit reaches the exit pit, the bentonite is captured in a shallow excavated pit. It is then pumped into a tanker truck and transported to a landfill. The drill exit area is smaller than the entry area because there is less equipment needed. It is about 50 by 50 feet. Often, several drill passes are needed to increase the size of the bore hole to about one and one half times the diameter of the pipeline, being pulled back through the bore hole.
H-2
Attachment H: Construction
On the drill exit side, the pipeline is welded together and pressure tested. The full length of the pipeline to be pulled through the bore hole is welded and laid out above ground on roller supports. The welds are radiographicly examined to ensure they are sound. The welded pipeline is pressure tested to twice the design pressure to check for leaks prior to pullback. Once the testing has been successfully completed and the correct diameter of the bore hole is reached, the welded pipeline is ready to be pulled through the bore hole. The pipeline is attached to the drill string and the diesel engine on the entry pit side pulls the pipeline through the exit hole and back to the entry hole. The pulling operation is expected to take about 2 days for each pipeline. The drill entry area has more equipment and personnel than the exit side. The entry side has the drill rig ramp and diesel engine, the drill rod and bits, the control house, water tankers, slurry holding tanks and mixing equipment, and slurry reclamation equipment. About 20 to 30 construction workers would be needed for the drilling and slurry mixing operation. After initial setup less than 10 truck trips per day would be needed for the entry area work. The equipment on the drill exit side would require truck mounted welding machines, radiography trucks, and cranes for handling pipe. A tanker truck and pumps would also be needed to recover the bentonite slurry when the drill bit reaches the exit pit. About 10 to 20 workers would be needed for the pipe handling and welding. When the drill bit reaches the exit bit and the bentonite slurry has to be handled, about another 5 workers would be needed. After initial set up, the exit side of the operation would need less than 10 truck trips per day. PHASE I The first phase of the project (see Figure A-1) would be the installation of two parallel natural gas pipelines in areas adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge, on the Rockaway Peninsula, below Rockaway Inlet, and in Brooklyn using HDD. The pipelines would be installed west of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge roadway within a Coast Guard designated cable crossing area and in upland areas irrevocably assigned and conveyed by the City of New York to MTA B&T. The pipelines would be installed well below the design dredge depth and the existing sea bed of Rockaway Inlet. The pipelines between the drill entry point and connection to the existing gas main on Beach 169th Street on the Rockaway Peninsula is approximately 250 feet long and would be installed using conventional open cut and cover construction methods. The pipelines between the exit point and a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field, Brooklyn would be installed using conventional open cut trenching construction methods. The drill entry area, approximately 60 by 100 feet in size, would be located on the east side of Beach 169th Street south of Beach Channel Drive, in a grassy area by the eastbound Beach Channel Drive access ramp on MTA B&T property south of the inlets shoreline at Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) elevation. The drill exit area would be located on the west side of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge north of the toll plaza, in the vicinity of Aviation Road. Both the entry and exit points are located away from the shoreline of Jamaica Bay and its aquatic resources. Based on the current schedule for installation of the Phase I pipelines, construction would commence in September 2012 and be completed by March 2013. Table H-1 presents the expected activities.
H-3
Table H-1 Phase I Construction Activities

Month Sept. 2012 Oct. 2012 Nov. 2012 Dec. 2012 Jan. 2013. Feb. 2013 Mar. 2013 Queens Drilling Drilling Drilling Drilling Trenching, testing None None Brooklyn Welding, testing Welding, testing, and slurry handling Welding, testing, and slurry handling Welding, testing, and slurry handling Trenching, testing Trenching, testing Trenching, testing
Notes: Based on current schedule. Sources: National Grid.
On the Queens side (entry side of the operation), drilling would take about four months, and this activity would be contained within the grassy area where Beach Channel Drive bifurcates at its intersection with Beach 169th Street. All activity would be contained within this area, and the bike path would be blocked for four months. After the HDD is completed, the pipelines would be trenched to the existing gas distribution system at Beach 169th Street. In January 2013, the use of the western end of Beach Channel Drive and Beach 169th Street would be affected. The roads would remain open, but partial lane closures would be needed to install the pipelines. The Williams Transco HDD exit area on the rockaway Peninsula would be near National Grids Phase I entry area. The construction activities of the HDD would be very similar. The Williams Transco project is anticipated to start in the fall of 2013 and would not overlap with the National Grid construction on the Rockaway Peninsula. After Williams Transco has installed its pipeline, National Grid would come back and disconnect its 26-inch pipeline from the distribution grid. On the Brooklyn side (exit side of the operation), four months would be needed to lay, weld and test the pipelines to be pulled through the boreholes. In addition, some slurry handling would be needed in October through December 2012. The pipelines would be laid out on the shoulder of Flatbush Avenue, and the travel lanes would remain open, until they reach the exit pit. The western most travel lane on Flatbush Avenue in the vicinity of Aviation Drive would be closed for the exit pit. The pulling operation is expected to take two days for each drill and is anticipated to occur in the month of December, 2012. During this operation, the westernmost travel lane along Flatbush Avenue would likely be closed. Between January and March 2013, the pipelines would be installed by conventional cut and cover trenching to a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field. The westernmost travel lane of Flatbush Avenue would be closed to traffic, but the other lanes would remain open. At the northern termini, the pipelines would turn 90 degrees to the east, and be connected to the existing 8-inch gas distribution line, which is located in the median of Flatbush Avenue. One travel lane of Flatbush Avenue at a time would be closed, while the pipelines are being connected to the system. This connection would take less than a week. PHASE II The second phase of the project would be the installation of a 30-inch steel natural gas pipeline in the street bed of Flatbush Avenue between the northern terminus of Phase I and Hendrickson Place and within the street bed of Hendrickson Street and Hendrickson Place between
H-4
Hendrickson Place and Avenue U. At its shallowest point, the top of the pipeline would be at least 42 inches below grade. The work in Phase II is located upland and away from Jamaica Bay. With the exception of the Belt Parkway crossing, the pipeline would be installed using cut and cover techniques along Flatbush Avenue, Hendrickson Place, and Hendrickson Street. Table H-2 presents the expected construction activities during Phase II.
Table H-2 Phase II Construction Activities

Time Period April to June 2013 July to November 2013 December 2013 to March 2014 April to November 2014 Notes: Based on current schedule. Sources: National Grid. Construction Activity HDD on the west side of Flatbush Avenue in Marine Park Trenching from Belt Parkway south to the M & R station None Trenching from Belt Parkway north to Avenue U
The first Phase II construction activity would be the HDD under the Belt Parkway on the west side of Flatbush Avenue within Marine Park, which is under the jurisdiction of New York City Department of Parks and Recreation (NYCDPR) and maintained by New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT). The 60-by-100-foot entry pit would be located in the mowed grassy area north of the entrance/exit clover leaf for Flatbush Avenue at the Belt Parkway. Intrusion of the entry area into Marine Park will be minimized to the extent possible by locating the outer boundary at the location of the existing guard rail along Flatbush Avenue. The 50-by50-foot exit area would be located just south of the entrance/exit clover leaf, and would also have minimum intrusion into Gateway National Recreation Area. The HDD construction activities would be the same as described above. The westernmost travel lane of Flatbush Avenue in the vicinity of the clover leaf would be closed during the HDD. After the HDD is completed, conventional cut and cover technique, as described above, would be used to extend the 30-inch pipeline south to the northern terminus of Phase I. This construction would take place from July and into November 2013. During this time one southbound lane of Flatbush Avenue would be closed to traffic. Construction activities would be temporarily suspended for December through March. National Grid typically suspends construction of gas pipelines in the winter because of delays caused by snow and cold weather. In spring of 2014, construction would recommence at the northern end of HDD installation at the Belt Parkway clover leaf and proceed northward to Hendrickson Place. It is expected that the construction would be completed along Flatbush Avenue by the end of August 2014. The construction along Hendrickson Place and Hendrickson Street and the connection to the existing 30-inch transmission line at Avenue U is expected to take about three months and be complete by November 2014. A lane would be closed to traffic along Hendrickson Place and Hendrickson Street during the construction. In order to make the connection to the existing 30-inch gas transmission main on Avenue U, it will be necessary to cross underneath an existing 132-inch sanitary sewer box culvert. This would be accomplished by auger boring a 36-inch diameter casing under the culvert and inserting the new 30-inch gas pipeline inside the casing. The auger boring operation requires the use of a sending and receiving pit. The sending pit would be approximately 30 feet long by 10 feet wide and 15 feet deep, and would occupy the entire south sidewalk area and part of the eastbound travel lane of Avenue U. The receiving pit would be approximately 15 feet wide by 15 feet long by 15 feet deep and would occupy part of the H-5
westbound travel lane. Both pits would be sheeted and plated during non working hours to ensure public safety. Prior to the excavation of the receiving pit, the existing water main would need to be relocated as shown on the construction drawings. Upon completion of the casing installation and insertion of the gas carrier pipe, the carrier pipe would be extended vertically to match the elevation of the existing 30-inch gas main. The receiving pit would be backfilled and a tie-in pit would be excavated to enable the removal of a section of existing 30-inch gas main and the installation of a 30-inch three way tee to connect the new gas main to the existing gas main. The tie-in pit would be approximately 20 feet long by 10 feet wide by 10 feet deep. The roadside of the pits would be protected with concrete barricades to protect the safety of both the workers and public. Travel lanes would be temporarily relocated into the center median. Upon completion of all work, the center median would be restored to its original condition and the pavement restored in accordance with NYCDOT specifications.
D. IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND CONTROLS

TRAFFIC Construction of Phase I would be scheduled to commence after Labor Day in 2012. Traffic generated by the project would include trucks delivering materials or removing debris, and workers vehicles. Some truck delivery of construction materials would occur during the construction period. However, there would not be an extensive or prolonged delivery of equipment/materials to the proposed pipeline route. Heavy equipment and construction material delivery would average fewer than 20 trucks per day over the construction period. During construction of the pipelines, the number of workers would vary from about 20 to 30 total personnel at any one time, at any one work location. The total number of vehicle trips in any given hour would be below the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) threshold of 50 vehicles per hour, and the construction traffic would not cause a significant impact to traffic conditions in the area. In addition, construction worker traffic tends to occur outside of peak traffic hours. The construction workers typically arrive before 7 AM and leave before 4 PM. The short-term construction effects of equipment movement, material deliveries, and construction worker trips would not be expected to have any significant adverse traffic impacts. According to the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Local Highway Traffic Volume Report, Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) on Flatbush Avenue between the Belt Parkway and Avenue U in 2007 was 50,398, and AADT on Flatbush Avenue between the Belt Parkway and Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge toll plaza in 2009 was 24,227. Accident data for the study area intersections were obtained from NYSDOT for the time period between March 30, 2007 and September 30, 2010. The data obtained quantify the total number of reportable accidents (involving fatality, injury, or more than $1,000 in property damage), fatalities, and injuries during this time period, as well as a yearly breakdown of pedestrian- and bicyclerelated accidents at each location. According to the 2010 CEQR Technical Manual, a high accident location is one where there were 48 or more total reportable and non-reportable accidents or five or more pedestrian/bicyclist injury accidents in any consecutive twelve months of the most recent three-year period for which data are available. During this period, a total of 36 reportable accidents, 2 fatalities, 35 injuries, and 3 pedestrianrelated accidents occurred at the study area intersections. A rolling 12 month total of accident data identifies zero study area intersections as high pedestrian accident locations in the 2007 to
H-6
2010 period. Table H-3 provides total accident characteristics by intersection during the study period, as well as a breakdown of pedestrian and bicycle accidents by year and location.
Table H-3 Accident Data

Intersection North-South East-West Roadway Roadway
Flatbush Ave NB Flatbush Ave NB Hendrickson Street Hendrickson Street Flatbush Ave Flatbush Ave Flatbush Ave Flatbush Ave NB Flatbush Ave NB Flatbush Ave SB Flatbush Ave SB Flatbush Ave SB Flatbush Ave SB EB Belt Pkwy-Off WB Belt Pkwy-On Avenue U Avenue V Aviation Road N Aviation Road S Hendrickson Street WB Belt Pkwy-Off EB Belt Pkwy-On EB Belt Pkwy-On EB Belt Pkwy-Off WB Belt Pkwy-Off WB Belt Pkwy-On
Study Period Reportable Total Total Accidents Fatalities Injuries

0 0 12 5 4 0 9 0 0 0 4 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 4 7 0 7 0 0 0 2 0 1
2007
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Accidents by Year Pedestrian Bicycle 2008 2009 2010 2007 2008 2009 2010
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Source:
NYSDOT March 30, 2007 to September 30, 2010 accident data.
Installation of the pipelines in property irrevocably assigned and conveyed to MTA B&T would be performed pursuant to a construction permit issued by MTA B&T. The permit would contain provision for Maintenance and Protection of Traffic, specific requirement for the fabrication and installation of the pipelines, as discussed in Attachment H, and other conditions imposed to protect the safety and security of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodge Memorial Bridge, the traveling public and MTA B&T employees. During the majority of the construction periods, two lanes, both southbound and northbound, would be kept open to traffic. During any lane closures, signage and transition lengths would be in accordance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the American Association of State and Highway Officials (AASHTO) design guidelines, and all applicable NYCDOT regulations. Variable message signs would be used to warn drivers of the upcoming lane closure and flaggers would be deployed to control the traffic. In certain locations, however, Flatbush Avenue is not wide enough to accommodate construction and two travel lanes in each direction, and therefore, at times only one southbound lane can be maintained. The one lane situation would occur during the cut and cover installation during Phase I and for short segments during Phase II. If only one southbound lane is available to traffic, the construction would take place at night when traffic is at its lightest. The night time hours would be between 10:00 PM to 6:00 AM. In addition to the traffic protection and maintenance measures discussed above, a tow truck would be available close to the work area, in case of a vehicle breakdown, which could block the only available lane. Prior to start of construction, Maintenance and Protection of Traffic (MPT) plans would be submitted for review and approval to NYCDOTs Office of Construction Mitigation and Coordination (OCMC). All work would be done in accordance with OCMCs directives. Another project, Mill Basin (Kristal Auto Mall and Toys-R-Us), is located along the Phase II route and may be under construction at the same time as Phase II. If Mill Basin is under construction during Phase II, National Grid would coordinate with the developers of that project to ensure that the two projects do not interfere with one another or cause cumulative impacts to the nearby community. H-7
During the connection to the existing natural gas line in Avenue U, the southern sidewalk (for a distance of about 10 feet) along Avenue U would be closed, as well as a short segment of one eastbound and one westbound curb lane to allow for the jacking and receiving pits. Pedestrians would be routed around the closure using Jersey barriers for the duration of the connection. This disruption would last less than a month. The construction work for the connection would be done during the night time hours of 10:00 PM and 6:00 AM, and the MPT plans would be reviewed and approved by OCMC prior to the start of construction. Installation of the pipeline within the right-of-way of Flatbush Avenue would require a road opening permit from the NYCDOT to allow selective cuts in the roadway. Additional permits and authorization would be needed from NYCDOT and NYCDPR for the Belt Parkway crossing. NYCDOT maintains the Belt Parkway, but it is under the jurisdiction of NYCDPR. Temporary construction authorization from NYCDPR would be needed for the entry area. A revocable consent from NYCDPR and NYCDOT would be needed for the long-term maintenance of the pipeline. The land is currently the subject of a Uniform Land Use Procedure Review (ULURP) application (# 080291MEK), and if that application is approved by the time the National Grid project goes forward, a revocable consent would be needed from both NYCDPR and NYCDOT. A tree removal permit under Local Law 3 of 2010 would also be needed from NYCDPR for the loss and replacement of any street trees on New York City property. The entry and exit areas would be located away from travel lanes and would have no effect on Belt Parkway traffic. After construction, at-grade conditions would be restored. A road opening permit from NYCDOT would also be required for installation of the pipeline along Hendrickson Place and Street and Avenue U. Construction crews would use the MPT plans to manage traffic flow on Flatbush Avenue and Hendrickson Street and Hendrickson Place, including flaggers, barriers, and signage. Access to driveways and abutting properties would be maintained at all times. All driveways would be plated during construction, with access to properties remaining available. Business owners in the area proximate to Flatbush Avenue, Hendrickson Street, and Hendrickson Place would be given advance notice of lane closures. Access for emergency vehicles would be maintained at all times. At the end of each days work, trenches and pits would be backfilled and temporarily paved. Any soils dug from trenches would be backfilled into the trench or removed off-site at the end of each day. Any paved areas, sidewalks, curbs, landscaping, signs, fences, or guard rails that are disturbed during installation would be replaced or restored in kind. Cleanup operations after pipeline installation would include restoration of affected areas to at least pre-construction condition. During final restoration, any cleared areas would be re-graded to pre-construction grade. Private vehicles would encounter roadway delays associated with the project. Delays would occur for a short period of time and are not considered significant. It is anticipated that temporarily reduced roadway capacities on Flatbush Avenue could still accommodate traffic demand. During Phase I, a bike path on the Rockaway Peninsula would be blocked by the entry area for about four months. Bicyclists would be able to detour around the construction area and continue their ride. Also, the construction would occur during cold weather, when bicycling is at a low level. During the Phase I layout of the pipeline, the pedestrian walkway on the west side of Flatbush Avenue from about Aviation Avenue to about 6,000 feet north would be blocked. If striped crosswalks are not already in place at intersections with existing traffic signals, National H-8
Grid would install them, so that pedestrians can cross over to the east side of Flatbush Avenue. Signs warning the pedestrians of upcoming sidewalk closures would be erected, so that the pedestrian know where to cross Flatbush Avenue. During the cut and cover construction, flaggers would be present to control both vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow. AIR QUALITY All diesel engines would use ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel to reduce sulfur oxide emissions. Trucks would observe New York regulations and would not idle more than 3 minutes. Other possible impacts on local air quality during construction include fugitive dust (particulate) emissions and mobile source emissions. FUGITIVE EMISSIONS Fugitive dust emissions may result from earth moving, excavation, material handling, wind erosion of excavated soil piles, vehicular movement over unpaved areas, and other constructionrelated activities. Actual quantities of fugitive dust emissions depend on the extent and nature of clearing operations, the type of equipment employed, the physical characteristics of the underlying soil, the speed at which construction vehicles are operated, and the type of fugitive dust control methods employed. Only about 300 to 400 linear feet of trench would be exposed at any given time. Temporary measures to reduce dust would be incorporated prior to restoration, as necessary. Appropriate fugitive dust control measures would be employed to minimize any impacts. These may include: watering of exposed areas, periodic washing of paved surfaces during dry periods, street sweepers, dust covers for trucks, maintenance of low construction vehicle speeds, minimized duration of stockpiling of trench soils, minimized height of soil piles, application of water or other approved surfactants on stockpiles during dry periods, and restoration of disturbed areas to their pre-construction conditions as soon as practicable. No significant fugitive dust-related air quality impacts are anticipated during construction of the project. MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS Mobile source emissions are emissions of air pollutants from motor vehicles, referred to as mobile sources. Exhaust emissions may result from construction equipment, construction worker vehicles, delivery vehicles, and private vehicles. Construction vehicles would be well maintained, resulting in efficient fuel combustion and minimal criteria pollutant emissions, such as carbon monoxide and particulate matter. Construction activities would involve a small number of workersbetween 20 to 30 personnel at any one time, at any one work locationand the number of construction worker vehicle trips would be small. This number of worker vehicles is below the CEQR thresholds for this area of 170 passenger vehicles per hour and 23 heavy duty trucks. Overall, the project would not cause any appreciable decrease in ambient air quality, and mobile source emissions during construction are not expected to be significant. The project would not have a significant adverse impact on air quality. NOISE Impacts from noise during construction would include noise from construction equipment operation and noise from worker vehicles traveling to and from the work site. In general, construction of the project would result in some increased noise levels for a limited period of time.
H-9
During construction, noise would primarily be generated by the diesel engines that power construction equipment. Exhaust noise is usually the predominant source of diesel engine noise. Maintenance of exhaust muffler systems on all vehicles would be required to minimize this temporary noise source. Jackhammers and/or pavement saws powered by air compressors would also be a source of temporary noise. Increases in noise levels caused by delivery trucks, construction workers traveling to and from the project sites, and construction vehicles would not be significant based on the short duration of construction and the modest amount of construction-related traffic relative to existing volumes along affected roadways. In coordination with the New York City Noise Control Code, as amended in December 2005 and effective July 1, 2007, the City has prepared standards and procedures to reduce noise levels from construction. Per Section 28-105 Utility Noise Mitigation Plan of Chapter 8 Citywide Construction Noise Mitigation of Title 15 of the Rules of the City of New York, every authorized publicly franchised New York City utility company that provides gas, electric, steam and telecommunication services must post a complete and accurate Utility Noise Mitigation Plan at all sites where construction activities take place. Although the plan need not be filed with New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP), it must be readily available for inspection should a complaint be filed or during a routine inspection. Although the New York City Noise Code does not apply to work on MTA B&T property, National Grid would follow the New York City Noise Code because it is more stringent than the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requirements that do apply on MTA B&T property. If MTA B&T chooses to apply more stringent requirements in its construction permit, National Grid would follow those requirements. Section 28-106 Required Noise Mitigation Measures for Utilities includes the following additional regulations: (Section 28-106.a) A utility company conducting construction activity must self-certify in its Construction Noise Mitigation Plan that all construction tools and equipment have been maintained so that they operate at normal manufacturer's operating specifications, including at peak loading. Such self-certification must be indicated on the Construction Noise Mitigation Plan form. If NYCDEP identifies equipment that exceeds the noise level guidelines in the Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model User's Guide, January 2006, the utility will have the option of performing maintenance to mitigate the noise; replacing the equipment with equipment that complies with the noise level guideline; or filing an Alternative Noise Mitigation Plan pursuant to Section 28-104 within five business days of the NYCDEP inspection. (Section 28-106.b) All tools and equipment must be equipped with the appropriate manufacturer's noise reduction device. These devices, including but not limited to portable compressors and other pneumatic tools, such as jackhammers/pavement breakers, must be equipped with a standard muffler and jacket, free from air or exhaust leaks. (Section 28-106.c) Specialized vehicles, including but not limited to compressor trucks, vacuum excavators, pavement-coring, power-roding, flush trucks, and other vehicles with internal combustion motors, require additional noise mitigation measures as specified by NYCDEP, such as the use of noise-insulating material that does not interfere with the engine operation and/or other techniques to reduce noise. (Section 28-106.d) Portable compressors, generators, pumps, and other such devices must be covered with noise-insulating fabric, which is not to interfere with engine operations, and/or must employ other techniques to reduce noise. H-10
(Section 28-106.e) The time of day that work is in progress also determines the technology that provides the appropriate noise mitigation. All work that occurs outside the hours of 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM on weekdays requires an after hours work authorization. From the hours of 6:00 PM to 10:00 PM on weekdays, the utility must use daytime noise mitigation controls. However, work between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM on weekdays and between 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM on weekends may be required to employ additional techniques, including noise blankets and barriers, to reduce the level of noise for receptors within 200 feet. (Section 28-106.f) Quieter jackhammers, compressors, and other such construction devices must be used when available. (Section 28-106.g) All unnecessary vehicle engine idling must be prevented. (Section 28-106.h) All steel traffic plates must be properly installed and secured to the roadway surface in compliance with applicable City regulations. (Section 28-106.i) Notification must be given to residents within 200 feet of the construction site when work is scheduled for longer than 3 days. Such notification must include information on construction, work schedules, and locations. (Section 28-106.j) The permit holder must respond to all noise complaints and/or official notice from NYCDEP the same day as received, the next day if received after regular utility work hours, or as may be required by NYCDEP. (Section 28-106.k) All new vehicles must be phased in with the installation of quieter backup warning devices in accordance with Section 28-102. (Section 28-106.1) A formal noise mitigation training program must be established and implemented for all field worker supervisory personnel, including sub-contractor supervisors. Supervisory personnel must field train all field workers in an effort to minimize construction noise. (Section 28-106.m) When work is planned near sensitive receptors, including but not limited to schools, hospitals, places of worship, and homes for the aging, the utility must cooperate with the facility owner/operator to coordinate the work whenever possible so as to minimize the impact on the facility, and the utility must use quieter devices and other noise mitigation methods, such as blankets and barriers. (Section 28-106.n) A NYCDEP Inspector may visit the construction site to examine the Utility Noise Mitigation Plan upon receiving a complaint and may require further action to reduce the level of noise. The responsible party will be provided a 24-hour cure period to correct the condition (with the exception of compliance with selected regulations as identified in Section 28-106.n, for which there is no 24-hour cure period), or to file an Alternative Noise Mitigation Plan under Section 28-104. (Section 28-106.o) Perimeter noise barriers must be used as set forth in Section 28-101. All gaps and spaces in the semi-permanent or temporary barriers must be filled with noise attenuation material, and such barriers must be placed as close as possible to the noise source to promote greater noise attenuation. (Section 28-106.p) Utilities that engage in non-emergency, long-term projects, defined as continuous work that cannot be completed within 15 calendar days when there is a dedicated lane, must comply with Sections 28-100 to 28-104.
H-11
EPA also has regulations that limit noise from construction equipment. These regulations would apply on MTA B&T property, but as stated above, National Grid would follow the most stringent regulations by EPA, NYCDEP or the MTA B&T construction permit. The federal requirements mandate that certain classifications of construction equipment and motor vehicles meet specified noise emission standards and that construction material be handled and transported in such a manner as to not create unnecessary noise. NYCDEP and EPA regulations would be carefully followed during construction. Construction activities would generally take place on weekdays. Only quiet tasks would occur during late hour or weekend work. Where practical, at noise sensitive locations, low noise emission level equipment and quiet operational procedures would be utilized. Compliance with noise control measures would be ensured by including the measures in contract documents as material specifications, and by directives to construction contractors. Noise impacts would be short term in duration and would not be considered a significant adverse impact. TREE PROTECTION AND LOSS Construction would occur within the MTA B&T property in areas adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge and Flatbush Avenue right-of-way as well as within a small portion of Marine Park at the Belt Parkway/Flatbush Avenue interchange. All trees within 20 feet of proposed trenching and drilling locations would be vulnerable to root damage or may require removal. They have been inventoried and measured, and 97 trees were identified within 20 feet of the proposed construction. In addition, 9 trees have been identified within the construction area, and these trees would be lost. The lost trees include 4 eastern red cedars, 3 black cherries, 1 sweet gum, and 1 white ash, all of which are 9 inches diameter at breast height (DBH) or less. A Tree Protection and Replacement Plan would be designed and implemented in accordance with Local Law 3 of 2010 to prevent damage to nearby trees and to replace trees that would be lost to the project. Any trees removed or damaged on MTA B&T property would be replaced in accordance with the MTA B&T construction permit. Protection measures would include protective fencing around each of the identified trees, mulching of the soil around the tree, flags in the lower branches so that they are more visible to lifting equipment operators, and tree repair specifications for any tree that is accidently damaged. Construction equipment, workers, and materials would not be allowed within the protective fencing area around the trees. Also in the Tree Protection and Replacement Plan would be specifications to replace any tree that would have to be removed from the construction area and any tree that is badly damaged during construction. These specifications would, at a minimum, meet the requirements of Local Law 3 of 2010. The tree replacement would be based on a basal diameter and not on a one-toone basis. Certain other measures would be taken, which would protect natural resources. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which is described below, to prevent discharge of sediment into terrestrial natural areas, wetlands, and waterways. Any open space or parkland disturbed that is disturbed as a result of the construction would be fully restored to the specifications of NYCDPR. Silt fencing would be installed between the construction area and any nearby body of water to prevent runoff with sediment from discharging into the body of water. Further measures to protect natural resources are described below under Stormwater Management.
H-12
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Under the New York State stormwater permitting program, site disturbance of more than 1 acre requires the development of SWPPP and submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Because ground disturbance would be approximately 88,050 square feet, a SWPPP would be prepared and the NOI would be submitted prior to the start of any pipeline construction. Erosion and sedimentation control measures and devices would be applied as needed during construction. The applicable erosion and sediment control practices and methods outlined in National Grids Environmental Guidance will be followed during the installation of the pipelines (See Appendix II). Below is a list of measures to be employed during construction: Facilities and equipment for implementation of erosion and sediment control would be maintained in proper working order throughout construction. At the end of each work day, all erosion control devices would be inspected to ensure proper functioning, and be repaired as necessary. In locations where construction adjoins existing rights-of-way and road crossings, erosion control measures would conform to the existing drainage pattern and runoff structures. Silt fences would be used to slow surface runoff and trap sediment. Where appropriate, water diversion devices would be used to control surface runoff on rights-of-way and adjacent work areas. Storm and/or sewer drain openings in the road or shoulder would be protected by completely covering the openings during trenching and backfilling activities or by installing a geotextile fabric under the grate of the drain opening to prevent silt and sediment from entering the basin. Storm drain inlets would be protected. Inlet protection would be installed at all catch basins where the contributing drainage areas are not stabilized. Inlet protection would be installed at catch basins located downstream of soil stockpiles. Temporary sediment traps would be provided. Soil stockpiles would be protected and stabilized. Dust control measures would be applied as needed. Stabilized construction entrances would be provided and maintained, with stone provided to remove mud from construction vehicle tires, all construction traffic directed to use the stabilized entrances, and adequate drainage provided to prevent ponding. Landscape restoration as necessary.
National Grid or its contractors would perform cleanup and final restoration in accordance with the requirements and conditions of project permits. Backfilling of trenches, soil stabilization, and surface restoration would immediately follow pipeline installation. All cleared areas would be re-graded to pre-construction grade. With the above measures in place to minimize erosion and sediment runoff and the distance from Jamaica Bay, no significant adverse impacts are expected from construction of the project, and thus would be no significant adverse impacts to water quality during construction.
H-13
Attachment I:
Public Health and Safety
A. INTRODUCTION
This attachment addresses potential safety risks arising from the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed new gas transmission mains. First the sources of safety concerns are outlined, and the regulatory context of controlling those risks is described. Then additional measures that are proposed as part of the project to minimize those risks are listed and explained. Finally, the potential for significant adverse impacts is assessed. A detailed risk assessment1 of the proposed gas transmission mains was prepared and serves as the basis of this attachment.
B. POTENTIAL SAFETY RISKS

This section addresses the risks to the general public and, in particular, risks to the users of the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge, resulting from any pipeline incidents. The first basic risk is from third party damage. The most common cause is from construction equipment striking the pipeline. The second basic risk is from corrosion and the third basic risk is the potential escape of natural gas through leaks or breaks in the pipelines and the ancillary equipment (valves, meters, and minor piping). The natural gas could escape into the soil, the waters of Jamaica Bay, or the atmosphere. THIRD PARTY EXCAVATION THIRD PARTY EXCAVATION The dominant cause of third party damage to natural gas pipelines and leakage is from excavation activity occurring adjacent to the pipelines. Among the measures to prevent this type of damage is burial depth, marking the pipeline and providing structural cover, such as steel plate or concrete planking, over the pipeline. According to a study cited in the risk assessment, pipelines that are protected by a concrete/steel barrier and warning tape are 100 percent effective in preventing third party excavation damage. National Grids project drawings specify the installation of an eight-inch-thick concrete protective barrier with yellow caution tape for placement above both pipelines in the areas where they are installed by open cut trench excavation in the upland areas of the project adjacent to the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge.
Halcrow, Inc., National Grid USA Service, Co, Inc Risk Assessment for Gas Pipeline Adjacent to Marine Parkway Bridge, Final Report for Circulation, September 2011.
I-1
ANCHOR DAMAGE Based on a detailed analysis of ships and barges that have transited Rockaway Inlet, the maximum anchor size is about 7 tons, and the extreme size would not exceed 12 tons. Based on studies by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the United States Coast Guard, the 7ton anchor dragging into the seabed would penetrate about 3 feet into the seabed, and the 12-ton anchor would penetrate about 5 feet below the seabed. Since the proposed pipelines would be installed well below the design dredge depth and existing sea bed in Rockaway Inlet, anchor damage is not considered to be a credible event. CORROSION Another potential cause of leaks is from corrosion. Corrosion could occur either internally or externally. Internal corrosion is generally caused by condensation of moisture in the gas. The dew point of the gas is maintained at 15F while the temperature in the inlet is at least 31F and the soil below the seabed (lowest point of the pipeline) is estimated to be a constant 50F. Therefore, the gas temperature and pipe wall temperature are substantially above dew point and the water or humidity content of the natural gas is normally insufficient to cause any damage to the internal pipe as any water will be vaporized. However, as a precautionary measure, internal corrosion will be monitored through the use of moisture meters and gas quality measurement at the Meter and Regulator (M&R) Station. In addition, In-Line Inspection tools will be utilized on a seven year periodic basis to detect any potential wall loss. External corrosion is dependent on wall thickness, year of construction, external coating type, cathodic protection, and type of backfill. This type of corrosion is mitigated by applying coating and cathodic protection at the exterior of the pipe. National Grid would employ risk reduction measures and utilize an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) plan to effectively reduce the probability of external corrosion including proper coating and cathodic protection. The O&M plan that addresses corrosion inspection, testing, and repair is detailed in National Grids policy document 040020-PL and ensures the proper function of the corrosion control systems. Inspection and testing intervals will be: At least once each calendar year, the cathodic protection system will be inspected; Every two months, each cathodic protection rectifier will be monitored; and Every seven years, wall thickness surveys will be conducted using In-Line Inspection tools to assure any early external corrosion would be detected before pipe leakage.
LEAKS AND BREAKS DEFECTIVE MATERIAL The pipeline material may have small flaws in the pipe wall or the welds material, which may grow to a critical size and eventually fail. These flaws can be caused during the original manufacturing process, from damage during the installation process, or from damage after the pipeline has been installed. According to the risk assessment, incidents related to defective pipe seams primarily occurred in specific electric resistance welded and double submerged arc welded pipes manufactured pre 1970. Some fabrication welds such as fillet welds for installation of saddles and steel sleeves have to be done in-service and require the use of specific weld procedures to ensure that the I-2
Attachment I: Public Health and Safety
welds are defect-free. To ensure that material defects are detected prior to operation of the pipelines, they will be pressure tested up to two times the maximum allowable operating pressure. Current regulations require testing to only 1.5 times the maximum allowable operating pressure. Further, 100 percent of the pipe joints will be radiographically inspected prior to operation to ensure they are defect free. OTHER OUTSIDE FORCES Leaks caused by other outside forces include fire or explosion, vehicle collision, rupture of previously damaged pipes, and deliberate or willful acts, such as vandalism. According to studies cited in the risk assessment, approximately 70 percent of pipeline leak incidents related to other outside forces are a result of vehicle collision. This type of incident is only relevant related to the onshore segment. However, since the onshore pipeline would be installed below grade, leaks caused by potential vehicle collision would be mitigated. The onshore pipeline near the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge would be fenced off from the public and vehicles by a concrete barrier. There are no other pipelines located in the project vicinity and therefore rupture of a previously damaged pipe is not applicable. The concrete valve vaults with locking covers and intrusion alarms to protect the isolation valves effectively reduce the likelihood of possible acts of vandalism. EQUIPMENT MALFUNCTION Pipeline leakage can be caused by the malfunction of a variety of control/relief equipment such as valves, regulators and other instrumentation. It can also be caused by seal failures on gaskets or O-rings. The only possible failure scenario from the malfunction of control equipment would be the accidental connection of the high pressure pipeline (26-inch) to the low pressure pipeline (12inch) causing the 12-inch pipe to rupture. However, the 12-inch pipe has an equivalent pressure rating to that of the 26-inch pipe. In addition, the temporary valve connection between the lower pressure pipeline and the higher pressure pipeline will be permanently removed and capped off once the 26-inch pipeline is up-rated to its final higher operating pressure. This safety measure will completely eliminate the potential of opening this valve and subjecting the low pressure pipe to high pressure with the potential of pipeline leak or rupture. OPERATOR ERROR Operator error related to pipeline leaks results from inadequate procedures or safety practices, or failure to follow correct procedures, or other operator error. Incident- and location-specific operating procedures will be written, adopted, and issued to National Grid gas system operators prior to the commission of the pipeline. These written procedures will provide operators clear instructions on how to handle the valves and manage different types of pipeline incidents in accordance with the protocol. NATURAL FORCE Natural forces contributing to pipeline leaks include: earth movements, earthquakes, landslides, subsidence, lightning, heavy rains/floods, washouts, flotation, mudslide, scouring, temperature, frost heave, frozen components, high winds, or similar natural causes.
I-3
Historically, the New York region is not a high-risk earthquake region. The largest earthquake ever recorded in New York was in the magnitude of 5.8 in 1944. Historic statistics in California, a region characterized with frequent and severe seismic activity, have shown that welded steel pipelines rarely fail as a result of earthquakes. The topography of New York City region is characteristically flat with an absence of unstable slopes in the vicinity of the onshore pipeline. According to Preliminary Brittle Structures Maps of New York2 cited in the risk assessment, no geological faults are located anywhere close to the proposed pipeline. The primary risk for the 26-inch pipeline is the potential for local scour in the vicinity of the bridge piers. Scour depth under an extreme event might expose the pipeline and have a negative impact on the stability of the pipeline. According to HEC-RAS scour evaluation results, the maximum scour depths at the water pier locations for a 100-year event are on the order of -110 feet. Normally, scour depth is the deepest near the pier locations. Since the 26-inch pipeline is located away from the edge of the bridge, it is unlikely that the extreme scour will result in exposure of the 26-inch pipeline and affect its structural stability. The pipeline is required to be surveyed every five years to ascertain its location and cover. National Grid also assures that the condition of the pipeline will be closely monitored during severe weather events so that the likelihood of a 100-year scour depth of greater than 100 feet going undetected for a long enough period of time to significantly increase risk exposure would be extremely low. It is believed that the regular survey and monitoring activities will be able to detect scour development over long periods of time. The inspection standards and maintenance procedures being put into effect have been used successfully in similar installations. To address possible rapid scour development under an extreme event, National Grid will conduct pipeline surveys and/or sub-bottom profiling surveys following an extreme event that could cause this kind of scour (e.g., a hurricane, flood, or earthquake) to make certain that the integrity of the pipelines have not been compromised. Scour remediation measures at Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge have been proposed and scheduled to be implemented by MTA B&T in September 2014. The project is aimed to protect the bridge structure but would also protect the pipelines because the measures would reduce the scour depth above the pipeline and make the scour hole much smaller.
C. REGULATORY CONTEXT
The proposed gas transmission mains would be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained in compliance with New York State pipeline safety regulations contained in 16 NYCRR Part 255, and with U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Minimum Federal Safety Standards contained in 49 CFR Part 192. 49 CFR Part 192 final rules define areas of high consequence where the potential consequences of a gas pipeline accident may be significant. A High Consequences Area is defined as an area within 660 or 1,000 feet of a building with mobility-impaired or confined persons or where 20 or more people gather at least 50 days in a year. Both of the twin gas pipelines are considered to be
2
Isachsen, Y. W. and W. McKendree, New York State Museum and Science Service Map and Chart Series No. 31, 1977.
I-4
located in a High Consequences Area and will require comprehensive lifecycle integrity management. In particular, the following regulations of 49 CFR 192 apply: Establishing Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure under 192.619; Control of corrosion according to 49 CFR 192 Subpart I requirements; Periodic inspections of the pipeline using tools capable of locating defects in the pipe; and Damage prevention program under 192.614. The proposed design considerations to assure lifecycle integrity meet and exceed regulatory requirements. In addition, the proposed project includes a number of measures to protect public health and safety, as discussed in the following section.
D. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PROCEDURES

Pipelines operating above 124 psi are defined by New York State Public Service Commission Regulations as transmission gas mains. Both the 26-inch and 30-inch pipelines fall into this category. Because of the regulations regarding design, operation, and maintenance of transmission pipelines, they have an excellent safety record. Design regulations limit their operation to 40 percent of yield strength so there is a large factor of safety. All joints are welded and 100 percent radiographically inspected prior to operation. All pipe coating is dielectrically tested to 10,000 volts to assure there are no coating flaws prior to installation. Isolation valves are to be installed closer than required by regulations and pipeline pressure is monitored by National Grids Control Center 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. National Grid also performs weekly vehicle line patrols to observe surface conditions for recent third party excavation activity above or adjacent to transmission pipelines. This policy exceeds Public Service Commissions requirements. The pipelines would be installed well below the design dredge depth and the existing sea bed in Rockaway Inlet using HDD technology. HDD is a trenchless method of installing underground pipes, conduits, and cables. The technology is used when trenching or excavating is impractical (e.g., for road and waterway crossings). HDD minimizes or eliminates traffic disruptions and impacts to environmentally sensitive and urbanized areas. Pipeline depths on land would be well below grade at the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge toll plaza, and further north. In Phase II, the 30-inch gas main would be installed on Flatbush Avenue deeper than required be regulations. With the exception of crossing the Belt Parkway, the pipeline would be installed using conventional open trench construction methods on Flatbush Avenue. The crossing of the Belt Parkway would be installed using horizontal directional drilling technology. The pipeline would be directional drilled a minimum of 30 feet below the access ramps and highway, allowing vehicular access to be maintained at all times. Pipeline installation would require temporary closure of one or two southbound travel lanes on Flatbush Avenue between Hendrickson Place and at a point in the vicinity of the southernmost airplane hangar on Floyd Bennett Field for use by construction vehicles. Between Hendrickson Place and Avenue U, installation would also require temporary closure of lanes in Hendrickson Street and Hendrickson Place.
I-5
Design drill depth would well below the design dredge depth and the existing sea bed of Rockaway Inlet. The depths will assure isolation from potential damages caused by erosion and anchor drag, for example. All National Grid pipelines are cathodically protected. Normally, sacrificial anodes are connected to the pipeline at intervals of 250 feet. Since these pipelines will be directionally drilled, they will be rectifier protected with impressed current anode beds on each side of the inlet. Pipeline coating thickness for directionally drilled pipelines at National Grid is doubled from the standard thickness of 40 mils to 80 mils. Coating thickness for the directional drilled pipe will be 22 mils of fusion bond epoxy (FBE) and 30 mils of Powercrete coating. The fusion bonded epoxy provides the cathodic protection and the Powercrete coating (beyond standard practice) is an effective proven coating with high abrasion resistance to protect the pipelines from coating damage during installation (although soil boring data shows no signs of rock or abrasive characteristics). Powercrete is being used to protect against any unforeseen soil conditions. The coating material will be dielectrically tested to 10,000 volts to assure coating integrity prior to installation. Test holes would be dug during the design phase to determine the best location of the new gas mains relative to the exact location of subsurface facilities. In addition, test holes would be dug during construction to ensure proper placement and safe installation. All work would be performed in accordance with NYCRR Title 16 Part 753 for proper excavation and mark-out of subsurface facilities. In accordance with New York State Industrial Code Rule 53, contractors are required to have all utilities within the proposed construction areas identified and marked at least 48 hours prior to commencement of construction. Prior to excavation, a surface and subsurface facilities survey would be performed. All known utilities and facilitiesincluding telephone, electric, gas, storm drain, sewer, traffic control, and water lineswould be included on the final design drawings. In the event that an unknown utility is encountered during construction, contractors would be directed to notify the appropriate agencies. Safety practices would focus on worker and public safety, particularly as they relate to excavation, excavation near existing utilities, heavy equipment operation, and work in high traffic areas. Contractors would follow industry standard health and safety practices. All excavation and construction work would be performed under a Health and Safety Plan (HASP). National Grids standard HASP would be modified, as necessary, for the proposed project. ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO MITIGATE RISK The proposed project incorporates a number of measures, including quality assurance and safety precautions, to minimize any potential risk to the general public, in particular, users of the Marine ParkwayGil Hodges Memorial Bridge, resulting from the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the gas mains, as follows: Compliance with all recognized codes and governing regulations: 49 CFR 192, 16 NYCRR Part 255, ASME B31.8, API1104, API 5L and ASME BPV Code Section VIII; The 26-inch and 12-inch offshore pipeline segments will be buried well below the design dredge depth and the existing sea bed of Rockaway Inlet; Remotely operated Emergency Isolation Valves will be included on both the 26-inch and the 12-inch pipelines, which would be closed in 30 seconds should a rapid drop in pipe pressure be detected; Spacing isolation valves closer than required be regulations; I-6
The concrete valve vaults, which protect the remotely operated isolation valves, will be equipped with locking covers and intrusion alarms; The onshore portion of the pipeline will be buried deeper than required by regulations and protected with an 8-inch concrete slab cover including warning tape. These will be installed between the HDD exit point and the remotely operated isolation valves; The pipeline will have a clearance of at least 100 feet from the toll plaza in an area away from existing utilities and potential third party excavation. A physical concrete barrier on the side near the toll plaza will be provided to prevent traffic from intruding into the pipeline area during construction; The natural gas will be odorized so that a leak can easily be detected; Pipeline operations will be monitored on a 24/7 basis from National Grid's control center; Hydrostatic testing will be performed for the pipelines to two times its maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) before installation. The current regulation only requires the pipeline to be tested at 1.5 times MAOP; Safety patrols will be performed on a weekly basis to check for third party excavation activities, abnormal conditions, encroachments, etc. The current regulation only requires annual patrols for pipelines in this Class location; A comprehensive dig-safe program will be set-up to ensure all underground facilities are located prior to any third party or company excavation activities. On-site oversight will be provided by National Grid of third party excavations in the vicinity of the gas transmission mains; Implementing an integrity management program for gas transmission facilities that includes in-line inspection of this line every seven years to ensure the integrity of the pipelines; and Implementing plans to conduct pipeline surveys and/or sub-bottom profiling surveys following extreme weather events to ensure that the integrity of the pipelines is not compromised due to extreme scour.
E. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

There are no formal risk acceptability criteria in the U.S. regarding the safety of gas transmission pipelines. Traditionally, the results of quantitative pipeline risk assessments have been compared against the acceptable societal risk (SR) or individual risk (IR) criteria. SR focuses on the overall consequences that arise from pipeline incidents and represents an aversion to large incidents that involves a high number of fatalities, whereas IR determines the annual probability of fatality caused by a pipeline incident for a person locate within the pipeline hazard zone. A risk acceptance criterion called ultimate limit state (ULS) reliability targets, though not mandatory, is highly recommended by the Canadian Pipeline Standards. The ULS reliability targets are derived from a well-established reliability-based design and assessment theory. The targets draw on research conducted over several decades to determine tolerable and consistent risk levels for gas pipelines. A quantitative risk assessment was carried out for the 26-inch pipeline. The joint probability of an incident to occur for the 26-inch pipeline near the Marine Parkway-Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge will be 1.9x10-5 per km year, or 1 event in 41,000 years. The target reliability value is calculated as 1 event in 19,000 years and thus, the proposed project satisfies the CSA reliability target requirement. I-7
With the abovementioned public health and safety procedures in place, the proposed pipelines do not present an undue hazard to persons or property along the proposed route and no significant adverse impacts are expected.
I-8
Attachment J:
Bibliography
Abraham, B.J. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates: Mummichog and Striped Killifish. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Waterways Experiment Station Coastal Ecology Group and the National Coastal Ecosystems Team, Division of Biological Services, USFWS. 1985. Bigelow, H.B., and W.C. Schroeder. Fishes of the Gulf of Maine. Fishery Bulletin of the Fish and Wildlife Service. Vol. 53. 1953. Black, F.R. 1981. Historic Resource Study, Jamaica Bay: A History, Gateway National Recreation Area, New York/New Jersey. Cultural Resources Management Study No. 3, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, North Atlantic Region, Division of Cultural Resources, Boston, MA. 143 pp. Colligan, M.A. 2009. Correspondence dated February 4, 2009, from Ms. Mary A. Colligan, US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Northeast Region, to Jocelyn Wenk, AKRF, Inc. 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 (NYNHP), New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), Albany, NY. Fahay, M.P. Biological and Fisheries Data on the American Eel, Anguilla Rostrata (LeSeur). NTIS PB-297 067. NMFS Technical Series Report No. 17. 1978. Fay, C.W., R. Neves, and G.B. Pardue. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates (mid-Atlantic): Striped Bass. Study conducted by the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences for the Division of Biological Services, USFWS (FWS)/OBS-82/11.8. USACE, TR EL-82-4. 1983. Franz, D.R. 1990. Dietary study of winter flounder (Pseudopluronectes americanus) and the secondary production of its major food species, the amphipod Ampelisca abdita in Jamaica Bay, Gateway National Recreation Area: final report. Brooklyn, NY: Brooklyn College, City University of New York. Golf in New York City. Marine Park Golf Course. Posted on http://www.golfinnyc.com/brooklyn_golf_courses/marine_park_gc/marine_park_golf_cours e.php, accessed February 4, 2009.
J-1
Grimes, B.H., M.T. Huish, J.H. Kerby, and D. Moran. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates (mid-Atlantic): Summer and Winter Flounder. USFWS Biological Report 82 (11.112). USACE, TR EL-82-4. 1989. Heimbuch, D., et. al. Distribution Patterns of Eight Key Species of Hudson River Fish. Coastal Environmental Services, Inc. Linthicum, MD. Prepared for the Hudson River Foundation. New York, NY. 1994. Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan (JBWPP). 2008. New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP) JBWPP. New York, NY. National Parks of New York Harbor Conservancy. Floyd Bennett Field. Posted on http://www.nyharborparks.org/visit/flbe.html, accessed February 4, 2009. National Parks of New York Harbor Conservancy. Fort Tilden. http://www.nyharborparks.org/visit/foti.html, accessed February 4, 2009. Posted on
National Parks of New York Harbor Conservancy. Gateway National Recreation Area. Posted on http://nyharborparks.org/visit/gana.html, accessed February 4, 2009. National Parks of New York Harbor Conservancy. Jacob Riis Park. Posted on http://www.nyharborparks.org/visit/jari.html, accessed February 4, 2009. NYCDEP. 2007. JBWPP. Accessed March 16, http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/dep_projects/jamaica_bay.shtml. 2009 from
New York City Department of Parks and Recreation (NYCDPR). Forever Wild Marine Park Preserve. Posted on http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_about/parks_divisions/nrg/forever_wild/ site.php?FWID=23, accessed February 5, 2009. NYCDPR. Forever Wild Nature in New York City. Posted on http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_about/parks_divisions/nrg/forever_wild/foreverwild_home .html, accessed February 5, 2009. NYCDPR. Four Sparrow Marsh. Posted accessed February 4, 2009. http://www.nycgovparks.org/parks/foursparrowmarsh/, NYCDPR. Leif Ericson Dr (Shore Parkway). Posted http://www.nycgovparks.org/parks/B166/highlights/11917, accessed February 4, 2009. on on
NYCDPR. Marine Park. Posted on http://www.nycgovparks.org/parks/marinepark, accessed February 4, 2009. New York City Zoning Handbook. New York State Department of State (NYSDOS). 1992. Jamaica Bay Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat Rating Form. NYSDOS. 2002. New York State Coastal Atlas, Block NY-22 August 2002. PAS 1985. The Inland Fishes of New York State. NYSDEC. Paulus, Sokolowski and Sartor Engineering, Inc. 2008. Draft Article VII Application to NYS Public Service Commission on behalf of National Grid for the Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect Project. December 2008.
J-2
Attachment J: Bibliography
Pereira, J.J., R. Goldberg, J.J. Ziskowski, P.L. Berrien, W.W. Morse, and D.L. Johnson. 1999. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Winter Flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. NMFS. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFSNE 138, http://www.nefsc.nmfs.gov/nefsc/habitat/efh/ - list Reschke, C. 1990. Ecological Communities of New York State. NYNHP. NYSDEC. Latham, N.Y. 96p. +xi. Salerno, T. 2009. Letter dated February 9, 2009 from T. Salerno (Information Services, NYNHP) to Jocelyn Wenk, AKRF, Inc., regarding presence of threatened or endangered species within the vicinity of the proposed pipeline. Stanley, J.G., and D.S. Danie. 1983. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates (North Atlantic): White Perch. USFWS Biological Report FWS/OBS-82/11.7. USACE, TR EL-82-4. USFWS. 2009. NY Field Office - County List of federally threatened and endangered species, Kings and Queens Counties. Accessed February 3, 2009 at http://www.fws.gov/northeast/nyfo/es/CountyLists/CountySelect.htm Van Alen Institute.Envisioning Gateway: A Public Design Competition for Gateway National Park. Posted on http://www.vanalen.org/gateway/site_gatewayatlas.php, accessed February 5, 2009.
J-3
LIST OF APPENDICES
I. Natural Resources Correspondence II. National Grid Environmental Guidance (EG302NY and EG-303) III. Archaeological Surveys IV. Historic Resources Correspondence V. Engineering Drawings
APPENDIX I
Natural Resources Correspondence
NATIONAL GRID BROOKLYN-QUEENS INTERCONNECTOR
APPENDIX II
National Grid Environmental Guidance (EG-302NY and EG-303)
DOC NO.
EG-302NY
Rev. No.
ENVIRONMENTAL GUIDANCE
SUBJECT
PAGE
1 of 9
10/21/10
DATE REFERENCE
Protected Waters
EP No. 3 Natural Resource Protection (Chapter 5)
1.0
SCOPE AND RESPONSIBILITIES National Grids New York service territory encompasses thousands of wetlands, lakes, rivers, streams, and other water bodies that are regulated by various Federal and New York State environmental regulations. Many of National Grids transmission and distribution facilities, in particular, cross and/or pass near to these protected water resources. All National Grid personnel who plan and perform work involving protected water resources are responsible for: identifying if proposed work may involve protected water resources; obtaining any required regulatory agency permits or approvals; notifying Environmental or regulatory agencies of emergency work activities that involve protected water resources; and, implementing appropriate design, work site selection, scheduling, and practices to avoid or minimize disturbances to such water resources.
Environmental Engineers and/or environmental consultants will provide support and assistance to National Grid personnel who assume these responsibilities. As described in EG-301NY, Project Planning and Permitting, Project Engineers and other personnel who are planning work are to use an environmental checklist for considering the potential presence of protected waters. The Environmental Engineer and/or environmental consultant will assist with the identification of protected waters by checking available regulatory agency information, such as GIS databases and mapping sources. 2.0 REGULATED WETLANDS The NYSDEC regulates freshwater wetlands that are 12.4 acres or greater in size. Wetlands smaller than this may be protected if they are considered of unusual local importance. The NYSDEC also regulates a 100 feet adjacent area around such freshwater wetlands. All such wetlands are depicted on official NYSDEC wetland maps. In addition to freshwater wetlands, the NYSDEC regulates tidal wetlands and a 300 feet (150 feet in New York City) adjacent area around such tidal wetlands. The APA regulates wetlands in the Adirondack Park that are 1 acre or greater in size. Some of the APA wetlands are mapped; however, some are not mapped and may require an official determination by the APA and/or a formal delineation by a qualified wetland consultant. On a case-by-case basis, the APA may also regulate the wetland buffer or adjacent area, particularly with regard to any potential runoff of pollutants.
APPROVED BY: VICE PRESIDENT, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PRINTED COPIES ARE NOT DOCUMENT CONTROLLED. FOR LATEST AUTHORIZED VERSION PLEASE REFER TO THE NATIONAL GRID ENVIRONMENTAL INFONET SITE.
DOC NO.
EG-302NY
Rev. No.
SUBJECT
PAGE
2 of 9
10/21/10
DATE REFERENCE
Protected Waters
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) also has jurisdiction over all NYSDEC and APA wetlands, as well as over smaller wetlands. Federal wetlands have no minimum size but must meet eligibility criteria for vegetation types, soils types, and connection to other waters of the U.S. Some Federal wetlands are mapped by the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI); however, some are not mapped and may require formal delineation by an ACOE representative or a qualified wetland consultant. The ACOE does not regulate a wetland adjacent area. Regulated work activities in state and federal wetlands include excavating, trenching, auguring, backfilling, grading, digging, structure erection and removal, and other activities that may disturb the ground surface or water levels, flows, and functions of wetlands. Regulated work activities can also include driving or operating equipment within protected wetland areas, particularly if such equipment uses causes rutting of wetland soils. 3.0 PROTECTED STREAMS AND OTHER SURFACE WATERS The NYSDEC regulates activities that impact the beds, banks, and water quality of streams and other surface water bodies that have sufficient water quality to support trout and/or higher uses of water, such as cooking and drinking. Simply driving equipment across a regulated water body is a regulated activity that requires a permit. The NYSDEC typically regulates activities within 50 feet of protected waters. The ACOE regulates activities conducted under, in, and over navigable waters of the U.S. The installation of natural gas or electric facilities across major streams, rivers, and lakes is regulated by the ACOE. 4.0 NYSDEC AND APA PERMITTING National Grid has a General Permit with the NYSDEC that authorizes the following activities involving NYSDEC wetlands and their 100 feet adjacent areas, as well as protected waters: A) B) C) D) Vehicular and equipment crossings Maintenance of in-kind existing facilities Small excavations and fills New minor construction to install new single family residential live service across a freshwater wetland, 100 feet adjacent area or protected stream E) Vegetation management
DOC NO.
EG-302NY
Rev. No.
SUBJECT
PAGE
3 of 9
10/21/10
DATE REFERENCE
Protected Waters
The NYSDEC General Permit (0-0000-01147/00001) requires notification of the proposed activity to the NYSDEC, no later than 45 days prior to project commencement. If no response is received from the NYSDEC, the work may proceed in accordance with the General Permit conditions and Best Management Practices (BMPs). The NYSDEC General Permit (0-0000-01147/00001) is provided on National Grids Infonet (see the Environmental site). NYSDEC General Permit 0-0000-01147/00001 includes 26 Natural Resource Permit Conditions that apply to Articles 15 and 24 of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) and to Water Quality Certification. Although compliance with all 26 permit conditions is required, the following selected conditions are cited or summarized, herein, simply to highlight their applicability to work involving these NYSDEC-protected wetland and water resources: 8. Prohibition Period for In-stream Work: The general period which prohibits stream work is as follows: a) for cold water trout fisheries, beginning October 1 and ending May 31 b) for warm water fisheries, beginning March 1 and ending July 15 15. Erosion Control Devices: To prevent environmental degradation, practicable measures and devices (such as silt fences, straw bales, check dams, catchment basins, sediment retention basins, water bars, diversion culverts, and other appropriate measures) shall be employed wherever necessary to prevent erodible soils from entering the wetland or water body. 18. Maintain Water Flow and Water Clarity: During periods of work activity, flow immediately downstream of the worksite shall equal flow immediately upstream of the worksite, unless specifically permitted by the NYSDEC. There shall be no discernible difference in clarity between waters upstream and downstream of the work site. 20. Preventing Transport of Invasive Species: National Grid has conservatively assumed that one or more species of NYSDEC-listed invasive plants occurs within or otherwise infests all NYSDEC wetlands and their 100 feet adjacent areas, as well as protected waters. To prevent the spread of invasive plant specie seeds, roots or other viable plant parts, equipment used in NYSDEC wetlands and their 100 feet adjacent areas, as well as protected waters, shall be power-washed and cleaned with clean water (no soaps or chemicals) before leaving these protected areas. The invasive material cleaned from such work areas may remain within these areas, provided that no filling of a wetland shall occur. Loose plant and soil material that has been
DOC NO.
EG-302NY
Rev. No.
SUBJECT
PAGE
4 of 9
10/21/10
DATE REFERENCE
Protected Waters
removed from personnel clothing and boots may also remain within these areas, provided that no filling of a wetland shall occur. The wash water, including spray, shall not be discharged within 30 meters of any stream, wetland, 100 feet adjacent area or stormwater conveyance (ditch, catch basin, etc.). In planning for such equipment cleaning, a forestry and/or wetland matting contractor should be contacted to provide such services (as well as to provide erosion control device installations, maintenance and removal). 24. Wetland Resource Protection: Replacement of penta-treated poles in NYSDEC wetlands, within NYSDEC wetland 100 feet adjacent areas that support protected species and within NYSDEC wetlands with endangered or threatened species, species of special concern or species of greatest conservation need shall be accomplished with treated wood poles that have been air-dried for at least three months prior to replacement. Poles cannot be replaced during the known breeding period of the endangered, threatened, species of special concern, or species of greatest conservation need. Construction or vehicular activities within such 100 feet adjacent areas should be minimized during the breeding period of any protected species present. Erosion control measures shall be utilized as needed to prevent potential erosion of sediments into the wetland or the 100 feet adjacent area. Emergency Actions (Administrative and Enforcement Condition No. 9): The appropriate NYSDEC Regional Natural Resources Supervisor must be notified by telephone (see the General Permits Attachment C for contact information) before starting an emergency action and such telephone notification must include a description and location of the situation and of the action that will be taken. If the Natural Resources Supervisor cannot be reached, a telephone or electronic mail notification must be made within 24 hours of commencing the emergency action and must include the same information, to be provided on the General Permits Attachment A Notification of General Permit Project form. National Grid also has a General Permit (1-9901-00011/00013) with NYSDECRegion 1 (Nassau and Suffolk Counties) that authorizes certain minor utility installation, repair, and maintenance activities in the adjacent areas of state regulated freshwater and tidal wetlands, and scenic/recreational rivers throughout Nassau and Suffolk counties. This General Permit requires notification of the proposed activity to the NYSDEC, no later than 14 days prior to project commencement. The notification package must include a detailed description of the project, design drawings, applicable wetlands maps, and recent project site photographs. If no response is received from the NYSDEC, the work may proceed in accordance with the General Permit conditions and BMPs. NYSDEC General Permit 19901-00011/00013 is provided on National Grids Infonet, Environmental site.
DOC NO.
EG-302NY
Rev. No.
SUBJECT
PAGE
5 of 9
10/21/10
DATE REFERENCE
Protected Waters
Certain routine maintenance activities involving Adirondack Park wetlands may be eligible for a General Permit issued by the Adirondack Park Agency. Larger scale projects or major work activities involving NYSDEC or APA wetlands or NYSDEC-protected waters may require an individual NYSDEC or APA permit and a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (a determination by the NYSDEC that the proposed activity will not violate New York Water Quality Standards). The NYSDEC may, as a result of its review, assign special conditions to ensure that water quality is protected, and environmental damage is minimized. The NYSDECs Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements may also apply to work activities if more than 1 acre of soils will be disturbed. If so, work will need to conform to the NYSDECs SPDES General Permit GP-0-10-001 and associated erosion and sediment control requirements. The NYSDEC SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activities (GP-0-10-001) is provided on National Grids Infonet (see the Environmental site). 5.0 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMITTING For certain maintenance and minor work activities involving Federal wetlands, the ACOE also provides for a general type of permitting. In general, activities involving less than 0.1 acre of wetland impacts are eligible for the ACOEs Nationwide Permitting, on a selfauthorized basis, as long as permit conditions and Best Management Practices (BMPs) are adhered to (a blanket 401 Water Quality Certification is included). Activities involving from 0.1 to 0.5 acres of wetland impacts may still be eligible for ACOE Nationwide Permitting, but require a Pre-Construction Notice (PCN) to be made to the ACOE, require an individual 401 Water Quality Certification, and normally require mitigation of impacts. Activities involving greater than 0.5 acres of wetland impacts typically require an individual Section 404 permit and mitigation of impacts. For work over, in, or under navigable waters of the U.S., an ACOE Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act) permit is required. For projects that are either in or affecting the coastal zone and that require a Federal permit or approval, a Coastal Zone Management (CZM) consistency concurrence is required from the New York State Department of State (DOS). Coastal zone projects directly undertaken by a state agency or authority require consistency concurrence, as well, regardless of federal agency involvement. Accordingly, Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) projects in the coastal zone require a consistency review completed by LIPA, National Grid (on behalf of LIPA), or another party as agent for LIPA.
DOC NO.
EG-302NY
Rev. No.
SUBJECT
PAGE
6 of 9
10/21/10
DATE REFERENCE
Protected Waters
6.0
EMERGENCY SITUATIONS AFFECTING REGULATED WETLANDS AND PROTECTED WATERS In a natural disaster, accident or other emergency situations where electric or gas facilities are damaged or threatened and must be promptly repaired, there may not be the time to follow normal permitting procedures, especially when public health and safety may be affected. Should such an event occur that impacts critical gas or electric facilities, it is fully expected that National Grid would make every effort to repair the damaged facilities, as soon as possible. In such emergency situations that involve wetlands or other protected waters, call an Environmental Engineer as soon as possible to explain the emergency and the required work. Be prepared to provide a name and telephone number of a local operations contact. An Environmental Engineer will assume the responsibility to interface with the appropriate regulatory agency personnel, prepare all required reports, and will keep your local contact person informed. If an emergency situation occurs requiring an unavoidable impact to wetlands or other protected waters, the NYSDEC, APA (for Adirondack Park wetlands), and ACOE must be notified prior to the commencement of the work. Examples of unavoidable impacts to wetlands and protected waters include changes to preconstruction contours, mechanical clearing, underground utility lines greater than 500 feet, work site discharges resulting in the loss of greater than 1/10 acre of wetland, and permanent access roads installed above preconstruction contours or greater than 500 feet. If regulatory agency notification prior to commencement of work is not possible, then these agencies must be notified within 24 hours after the commencement of the work. Notification must be provided in writing by certified mail, facsimile, or other similar means. The information provided in this notification should include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. A description of the proposed (or ongoing) work; A location map and plan sketch or drawing of the project; Reasons why the situation is an emergency; An estimate of the type and volume of any material to be placed in or adjacent to a wetland or water body; and, A description of any measures taken to minimize impacts to the affected wetland or water body (i.e., hay bales, silt curtains, etc.).
DOC NO.
EG-302NY
Rev. No.
SUBJECT
PAGE
7 of 9
10/21/10
DATE REFERENCE
Protected Waters
Upon receipt of this information, the agency will determine whether an emergency really exists and review the projects environmental impacts and, if satisfied, issue an emergency authorization. Emergency activities must be performed in a manner that avoids or minimizes disturbances to protected waters. If for some reason, an Environmental Engineer cannot be contacted within the prescribed 24hour initial notification time period, the NYSDEC or APA and ACOE should be called directly to explain the job action and seek assistance. The locations and telephone numbers of NYSDEC regional offices are provided in Table 1. 7.0 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES The Best Management Practices (BMPs) and conditions of any required permits shall be applied to work involving protected waters. National Grids ROW Access, Maintenance and Construction BMPs include guidance for wetland and stream crossings and erosion controls (see No. 3.0 of this EG). In general, the following restrictions shall be applied to work involving protected waters: no deposition of slash or debris within stream channels; no accumulation of construction materials or debris within a typical 50 to 100 feet wide buffer area, depending upon terrain and vegetation conditions; no degradation of stream banks; no equipment washing or refueling within the resource or buffer area; no storage of any petroleum or chemical materials within the resource or buffer area; and, maintain herbicide application buffer zones (as specified in ROW management plans) and use of herbicide products labeled for aquatic areas.
DOC NO.
EG-302NY
Rev. No.
SUBJECT
PAGE
8 of 9
10/21/10
DATE REFERENCE
Protected Waters
TABLE 1
DOC NO.
EG-302NY
Rev. No.
SUBJECT
PAGE
9 of 9
10/21/10
DATE REFERENCE
Protected Waters
Record of Change Date of Review/Revision: Revision 1 2 Date Description
07/01/08 Added Record of Change. 10/21/10 Regarding NYSDEC General Permit No. 0-000001147/00001, include equipment-cleaning language and reflect some permit changes while highlighting some of the more important permit conditions.
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
SUBJECT ROW Access, Maintenance and Construction Best Management Practices
Page 1 of 42
Date 07/20/10 Reference EP No. 3 Natural Resource Protection (Chapter 6)
SCOPE:
This guidance document provides Best Management Practices (BMPs) for work on electric and natural gas transmission and distribution rights-of-way. The purpose of this guidance document is to provide National Grid personnel, consultants and contractors with Best Management Practices (BMPs) for working on rights-of-way (ROW), both fee-owned and easement, and on customer owned projects, to support work that is protective of the environment and that complies with all applicable environmental laws, regulations and company policies and procedures. These Best Management Practices (BMPs) are to be effectively and consistently followed by all personnel accessing Company substations, rights-of-way (ROW), and customer projects for inspection, maintenance and construction work purposes. These BMPs do not apply to Company employees and contractors performing routine vegetation management activities that are not a part of construction or re-construction project. Employees and contractors maintaining vegetation on Company ROW and substations must follow the National Grid ROW Vegetation and Substation Vegetation Management Plans. For more information regarding routine vegetation management, please contact a National Grid Forester.
GENERAL:
CONTACTS: If there are any questions on this guidance, contact the local Environmental Engineer.
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES: 1.0 Background National Grid operates substations and has cross-country ROW with overhead electric power lines in four New England (NE) States and New York. Massachusetts, New York, New Hampshire and Rhode Island also have transmission and distribution natural gas pipelines. Access is needed to substations, to ROW, and on customer property, for inspection, maintenance and construction activities. Many of the ROW and structures are located in or near environmentally sensitive areas, such as rivers, streams, or wetlands, etc., which are protected from activities that may disturb these ecosystems. Prior to the start of any new project, the Project Engineer or other project planner must determine whether any environmental permits or approvals are required, per state-specific EG301. Any questions regarding which activities may be conducted in an environmentally sensitive area should be referred to an Environmental Engineer or environmental consultant. The BMP sections presented in this EG address right-of-way access, construction along rightsof-way, structures in wetlands, clean-up and restoration standards, gates on rights-of-way, field refueling and maintenance operations, management of spills/releases, and a summary of key construction best practices.
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 2 of 42
2.0
Definitions Backfill, Common Unless defined differently in project-specific specifications, common backfill is defined as soil suitable for use as backfill consisting of any mixture of sand and gravel. Rocks less than 6" in diameter and silt may also be included in the mixture. Backfill, Select Unless defined differently in project-specific specifications, select backfill is defined as well-graded gravel, well-graded sandy gravel, or a mixture of these materials for use as backfill. Also called Select Borrow. BMP Best Management Practices. Clearing The cutting of trees and large bushes by hand and/or mechanical means. Environmental Monitoring Records Examples of checklists and/or monitoring reports suggested for use by the Company Environmental Engineer to document conformance of the project with this Environmental Guidance and or permit/license conditions. Environmentally Sensitive Areas Examples of environmentally sensitive areas that may be found on National Grid properties are rivers, streams, ponds, lakes, wetlands, bogs, swamps, salt marshes, parks, preserves, schools and as otherwise defined by Federal, State or local regulations. Person in Charge A National Grid Project Engineer, Manager, Supervisor, Field Construction Coordinator or other personnel assigned to oversee and coordinate work activities. Regulated Wetland Area Those areas that are subject to federal, state or local wetland regulation, including certain buffer or adjacent areas. Route, Access An improved or unimproved path utilized to move personnel and equipment from an existing public way to and along a right-of-way or into a substation. Right-of-Way A corridor of land where National Grid has legal rights (either fee ownership or easement) to construct, operate, and maintain an electric power line and/or natural gas pipeline and may include work on customer owned properties. Swamp Mats Components of a temporary wood, plastic or other suitable material used as an access road. Work Site An area where work is performed.
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 3 of 42
3.0
Right-of-Way (ROW) Access Whenever possible, access should be gained along existing access routes within the ROW. However, in some cases there are no existing access routes and other means of access, such as off-ROW access, are required. In many cases temporary access can be utilized. The following practices provide general guidance on accessing a ROW. Check with an Environmental Engineer to determine if any environmental permitting is required before utilizing a temporary access. Real Estate Asset Management should also be contacted if off-ROW access is needed. Access to ROWs from Public Roads A suitable (~15-foot wide by 50-foot long) crushed stone ramp, placed on geotextile fabric, should be installed at the intersection of the ROW and public roads and streets, at those locations where equipment could track mud onto the public street. Once work is complete, the crushed stone and geotextile fabric should either be removed or retained, depending upon future maintenance-related access needs; if removed, the area shall be graded, seeded (if adequate root and seed stock are absent) and mulched. Maintenance of Existing Access Road and Routes In many cases, the existing access road may need to be improved to allow passage of the heavy equipment needed for scheduled maintenance work. Minor improvements may include adding gravel fill or crushed stone to fill depressions and washed-out areas. Major reconstruction projects may require permits. In all cases, the fill to be used should be clean and free of construction debris. Use of processed gravel, including reprocessed concrete (crushed concrete), may be approved by the Person in Charge or the Environmental Engineer, on a caseby-case basis. Maintenance of Existing Access Routes Ruts and depressions along existing access routes and within the existing ROW can be leveled and graded, only. Maintenance of Existing Gravel Roads Existing gravel roads can be restored or maintained at their pre-existing width and elevation, with clean gravel or crushed stone. Maintenance of Existing Culverts Damaged culverts can only be replaced after checking with an Environmental Engineer and determining if a permit may be required. Care must be taken to protect adjacent wetlands and watercourses by installing appropriate sedimentation controls, such as hay or straw bales, around the downstream end of the culvert. If at the time of anticipated replacement, there is heavy flow through the culvert, the Person in Charge should consult with the Environmental Engineer, to verify whether the culvert should be replaced at that time.
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 4 of 42
Access When Roads Are Not Available If existing roads are not available, access via other methods described below should be explored. Consult with the Person in Charge or the Environmental Engineer. Upland Access Off ROW or other upland access should be used, if available. (Check with Real Estate Asset Management and with an Environmental Engineer) Low Bearing Pressure or Track Vehicles In some cases, access through shallow wetlands can be achieved with the use of Low Bearing Pressure or Track Vehicles. Use of this technique requires approval from the Environmental Engineer or Consultant (not all states allow this technique). Frozen or Dry Conditions If schedules can accommodate deferral of wetland access until frozen or dry conditions, use of swamp mats or other mitigation measures may be avoided. It should be determined beforehand if the regulatory authority in question accepts this alternative. Swamp Mats In some cases, access through wet areas may require the installation of swamp mats, especially in the case of stream crossings. Other Methods Where the number of trips, nature of loads and work are suitable, the Person in Charge may determine that helicopter use is justified. Stream Crossings Stream crossings should be bridged with swamp mats or other temporary minimallyintrusive measures unless fording is acceptable for the site and is authorized by the Environmental Engineer. Care should be taken when installing a swamp mat bridge to insure that the banks are not damaged during installation and removal and that stream flow is not unduly restricted. An environmental permit may be required to cross or disturb protected waters, depending upon state-specific regulatory requirements.
4.0
Construction Along ROWs During construction activities, efforts should be made to minimize impacts to the environment. Therefore, keep to a minimum the amount of ground cover and soil disturbed, and store materials needed for the project in upland areas. Utilize erosion and sediment controls included in Attachment B, such as silt fencing or straw bales, to limit the impacts from soil erosion.
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 5 of 42
Erosion and Sediment Controls Appropriate erosion and sediment control devices shall be installed at work sites, in accordance with permit conditions and/or regulatory approvals, and otherwise, in order to prevent negative impacts to water resources and adjacent properties. The overall purpose of such controls is to prevent and control the movement of disturbed soil and sediments from work sites to adjacent, undisturbed areas, and particularly to water resources, public roads and adjacent properties. Appropriate erosion and sedimentation controls, including such materials as silt fencing, straw bales, or wood chip bales (allowed in some NE states) should be installed between the work area and such environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, streams, drainage courses, roads and adjacent property when work activities will disturb soils and result in a potential for causing erosion and sedimentation. Attachment B provides typical sketches of common erosion and sedimentation controls. Erosion and sedimentation controls should be properly maintained and inspected on a periodic basis, until work sites are properly stabilized and restored. Methods of documenting such inspections may include a written log or use of the Storm Water, Wetlands & Priority Habitat Environmental Compliance Site Inspection/Monitoring Report (Attachment A). Site Grading The work site shall not be graded unless absolutely necessary to complete the work at the site. Grading outside of a regulated area shall be kept to the minimum extent necessary for safe and efficient operations. The Work Site shall be promptly re-graded, re-seeded (if adequate root and seed stock are absent), and mulched with hay or straw (use straw where the potential introduction of invasive plant species is of concern) to reduce erosion and visual impact, as soon as possible following completion of work at the site. Grading within a regulated area shall be subject to the review and approval of the Environmental Engineer or the Project Engineer. Top Soil When the Work Site requires excavation and grading, the top soil shall be stockpiled separately from the material excavated and this top soil shall be spread as a top dressing over the disturbed area during restoration of the site. Rocks In active agricultural areas, rocks that were brought to the ground surface as a result of the work should be removed from the site, dependent upon consultation with the farmer. Construction Material Along ROW After preparing a site by clearing and/or installing any necessary erosion and sediment controls and prior to the start of construction, material such as poles, cross-arms, cable, and insulators may be placed along the ROW, as part of the project. Place construction material out of wetlands or other sensitive resource areas, unless authorized by the Environmental Engineer or Environmental Consultant.
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 6 of 42
As soon as the structure work has been completed, all used parts and trash are to be picked up and removed from the ROW. Retired poles and structures should be removed or cut 18 inches below the ground surface and backfilled to grade. In some cases, the used material from structure work may be temporarily stored at the work area by placing it out of the wetlands or other sensitive resource area until work in the adjacent areas has been completed. If work is discontinued for an extended period, all material must be removed from the ROW. Contact the Environmental Engineer for guidance on whether the work site must be restored.
5.0
Construction Activities in Wetlands Access to Structures in Wetlands Access to structures should be obtained utilizing existing gravel roads whenever present. However, in some cases there are no existing gravel access routes, and other means of access to structures are required as discussed below. Structures with Gravel Pads Many electric power line structures built in wetlands were constructed with gravel pads. A gravel pad is a deposit of fill material, generally gravel, that was placed in the wetland to support the structure. In most cases the area around the structure was filled to a distance of 15 to 20 feet beyond the structure. This provided room for the construction crew to install and maintain the structures. In most cases, if the structure was built with a gravel pad, there would also be a gravel access road out to it. Structures without Gravel Pads (Deep Wetlands) In those cases where the structure is in a deep wetland without a pad, the structure was generally constructed on piles. In deep wetlands (generally greater than 7 feet) a pile would be driven down through the wetland into the hard material below the wetland. A pile would be driven for each leg of the structure. With the piles in place, the structure legs would be attached to the pile and erected on top. At those locations where piles were used, the wetland was generally too deep to construct a gravel access road. Access to structures without access roads will be on swamp mats or similar weightdistributing materials. In a deep wetland, timber mats may have to be piled 3 or 4 high to support the construction equipment above the wetland surface. Structures without Gravel Pads (Shallow Wetlands) There are cases where structures were built in a wetland and not on piles. This case would be a shallow wetland with a hard bottom. The wetland will probably be one or two feet deep. In this case, there may or may not be an access road out to it. Access for maintenance of the structure will be by driving through the wetland on the hard bottom, under frozen or completely dry conditions such that there is no rutting, or by installing swamp mats or similar weight-distributing bedding. The use of low-bearing or tracked
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 7 of 42
vehicles may also be appropriate. The method of access will depend on the time of year and the weather conditions. The Person in Charge should consult with the Environmental Engineer if he or she has any questions on what to use. Treated Wood Structures in Wetlands (New York North) The New York State Department of Environmental Conservations General Permit 0-000001147 prohibits the use of treated wood poles containing creosote, pentachlorophenol or chromated copper arsenate to be placed in their jurisdictional wetlands unless these poles have been air dried for at least 3 months prior to placement. In addition, poles placed in the buffer area of a jurisdictional wetland containing known NYSDEC Protected Species must also be air dried for 3 months. Proof of air dried time lapse can be determined from the date stamped on the pole or if necessary, through invoicing.
6.0
Clean-up and Restoration Standards The following steps should be taken after construction has been completed. Refer to the Order of Conditions or other applicable Permit Requirements if issued for the project in question, to determine if the site must be reviewed prior to removal of erosion controls. Disturbed Areas Unless otherwise specified in permits or prescribed by an Environmental Engineer or environmental consultant, all disturbed areas, including stream banks, wetlands and access routes, shall be returned to original grade, seeded with an appropriate, sitespecific seed mix (if adequate root and natural seed stock are absent), and mulched with hay or straw (use straw in sensitive areas where potential introduction of invasive plant species is of concern). For some wetland areas, natural re-vegetation may be more appropriate than seeding disturbed sites. Improved Areas Yards, lawns, agricultural areas, and other improved areas shall be returned to a condition at least equal to that which existed at the start of the project. Alternately, if requested, the property owner may be reimbursed to perform their own restoration, after the site has been left in an environmentally sound manner. If this option is requested, it should be documented in a written release signed by the property owner. Access Routes (Cross Country Routes) Cross country access routes shall be returned to pre-construction grade, seeded (if adequate root and seed stock are absent) and mulched. Access Roads (Constructed Gravel Roads) Constructed gravel roads shall be returned to a condition at least equal to that which existed at the start of the project except that gravel roads shall, at a minimum, be
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 8 of 42
serviceable for four-wheel drive vehicles. Seeding and/or mulching of gravel roads is generally not required, unless necessary to prevent erosion. Property Damage All damage to property occurring as a result of a project shall be immediately repaired or replaced. In some locations, it may be desirable to document preexisting damage prior to the project in order to demonstrate afterwards that the damage did not result from the project. Swamp Mats/Temporary Structures After all work is completed, swamp mats and temporary bridges shall be removed and the site restored to pre-construction conditions. Siltation Controls After all work has been satisfactorily completed and vegetation has been re-established, and upon approval by the Environmental Engineer, siltation fence and stakes from straw bales shall be removed, and the strings on the bales cut in accordance with any pertinent Order of Conditions or similar permit requirements. Straw bales which were used for sedimentation or siltation control may be used to mulch disturbed areas (straw should be used in areas where invasive plant species are of concern). Remaining straw bales that do not block the flow of water may be left in place. Straw bales that block the flow of water must be removed. Removed siltation fence and straw bale stakes shall be disposed of properly, off-site. Stonewalls Removal or alteration of stonewalls shall be avoided, whenever possible. As appropriate, some stonewalls removed or breached by construction activities shall be repaired or rebuilt. Rebuilt stone walls shall be placed on the same alignment that existed prior to temporary removal, to the extent that it will not interfere with operations. Work Site Upon satisfactory completion of work, the construction personnel shall remove all work-related trailers, buildings, rubbish, waste soil, temporary structures, and unused materials belonging to them or used under their direction during construction, or waste materials from previous construction and maintenance operations. All areas shall be left clean and restored to a stable condition and where feasible, as near as possible to its original condition. Material Storage/Staging Areas Upon completion of all work, all material storage yards and staging areas shall be completely cleared of all waste and debris. Unless otherwise directed or unless other arrangements have been made with an off right-of-way land owner, material storage
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 9 of 42
yards and staging areas shall be returned to the condition that existed prior to the installation of the material storage yard or staging area. Whether or not arrangements have been made with a landowner, all areas shall be left in an environmentally sound condition. Also any temporary structures erected by the construction personnel, including fences, shall be removed by the construction personnel and the area restored as near as possible to its original condition, including possibly seeding and mulching.
7.0
Gates on Rights-of-Way When not in use, gates shall be locked with a company-approved lock or double locked with the property owners lock.
8.0
Field Refueling and Maintenance Operations Field Refueling When refueling vehicles, Company personnel or contractors at field locations are to bring vehicles or equipment to an access area away from environmentally sensitive areas (such as wetlands or drinking water sources). A paved area such as a parking lot or roadway is preferred, to minimize the possibility of spill or release to the environment. The driver is to take all usual and reasonable environmental and safety precautions during refueling, such as connecting a safety grounding strap between the fuel tank and vehicle or equipment being refueled. The driver is also to frequently check for fuel spills, drips, or seeps during the refueling operation. Small equipment such as pumps and generators should be placed in small swimming pools or on absorbent blankets/pads, to contain any accidental fuel spills. Grease, Oil ad Filter Change When a routine maintenance lubrication or oil change is scheduled on vehicles or equipment in the field, Company personnel or contractors at field locations are to bring vehicles or equipment to an access area away from environmentally sensitive areas (such as wetlands or drinking water sources) if at all possible. A paved area such as a parking lot or roadway is preferred, to minimize the possibility of spill or release to the environment. The driver is to take all usual and reasonable environmental and safety precautions during routine lubrication and oil/filter changes. It is especially important to wipe up all minor drips or spills of grease and oil at field locations. Other Field Maintenance Operations When other vehicle or equipment maintenance operations (such as emergency repairs) occur, Company personnel or contractors at field locations are to bring vehicles or equipment to an access area away from environmentally sensitive areas (such as wetlands or drinking water sources) if at all possible. A paved area such as a parking
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 10 of 42
lot or roadway is preferred, to minimize the possibility of spill or release to the environment. Take all usual and reasonable environmental precautions during repair or maintenance operations. It is sometimes not feasible to move the affected vehicle or equipment from an environmentally sensitive area to a suitable access area. When this occurs, precautions should be employed to prevent oil or hazardous material release to the environment. These precautions include (but are not limited to) deployment of portable basins or similar secondary containment devices, use of ground covers, such as plastic tarpaulins, and precautionary placement of floating booms on nearby surface water bodies.
9.0
Management of Spills/Releases Should a spill occur, it must be reported and cleaned-up in accordance with applicable EGs. Contact the Environmental Engineer.
10.0
Summary of Key Construction Best Practices Environmental permits, approvals, or agency notifications may be required when working in or near a wetland resource area or other sensitive environmental area. If you have any questions as to whether these are required for your work activity, contact your Environmental Engineer. Whenever working in and around wetlands or other sensitive environmental areas, certain construction practices should be implemented to minimize impact to the environment. The practices may vary according to the area and scope of the work, but generally, these BMPs include: Minimizing Soil and Vegetation Disturbance Soil disturbance should be limited only to that necessary to safely operate equipment, excavate for structures and anchors, temporarily stockpile soils, and conducting the necessary repair or maintenance work. It may be necessary to use low bearing pressure or track vehicles if access through a wetland is required. Wooden timber mats or similar load-distributing materials swamp mats - are generally used to cross wetlands or streams and to provide an equipment work surface at structures in wetlands. As applicable, the swamp mats should be placed in locations where swamp mats had been previously placed. Removal of the swamp mats is required upon completion of the work. Most work conducted by distribution crews will not require the use of special vehicles or swamp mats as long as wetland contours are maintained, rutting is prevented, and protected stream banks and beds are not disturbed. Erosion and Sedimentation Control The overall purpose of erosion and sedimentation control is to prevent and control the movement of disturbed soil and sediments from work sites to adjacent, undisturbed areas, and
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 11 of 42
particularly to water resources, public road surfaces and adjacent property. Appropriate erosion and sedimentation controls, consisting of such materials as silt fencing, straw bales, or wood chip bales (allowed in some NE states) should be installed between the work area and environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, streams, drainage courses, roads and adjacent property when work activities will disturb soils and result in a potential for causing erosion and sedimentation. Attachment B provides typical sketches of common erosion and sedimentation controls. Erosion and sedimentation controls should be properly maintained and inspected on a periodic basis, until work sites are properly stabilized and restored. Methods of documenting such inspections may include a written log or use of the Storm Water, Wetlands & Priority Habitat Environmental Compliance Site Inspection/Monitoring Report (Attachment A). Restoring and Stabilizing the Area When the work is completed, the disturbed vegetation and soil must be restored and stabilized by:

Regrading the area to pre-existing conditions; Seeding (if adequate root and seed stock are absent) and mulching the exposed soil; Removing strings and stakes from straw bales and using straw for the mulch; and, Removing siltation fencing and stakes and return to the operating facility, for disposal as ordinary waste.
Be sure to consult any regulatory permit associated with the work in question to ensure compliance during and after the project construction. 11.0 Notification Because it is sometimes difficult to identify wetlands and other sensitive environmental areas, an Environmental Engineer should be notified within 24 hours or by the next working day whenever emergency off-road repair work takes place. Planned off-road maintenance work should be reviewed with an Environmental Engineer before work begins. Although the routine maintenance and emergency repair work is generally allowed, due to site conditions or the scope of the project, notification to the regulating agencies may be required.
12.0
Typical Best Management Practice (BMP) Drawings Attachment B contains typical BMP drawings of some commonly-used methods for achieving ROW access, wetland and stream crossings, and erosion controls. Note that these typical BMP drawings are provided as general guidance and that project- or contract-specific specifications shall prevail over such guidance.
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 12 of 42
Attachment A (Click for Form) National Grid Storm Water, Wetlands & Priority Habitat Environmental Compliance Site Inspection / Monitoring Report
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 13 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 14 of 42
Attachment B
TYPICAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE DRAWINGS FOR ROW ACCESS, MAINTENANCE AND CONSTRUCTION CONTENTS DRAWING NO. RIGHT-OF-WAY ACCESS TYPICAL ROAD GRADE AND TURNOUT INSTALLATION TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TYPICAL PLAN WATER BAR AND LEVEL SPREADER o SECTION A-A (THROUGH WATER BAR) o SECTION B-B (THROUGH LEVEL SPREADER) TYPICAL PLAN OPEN TOP LOG CULVERT WETLAND AND STREAM CROSSINGS TYPICAL SWAMP MAT DETAIL TYPICAL STREAM CROSSING WITH CULVERT o SECTIONS A-A AND B-B TYPICAL STREAM CROSSING WITH SWAMP MATS TYPICAL PLAN STONE FORD TYPICAL STREAM FORD, TYPE 1 (WHERE LESS THAN 6 SOFT MATERIAL ON BED) TYPICAL STREAM FORD, TYPE 2 (WHERE BETWEEN 6 AND 3 SOFT MATERIAL ON BED) TYPICAL STREAM FORD, TYPE 3 (WHERE GREATER THAN 3 SOFT MATERIAL ON BED) TYPICAL CORDUROY INSTALLATION FOR ACCESS ROADS EROSION CONTROLS TYPICAL EMBEDDED SEDIMENT BARRIER INSTALLATION TYPICAL NONEMBEDDED SEDIMENT BARRIER INSTALLATION TYPICAL SEDIMENT CONTROL FENCE TYPICAL CHECK DAM INSTALLATIONS TYPICAL FRENCH DRAIN INSTALLATION TYPICAL SEDIMENT TRAP INSTALLATION TYPICAL WATERBAR INSTALLATION TYPICAL REPRESENTATION OF SLOPE/SWALE STABILIZATION TYPICAL DEWATERING HAYBALE BASIN TYPICAL CONCRETE WASTE SUMP LS-6809-0 LS-6810-0 LS-6811-0 LS-6812-0 LS-6813-0 LS-6814-0
LS-6815-0 LS-6816-0 LS-6817-0 LS-6818-0 LS-6819-0 LS-6820-0 LS-6821-0 LS-6822-0
LS-6823-0 LS-6824-0 LS-6825-0 LS-6826-0 LS-6827-0 LS-6828-0 LS-6829-0 LS-6830-0 LS-6831-0 LS-6832-0
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 15 of 42
RIGHT-OF-WAY ACCESS
General: Roads will normally have a 12 feet wide travel surface and will be routed within a 20 feet wide swath along the ROW, so as to provide the best access to structures and to avoid sensitive environmental resources. Off-ROW roads will generally be constructed to the same standards, and shall have permanent or temporary easements executed by the property asset and real estate function, to identify any special restrictions.
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 16 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 17 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 18 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 19 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 20 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 21 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 22 of 42
WETLAND AND STREAM CROSSINGS
General: Installations shall maintain uninterrupted hydraulic and hydrologic continuity and shall be installed to minimize use or damage by beavers, while not interfering with the movement of aquatic and wetland fish and wildlife species, in general. No wood preservatives, herbicides, pesticides, fuels, or other deleterious substances may be introduced into wetlands and protected waters.
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 23 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 24 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 25 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 26 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 27 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 28 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 29 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 30 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 31 of 42
EROSION CONTROLS
General: Erosion control installations shall not cause turbidity in streams downstream of the worksite and are to contain sediment at or near the spot from which soil or sediment is disturbed. Straw bales shall be used instead of hay bales in areas (particularly wetlands) where the potential introduction of invasive plant species is of concern.
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 32 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 33 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 34 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 35 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 36 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 37 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 38 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 39 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 40 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 41 of 42
Doc. No.
EG-303 Rev. No. 4
Page 42 of 42
Record of Change Date of Review/Revision: Revision 2 3 Date 07/01/08 12/11/09 Description Added Record of Change. Revised Checklist, Storm Water, Wetlands & Priority Habitat Environmental Compliance Site Inspection/ Monitoring Report (Attachment A). Addition of treated wood structures in wetlands guidance to comply with NYSDEC General Permit 0-0000-01147 for New York North.
07/21/10
APPENDIX III
Archaeological Surveys
Stage 1A Archaeological Survey
A STAGE 1A ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY
for the NATIONAL GRID BROOKLYN-QUEENS INTERCONNECTOR
BOROUGHS of BROOKLYN and QUEENS, NEW YORK CITY
KINGS and QUEENS COUNTY, NEW YORK
PROJECT ARCHAEOLOGISTS: David J. Bernstein, Ph.D. Daria E. Merwin, M.A., R.P.A.
The Institute for Long Island Archaeology Department of Anthropology State University of New York at Stony Brook Stony Brook, New York 11794-4364
March 2008 Revised February 2009 Revised March 2009
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
SHPO Project Review Number Involved State and Federal Agencies Phase of Survey Location
N/A N/A Stage 1A; literature search and archaeological sensitivity assessment. Location: mostly along Flatbush Avenue, Brooklyn Minor Civil Divisions: 04701 and 08101 County: Kings (Borough of Brooklyn) and Queens Two phases of proposed work: Phase I consists of a gas pipeline across Rockaway Inlet, from the west side of Flatbush Avenue opposite Aviation Road to the intersection of State Road and Beach 169th Street in Jacob Riis Park, a distance of approximately 5800 feet (1768 meters). Phase II involves the construction of a gas pipeline from the northern terminus of Phase I along the west side of Flatbush Avenue to Avenue U, approximately 13,400 feet (4084 meters). Coney Island, New York-New Jersey (1966/1979) A Stage 1B archaeological survey is recommended for relatively undisturbed portions of the project area along Flatbush Avenue. It is estimated that approximately 30 to 45 shovel test pits will be required for the subsurface survey. In addition, it is recommended that an archaeologist review the marine remote sensing data collected by Ocean Surveys Inc. for the portion of the gas pipeline route in Rockaway Inlet due to the potential for shipwrecks. David J. Bernstein, Ph.D. Daria E. Merwin, M.A., R.P.A. March 2008, revised February 2009, revised March 2009
Survey Area
USGS 7.5 minute Quadrangle Maps Recommendation
Report Authors
Date of Report
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii LIST OF FIGURES, PHOTOGRAPH, AND TABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL LITERATURE SEARCH AND SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Background Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Environmental Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Site File Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Historic Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 5 5
Sensitivity Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Prehistoric Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Historic Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Disturbance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Testing Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
iii
LIST OF FIGURES, PHOTOGRAPH, AND TABLE
Figure 1. Figure 2.
Map of Long Island showing the location of the project area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1966/1979 USGS topographic map of Coney Island, New York-New Jersey showing the location of the project area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Aerial photograph showing the location of the two proposed phases of the National Grid BrooklynQueens Interconnector project area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1812 Eddy Map of the Country Thirty Miles Round the City of New York showing the approximate location of the project area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1829 Burr Map of the Counties of New York showing the approximate location of the project area along the west side of Jamaica Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1844 USCS Map of New-York Bay. The northern terminus of the proposed gas main is located adjacent to farm fields, while most of the corridor runs through marsh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1866 USCS Chart Number 20: New York Bay and Harbor showing the location of the project area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1898 USGS topographic map of Brooklyn, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1906 Hyde Map of Long Island showing the location of the project area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Circa 1908 Ohman Birds Eye View of Brooklyn illustrating the garbage processing facilities and associated community on Barren Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1898 land features over the 1966/1979 USGS topographic map of Coney Island, New York . . . 18
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8. Figure 9. Figure 10.
Figure 11.
Photograph 1.
Looking north along Flatbush Avenue near the entrance to Floyd Bennett Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Table 1.
Known archaeological sites within 1.6 kilometers (one mile) of the project area . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
iv
INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a Stage 1A archaeological survey (literature search and sensitivity assessment) for the proposed National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector, located in the New York City Boroughs of Brooklyn (Kings County) and Queens, New York (Minor Civil Divisions [MCDs] 04701 and 08101; Figures 1 and 2). The survey was conducted by the Institute for Long Island Archaeology at Stony Brook University in March 2008. The National Grid Corporation is proposing to install a new gas transmission line near southwest Jamaica Bay in two phases (Figure 3). Phase I consists of two parallel gas mains (12 and 26 inch diameter) to be installed via directional drilling from the west side of Flatbush Avenue opposite Aviation Road, across Rockaway Inlet, to the intersection of State Road and Beach 169th Street in Jacob Riis Park. Phase II consists of one 26 inch gas main from the northern terminus of Phase I along Flatbush Avenue to Avenue U. The purpose of this study is to determine the archaeological sensitivity of each of the proposed Phases and to provide recommendations for subsurface testing and/or additional archaeological investigations in the Area of Potential Effect (APE). This survey was conducted in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the Phase I Archaeological Report Format Requirements issued by the New York State Historic Preservation Office (2005) and the Standards for Cultural Resource Investigations and the Curation of Archaeological Collections issued by the New York Archaeological Council and the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (1995).
Figure 1. Map of Long Island showing the location of the project area.
Figure 2.
1966/1979 USGS topographic map of Coney Island, New York-New Jersey showing the location of the project area (scale = 1:24,000). 2
Figure 3.
Aerial photograph showing the location of the two proposed phases of the National Grid BrooklynQueens Interconnector project area.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL LITERATURE SEARCH AND SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT Project Description The proposed National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector consists of two phases of work (Figure 3). Phase I consists of two parallel gas mains (12 and 26 inch diameter) to be installed via directional drilling across Rockaway Inlet from the west side of Flatbush Avenue opposite Aviation Road to the intersection of State Road and Beach 169th Street in Jacob Riis Park, a distance of approximately 5800 feet (1768 meters). The proposed depth beneath the bottom of Rockaway Inlet is approximately 30 feet (9.1 meters). Phase II involves the construction of one 26 inch gas main from the northern terminus of Phase I along the west side of Flatbush Avenue to Avenue U, approximately 13,400 feet (4084 meters). The depth required for the proposed gas main trench along Flatbush Avenue is approximately six feet (1.8 meters). Background Research Environmental Setting. The project area is located near the south shore of western Long Island, southwest of Jamaica Bay (Figures 1 and 2). Much of the project area is within and adjacent to the Jamaica Bay Unit of Gateway National Recreation Area, National Park Service, and Mill Island, New York City Parks. The northern terminus of the proposed gas main is at the intersection of Flatbush Avenue and Avenue U, an urban area southeast of the locality of Flatlands. The majority of the terrestrial portion of the project corridor runs along Flatbush Avenue adjacent to open space and recreational facilities (e.g., a golf course and marina) (Figures 2 and 3; Photograph 1). The project area is situated on the broad sandy Hempstead outwash plain, a landscape feature created more than 15,000 years ago by meltwater runoff from the Wisconsinan ice sheet (Sirkin 1996). Topography in the project area is generally relatively level, with an average elevation of 4.6 meters (15 feet) above mean sea level. The nearest modern mapped sources of fresh water consist of streams, including Gerritsen Creek, that empty into Jamaica Bay. There are also tidal wetlands in the vicinity. It is likely that more creeks and streams were located near the project area prior to extensive land filling along Flatbush Avenue and elsewhere on the shores of Jamaica Bay during the twentieth century. Soils in Brooklyn and Queens have not yet been completely surveyed and mapped, but it appears that the project area is dominated by Bigapple-Fortress complex soils, 0 to 8 percent slopes. There are smaller areas of Pavement and buildings-Flatbush-Riverhead complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes (at the northern terminus), Gravesend and Oldmill coarse sands, 0 to 8 percent slopes, Pavement and buildings, wet substratum, 0 to 5 percent slopes, and Hooksan-Dune land complex, 0 to 25 percent slopes (near Floyd Bennett Field), and Hooksan-Verrazano-Pavement and buildings complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes (at the southern terminus) (New York City Soil Survey 2005). Only the Hooksan series consists of natural sediments, while all of the remaining series are based on sandy fill of anthropogenic origin. Bigapple-Fortress complex soils are found on fill mounds and plains near coastal waterways in New York City. They are deep and well drained, with parent material composed of sandy dredge deposits, usually more than 102 centimeters (40 inches) thick. A typical profile includes a surface layer (A horizon) of dark grayish brown sand to an average depth of eight centimeters (three inches). It is underlain by a leaching zone (E horizon) of brown sand to 20 centimeters (8 inches), followed by the subsoil (B horizon) of yellowish brown stratified sand to 51 centimeters (20 inches) and the parent material (fill, C horizon) of yellow to grayish brown stratified sand to a depth greater than 71 centimeters (28 inches) (New York City Soil Survey 2005:22-23, 29). Bedrock on the southwest shore of Long Island is typically located more than one hundred meters below the ground surface. In addition to filling, other disturbances within and adjacent to the project area consist of cutting and grading associated with road construction and installation of underground utilities (e.g., electrical service to light poles; Photograph 1). As the soil survey indicates, much of the project area has witnessed substantial filling, mostly done in the early twentieth century. The extent of this land filling can be discerned through a comparison of nineteenth century and modern maps (see Historic Maps section, below). Based on a comparison of historic maps and modern topographic surveys, the depth of fill appears to exceed ten feet (three meters) for much of the project area.
Photograph 1. Looking north along Flatbush Avenue near the entrance to Floyd Bennett Field.
Site File Search. The files of the New York State Museum (NYSM), and the Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) document four prehistoric Native American and nine historic period EuroAmerican archaeological site within 1.6 kilometers (one mile) of the project area (Table 1). There are two National Register of Historic Places listed districts adjacent to the project area, the Floyd Bennett Field Historic District (90NR01268) and the Jacob Riis Park Historic District (90NR01579). These districts are described in the Historic Context section, below. In addition, the Marine Parkway Bridge (built in 1936-1937 and also known as the Gil Hodges Bridge; 04701.014797, 08101.007322) has been determined by OPRHP to be National Register eligible.
Historic Maps. A survey of nineteenth and early twentieth century maps indicates that the project area along Flatbush Avenue consisted mainly of tidal marsh islands until land filling in the 1920s. Although early nineteenth century maps are not as accurate as those drawn later in the century, they suggest that the general outlines of the marshy islands in Jamaica Bay changed relatively slowly compared to the dynamic movement of the barrier beaches facing the Atlantic Ocean. For example, the 1812 Eddy Map of the Country Thirty Miles Round the City of New York (Figure 4) and the 1829 Burr Map of the Counties of New York (Figure 5) depict similarly-shaped marshy islands in the bay compared with later maps, but the barrier beaches (including what is now Manhattan Beach and the Rockaway Peninsula) changed significantly on subsequent maps. Note that while its configuration shifts, Barren Island is illustrated as dry land on the 1812 and 1829 maps, earlier than the start of land filling with refuse from Manhattan (see Historic Context section, below). The closest buildings depicted on these maps include the mills on Gerritsen Creek and Mill Island, and farmsteads in the hamlet of Flatlands (near the intersection of modern Flatlands Avenue and Flatbush Avenue). No buildings are shown within or adjacent to the project area.
Figure 4.
1812 Eddy Map of the Country Thirty Miles Round the City of New York showing the approximate location of the project area. The modern configuration of Rockaway Inlet is considerably different from that of the early nineteenth century. Part of the proposed National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector corridor was marsh and water at the time, but note that Barren Island is depicted as dry land.
Figure 5.
1829 Burr Map of the Counties of New York showing the approximate location of the project area along the west side of Jamaica Bay. Most of the project area is illustrated as marsh, but note that Barren Island is shown as dry land.
Beginning in the nineteenth century, the United States Coastal Survey (USCS) published a series of nautical charts, including several for the New York Harbor area. Although land ownership is not indicated on the USCS maps, they are remarkably accurate and detailed in their depiction of natural and man-made features along the coast. The 1844 USCS Map of New-York Bay (Figure 6) depicts most of the project area as running through marsh islands. The north end of the project corridor (now Avenue U) is adjacent to farm fields, while the portion on Barren Island is near an ecotone where beach, marsh, and woods meet. This is one of the last maps published before Barren Island became the site of garbage processing facilities in the 1850s (see Historic Context, below). The vegetation depicted on the island is mixed deciduous and coniferous trees, possibly indicating scrub oak and pine that was native to much of southern Brooklyn when the Dutch arrived in the seventeenth century, and for which nearby Flatbush is named. By the time of the 1866 USCS Chart Number 20 (Figure 7), the amount of wooded area on Barren Island had been greatly reduced. Four buildings (two near the project corridor, one of which may be the Rendering Plant [see below], and two on the east side on Jamaica Bay) and roads are illustrated on Barren Island on the 1866 map. By the end of the nineteenth century the industrial facilities on Barren Island, along with a community of workers and their families, had grown to include numerous buildings, wharves, and roads as depicted on the 1898 topographic map of Brooklyn, New York (15 minute series; Figure 8). The 1898 map shows the northern terminus of the National Grid project area near the boundary of dry land and marsh (Flatbush Avenue had been extended as far south as the project area by the end of the nineteenth century, though Avenue U had not yet been constructed). The 1898 topographic map is also among the earliest to illustrate the westward extent of Rockaway Peninsula as far as the southern terminus of the project area. Previous maps had the southern terminus landing in water. Major land filling operations around Jamaica Bay were undertaken during the first three decades of the twentieth century. The start of this process within the project area is illustrated on the 1906 Hyde Map of Long Island (Figure 9), where filling and bulkheading is evident near the northern terminus around Avenue U. Although no buildings are depicted on the 1906 map, the garbage processing facilities and associated community were still active on Barren Island. Land filling to support features such as Flatbush Avenue, Belt Parkway, and Floyd Bennett Field was done in the 1920s and 1930s.
Figure 6.
1844 USCS Map of New-York Bay. The northern terminus of the proposed gas main is located adjacent to farm fields, while most of the corridor runs through marsh. Note the woods depicted on Barren Island near the south end of the project area.
Figure 7.
1866 USCS Chart Number 20: New York Bay and Harbor showing the location of the project area. By this time, garbage processing facilities had been established on Barren Island near the south end of the study corridor.
10
Figure 8.
1898 USGS topographic map of Brooklyn, New York (15 minute series). By the end of the nineteenth century, the garbage processing facilities on Barren Island had grown to include several buildings, wharves, and roads, though significant land filling had not yet occurred. Note also this is the first map to show the southern terminus of the project area landing on Rockaway Peninsula.
11
Figure 9.
1906 Hyde Map of Long Island showing the location of the project area. Although land filling and channelization had been started near the northern terminus of the project area (near Avenue U, shown here), most of the remainder of the corridor remained relatively unchanged until the 1920s and 1930s.
12
Table 1. Known archaeological sites within 1.6 kilometers (one mile) of the project area. Site Identifier NYSM 3608 Site Name ACP KNGS 4 Age prehistoric Comments human burials and oyster shell midden found on Avenue U near Ryders Pond (may be part of Ryders Pond site) (Parker 1920); approx. 1 km west of the north end of the APE immense shell middens on Bergen Island (Parker 1920); 1 to 2 km east of the north end of the APE Native American village or large camp site with shell middens and human burials northwest of Jamaica Bay; artifacts date from Early Archaic through Late Woodland periods, now Marine Park; 1 km west of the north end of the APE reported Native American village site formerly on Barren Island, now part of Floyd Bennett Field; approx. 1 km east of the APE house on former Mill Island, likely destroyed by landfill operations in Jamaica Bay during the early twentieth century; approx. 1.2 km east of the north end of the APE 1659 or earlier house and mill built by Jan Martense Schenck on Crookes Island (later Mill Island, now connected to mainland by landfill); structures moved from site after 1940; no evidence of site documented; approx. 1.1 km northeast of the north end of the APE 1772 house built by John Eldert just north of Mill Island (near Belmont Road and Mill Road); no evidence of site documented; approx. 1.7 km northeast of the north end of the APE 1656 house and mill built by Hugh Gerritsen on the west side of Strome Kill (now Gerritsen Creek); no evidence of site documented; approx. 1.3 km west of the APE industrial rendering plant/glue factory (Products Manufacturing Company) on Barren Island (now Floyd Bennett Field) along Dead Horse Bay; structure destroyed in 1930s by land filling; approx. 250 m west of the APE late seventeenth century house built by Albert Voorhees that once stood on the west side of Mill Creek; approx. 250 m west of the north end of the APE US Army fort, established 1917; approx. 500 m southwest of the south end of the APE on Rockaway Peninsula circa 1890-1920 refuse deposit (dated by bottle glass and ceramic fragments) on Breezy Point (Fort Tilden); approx. 850 m west of the south end of the APE formerly stood on the east side of Fort Tilden; approx. 600 m south of the south end of the APE
NYSM 7391 NYSM 7459, A04701.000112
ACP KNGS 3B Ryders Pond
prehistoric prehistoric
A04701.000114
Equendito site
late prehistoricearly historic historic; probably 19th century
A04701.000117
JB-70, Bennett House site
A04701.000120
JB-73, SchenckCrooke House and Mill site
historic; 17th century
A04701.000121
JB-74, John Eldert House site
historic; 18th-19th centuries
A04701.000122
JB-75, Gerritsen Homestead and Mill site JB-77, Rendering Plant site
historic; mid-17th century
A04701.000124
historic; 19th century
A04701.000126
JB-79, Voorhees House site Fort Tilden
historic, late 17th century historic, 20th century historic, late 19thearly 20th centuries historic; mid-19th century
A08101.000088
A08101.000106
BP-30
A08101.000107
BP-63, Breezy Point Life Saving Station
13
Sensitivity Assessment Prehistoric Context. As discussed above, the site files contain information on four prehistoric Native American archaeological sites within 1.6 kilometers (one mile) of the project area (Table 1). Two of these sites (NYSM 3608 and 7391) were documented by Arthur Parker (1920), and consist of shell middens and other features along the shore. The Equendito site (A04701.000114) was possibly a Contact period Native American village on Barren Island, now the southern part of Floyd Bennett Field. The best known prehistoric site in the area is the Ryders Pond site (NYSM 7459 and A04701.000112). It is the largest known Native American site in Brooklyn (Cantwell and Wall 2001:130). The Ryders Pond site was located at the northern end of Gerritsen Creek, roughly one kilometer west of the northern terminus of the National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector project area. The area in and around the pond was subsequently filled, and it is now part of Brooklyn Marine Park. The site was excavated around the turn of the twentieth century by D.B. Austin, an avocational archaeologist (Lopez and Wisniewski 1971, 1972). A number of Native American skeletons were discovered when Avenue U was constructed, and exploration of the site yielded thousands of artifacts, mostly lithics and pottery fragments dating to the Late Woodland period (circa A.D. 1000 to 1500). However, among the projectile point assemblage are a few specimens dating to the Early and Middle Archaic periods (8000 to 6000 B.C. and 6000 to 4000 B.C.), with greater numbers dating to following periods. Lithic artifacts were made from chert, quartz, jasper, argillite, and other materials (Lopez and Wisniewski 1971). There are also several artifacts in the collection from Ryders Pond that suggest the site was occupied during the Contact period. Evidence for interaction between the Canarsee Indians and seventeenth century Dutch settlers includes triangular arrow points made from European metal (Cantwell and Wall 2001). Although the excavators left few records, it is clear that the Ryders Pond site reflects a diverse array of activities that were carried out over several millennia (Lopez and Wisniewski 1972). Jamaica Bay and surrounding marshes and uplands would have been attractive to prehistoric peoples as a rich source of water, food (aquatic and terrestrial flora and fauna), and raw material (such as marsh reeds and clay). It is expected that larger sites like Ryders Pond with a diverse assemblage of artifacts and features (suggestive of residential bases and other repeated-use site types) would be located on the shores of the bay, especially near streams, while more interior regions would yield evidence of short-term and possibly specialized occupations. Based on the results of the site file search and an assessment of environmental conditions, undisturbed portions of the project area, if they exist, would have a moderate to high sensitivity for the presence of prehistoric resources. However, it is likely that any prehistoric deposits are now very deeply buried beneath landfill. Most of the proposed construction will be contained entirely within the fill deposits (the upper six feet [1.8 meters] of sediment). Therefore, the potential for impact to any prehistoric resources is relatively low.
Historic Context. The site files contain information on nine historic period Euro-American archaeological sites within 1.6 kilometers (one mile) of the project area (Table 1). Most of these sites were inventoried during a cultural resources study performed for the Gateway National Recreation Area by John Milner Associates in 1978, and in many cases the site is known through the documentary record only, with no evidence found in the field. The historic period sites closest to the National Grid project corridor are JB-77, the Rendering Plant site (A04701.000124) located adjacent to the west side of Flatbush Avenue near Dead Horse Bay and JB-79, the late seventeenth century Voorhees House site (A04701.000126) adjacent to the west side of Flatbush Avenue near Mill Creek (now a golf course) (Table 1). In addition, there are two National Register of Historic Places listed districts adjacent to the project area, the Floyd Bennett Field Historic District (90NR01268) and the Jacob Riis Park Historic District (90NR01579) (see below). Permanent settlement by Europeans did not occur in southern Brooklyn and Queens until the middle of the seventeenth century. At this time the area around Jamaica Bay was inhabited by Canarsee and Rockaway Indians, Munsee-speaking Delaware groups who probably had stronger cultural ties to Delaware peoples on mainland New York and New Jersey than with the Eastern Algonquian groups of central and eastern Long Island (Goddard 1978). Sporadic armed conflicts between the European and Native Americans as well as devastating epidemics dramatically reduced the Native American population on western Long Island, and prime land and local power quickly passed to the white settlers.
14
The land surrounding the project area was ceded from the Native Americans in a series of deeds dating from the mid-seventeenth century. Early Dutch settlements were established at Midwout (Flatbush) and Amersfoot (Flatlands) in 1654, nearly two decades after the first Dutch purchase was made by Wouter van Twiller at Flatbush (Manbeck 2005:218). Most of the National Grid project area was part of a pre-1645 deed to Hugh Gerritsen that included Barren Island, what is today Marine Park, and Gerritsen Creek (Bankoff et al. n.d.). The house and mill built by Gerritsen in 1656 less than a kilometer west of the north end of the project area were among the earliest documented Euro-American buildings in the region. The Dutch ceded control of New Amsterdam to England in 1664, and the area surrounding Jamaica Bay was settled by both Dutch and English farmers in the 1660s (Hazelton 1925). The economy of southwestern Long Island was principally agricultural, supplemented by fishing and other maritime trades in communities along the shore. The rural economy was disrupted by the American Revolution. The Battle of Long Island took place in nearby central Brooklyn during August 1776, and despite the efforts of George Washington, New York City quickly came under British control. Queens was largely Loyalist in political sentiment, but both Patriot and Loyalist families that remained in the region following the Battle of Long Island suffered hardships as British garrisons were provisioned with crops, wood, and livestock, seriously depleting local resources (Luke and Venables 1976). Families that had actively aided the British during the Revolution were forced to surrender property to the returning Patriots during the 1780s and 1790s. Pre-war economic patterns were gradually resumed during the early nineteenth century, facilitated by waterborne trade. Much of Brooklyn remained rural agricultural land well into the nineteenth century, with most population concentrated in the northern portion of the county. Over the course of the century, the City of Brooklyn (established in 1834 near Brooklyn Heights) gradually expanded to encompass the old Dutch towns. Flatlands, near the northern terminus of the National Grid project area, was among the last of the towns to be annexed in 1896 (Manbeck 2005:219). Development in the Jamaica Bay area was spurred by the coming of the railroad. The Brooklyn and Rockaway Beach Railroad started operations in 1865, while the New York, Woodhaven, and Rockaway Railroad opened a line across Jamaica Bay in 1880, connecting mainland Queens with the Rockaway Peninsula, and transforming small fishing villages into thriving summer resorts (Manbeck 2005; Seitz and Miller 1996). Jacob Riis Park on the Rockaway Peninsula was developed between 1932 and 1937 as one such resort area, with Art Deco style recreational buildings built under the auspices of the Federal Work Progress Administration. Now part of Gateway National Recreation Area, Jacob Riis Park is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (90NR01579). None of the contributing elements are adjacent to the project area. Similarly, Marine Park was completed in 1934 just west of the project area. Although plans to turn Jamaica Bay into a harbor to rival the Port of New York were never realized (Seitz and Miller 1996), southern Brooklyn and Queens witnessed a housing boom that did not abate until the latter part of the twentieth century. Brooklyn today is the most populated county in New York State (Manbeck 2005:221). The history of Barren Island differs from other areas around coastal Brooklyn where recreational attractions like race tracks, amusement parks, and bathing beaches were created during the second half of the nineteenth century. Instead, the island became the destination of garbage from New York City starting in the 1850s. Industrial facilities were developed to process the waste, and a small impoverished community of workers and garbage pickers was established on Barren Island. The Rendering Plant was operated by the Products Manufacturing Company during the nineteenth century on the shore of Dead Horse Bay, just south of the current marina (John Milner Associates 1978:119). Dead Horse Bay gets its name from the animal carcasses from the Rendering Plant, which processed dead animals (mostly from the streets of New York City) into glue and other products. A fish processing factory was opened in the 1860s, and garbage scows brought refuse to the island daily. The colony of workers was comprised mostly of Polish, Italian, and Irish immigrants, with some African-Americans also working. Social status was reflected in the type of waste sorted: bone, metal, paper, rags (Johnson 2000). In the early years of the twentieth century, the buildings on Barren Island included five factories, four saloons, one store, a one-room schoolhouse, and several cottages (Figure 10). Garbage processing operations reached their peak during World War I, when boiled down refuse was used to make nitroglycerin, but in 1918 New York City stopped shipping waste to Barren Island. The glue factory closed in the early 1930s, and in 1936 the remaining workers were evicted to pave the way for the Marine Parkway Bridge (Johnson 2000).
15
Figure 10.
Circa 1908 Ohman Birds Eye View of Brooklyn illustrating the garbage processing facilities and associated community on Barren Island.
16
Construction at Floyd Bennett Field, the first municipal airport in New York City, began in 1928 at a time when Jamaica Bay was still under consideration for development as a major port. Land filling operations along the shore of the bay that began in the early twentieth century were intensified to create a large expanse around Barren Island that was five meters (16 feet) above mean low water; most of the fill at Floyd Bennett Field came from channels dredged in Jamaica Bay (John Milner Associates 1978:121-122). According to the National Register nomination form, by 1933 the airport was the second busiest in the country in terms of numbers of takeoffs and landings, and it was the site of several early flights that set speed and distance records. However, Floyd Bennett Field was eclipsed by Idlewild Airport (now John F. Kennedy International Airport) which opened in 1939 on the northeast shore of Jamaica Bay. Floyd Bennett Field was closed to commercial use, and the U.S. Navy acquired the property in 1941. It was the Brooklyn Naval Air Station until it was transferred to the National Park Service as part of Gateway National Recreation Area in 1972. The Floyd Bennett Field Historic District is listed on the National Register (90NR01268). None of the contributing components in the historic district are adjacent to the National Grid project area. Due in large part to its proximity to New York City, the project area also has a rich maritime history. Despite frequently updated nautical charts (e.g., Figures 6 and 7), the shifting barrier islands along the south shore of Long Island acted as ship traps on the approach to New York, resulting in numerous wrecks. In 1849, a life saving station was built near what was then the west tip of Rockaway Peninsula (the tip had migrated considerably westward by the time of the 1906 Hyde Map of Long Island [Figure 9]). Originally known as the Barren Island Station, by 1872 it was identified as the Rockaway Beach Station, and in 1928 it became the first land-based radio station for the U.S. Coast Guard (Field 1997:144-147). Part of the impetus for opening the Barren Island life saving station was the tragic loss of two ships nearby in the late 1830s. In November 1836 the bark Bristol went aground on the shoals near Far Rockaway, resulting in the loss of 84 lives, mostly Irish immigrants on their way to New York City. A similar fate befell the bark Mexico in January 1837, when the ship ran aground and about 120 people drowned, again mostly Irish immigrants (Field 1997:144). Two other well-known shipwrecks off the Rockaway Peninsula are the Black Warrior (lost February 1859 off Jacob Riis Park) and Ajace (lost March 1881) (Field 1997:147). The closest known shipwrecks to the National Grid project area in the files of the OPRHP are the scow Franklin (wrecked near Rockaway Inlet in August 1897), the motorboat Martha J. (struck by lightning and burned in October 1913 in Jamaica Bay), and the sloop J.R. Brown (sunk at Barren Island in March 1881). There may be other undocumented shipwrecks in or adjacent to the project area. Based on the archaeological site file search, historic maps, local history, and an assessment of environmental conditions, undisturbed portions of the project area, if they exist, would have a moderate to high sensitivity for the presence of historic period resources, especially for deposits associated with the Rendering Plant site on Dead Horse Bay. However, as is the case with prehistoric sites, it is likely that any historic deposits are now very deeply buried beneath landfill (Figure 11). Most of the proposed construction will be contained entirely within the fill deposits (the upper six feet [1.8 meters] of sediment). Therefore, the potential for impact to any historic resources is generally low except for areas with minimal landfill (should they exist). In addition, there are three historically-known shipwrecks near the project area in Rockaway Inlet, and there may be additional undocumented wrecks in the vicinity.
17
Figure 11.
1898 land features over the 1966/1979 USGS topographic map of Coney Island, New York. Land that was dry on the 1898 topographic map of Brooklyn, New York is shown in dark green with solid boundaries, while land that was illustrated as marsh on the 1898 map is light green with dotted boundaries. Note that much of the National Grid project area was formerly marsh. 18
Disturbance As discussed above, a substantial portion of the project area along Flatbush Avenue (proposed Phase II) has witnessed extensive land filling, most dating to the 1920s. The depth of fill is likely variable along the survey corridor, but probably more than six feet (1.8 meters, the proposed gas main trench depth) in most locations, especially where fill was placed to create land in formerly wet and marshy areas. A comparison of topographic maps dating from 1898 and 1966/1979 (Figure 11) indicates that the depth of fill likely exceeds ten feet (three meters) in most places. In addition, much of the west side of Flatbush Avenue between Avenue U and the entrance to Floyd Bennett Field has been disturbed by road, building, and utility construction. Disturbed areas have a very low potential for the presence of intact archaeological deposits. The southern terminus of the project area in Jacob Riis Park was not dry land until late in the nineteenth century, when the westward growth of Rockaway Peninsula passed what is now the location of the Marine Parkway (Gil Hodges Memorial) Bridge.
Testing Recommendations It is recommended that all relatively undisturbed portions of the National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector project area be subject to a surface survey and subsurface testing. Such relatively undisturbed portions are mostly limited to the southern end of proposed Phase II, near the entrance to Floyd Bennett Field, where historical maps indicate former Barren Island was dry land (shown as blue dotted line in Figure 11). Subsurface testing should consist of the excavation of shovel test pits (STPs) at 15 meter (49 foot) intervals in areas of minimal disturbance to ascertain if archaeological resources are present beneath the ground surface. Areas of suspected disturbance may be examined using a wider interval (e.g., 30 meters [98 feet]) between shovel tests. It is estimated that the proposed gas main along Flatbush Avenue will require approximately 30 to 45 shovel test pits. In addition, because of the potential for shipwrecks in Rockaway Inlet (Phase I of the project area), it is recommended that once final project plans become available, the remote sensing data collected in 2007 by Ocean Surveys Inc. for the gas pipeline route be examined by an archaeologist familiar with sonar and magnetometer data.
19
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on a search of archaeological site files, a consideration of environmental characteristics, and a field inspection, the proposed National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector has an overall low sensitivity for intact prehistoric and historic period archaeological deposits within the length, width, and especially depth of the APE. Much of the project corridor consisted of marshy islands until land filling in the early twentieth century. The depth of fill along most of Flatbush Avenue exceeds the proposed gas main trench depth of six feet (1.8 meters). The area of highest sensitivity for archaeological sites is near the southern end of proposed Phase II (the west side of Flatbush Avenue near the entrance to Floyd Bennett Field), where historic maps indicate that former Barren Island was dry land and fill may not be as deep as elsewhere in the APE. Documented sites in this vicinity include the Equendito Native American village site and the nineteenth century Rendering Plant on Dead Horse Bay. A Stage 1B subsurface archaeological survey is recommended for relatively undisturbed portions of the proposed transmission gas main along Flatbush Avenue. The Stage 1B survey will entail a surface survey and the excavation of shovel test pits to determine if archaeological materials are present. Approximately 30 to 45 shovel test pits will be required. In addition, because of the potential for shipwrecks in Rockaway Inlet (Phase I of the project area), it is recommended that the remote sensing data collected in 2007 by Ocean Surveys Inc. for the gas pipeline route be examined by an archaeologist familiar with sonar and magnetometer data once final project plans become available.
20
REFERENCES
Bankoff, H. Arthur, Christopher Ricciardi, and Alyssa Loorya n.d. Marine Park. Archaeological survey report prepared for the New York City Department of Parks by the Department of Anthropology, Brooklyn College. Accessed online December 6, 2007: http://depthome.brooklyn.cuny.edu/anthro/dept/marinepark.htm. Cantwell, Anne-Marie and Diana diZerega Wall 2001 Unearthing Gotham: The Archaeology of New York City. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut. Field, Van R. 1997 Wrecks and Rescues on Long Island, The Story of the U.S. Life Saving Service. Searles Graphics, East Patchogue, New York. Goddard, Ives 1978 Delaware. Pages 213-239 in Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 15 edited by Bruce G. Trigger. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D. C. Hazelton, Henry I. 1925 The Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens, Counties of Nassau and Suffolk, Long Island, New York 1609-1924, Volume II. Lewis Historical Publishing Company, New York. John Milner Associates 1978 A Cultural Resources Inventory of the Gateway National Recreation Area. Report prepared for the National Park Service by John Milner Associates, West Chester, Pennsylvania. Johnson, Kirk 2000 All the Dead Horses, Next Door; Bittersweet Memories of the Citys Island of Garbage. The New York Times, November 7, Section B, page 1. Lopez, Julius and Stanley Wisniewski 1971 The Ryders Pond Site, Kings County, New York. The Bulletin of the New York State Archaeological Association 53. 1972 The Ryders Pond Site II. The Bulletin of the New York State Archaeological Association 55. Luke, Myron H. and Robert W. Venables 1976 Long Island in the American Revolution. New York State American Revolution Bicentennial Commission, Albany. Manbeck, John B. 2005 Brooklyn. Pages 218-222 in The Encyclopedia of New York State edited by Peter Eisenstadt. Syracuse University Press, New York. New York City Soil Survey 2005 New York City Reconnaissance Soil Survey. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Staten Island, New York. Parker, Arthur C. 1920 The Archeological History of New York. New York State Museum Bulletin Numbers 237 and 238. Albany, New York. Thompson, Benjamin F. 1839 A History of Long Island, Containing an Account of the Discovery and Settlement. E. French, New York.
21
Seitz, Sharon and Stuart Miller 1996 The Other Islands of New York City. Backcountry Publications, Woodstock, Vermont. Sirkin, Les 1996 Western Long Island Geology with Field Trips. The Book and Tackle Shop, Watch Hill, Rhode Island.
List of Maps Burr, David H. 1829 Map of the Counties of New York, Queens, Kings, and Richmond, An Atlas of the State of New York. Rawdon, Clark, and Company, Albany. Eddy, John H. 1812 Map of the Country Thirty Miles Round the City of New York. Prior and Dunning, New York. Hyde, E. B. 1906 Map of Long Island, New York. E. Belcher Hyde, Brooklyn, New York. Ohman, August R. ca. 1908 Birds Eye View of Brooklyn, New York. Published by August R. Ohman and Company for the Worldmere Realty, New York. United States Coastal Survey 1844 Map of New-York Bay and Harbor and the Environs. U.S. Coastal Survey, Washington, D.C. 1866 Coast Chart Number 20: New York Bay and Harbor, New York. U.S. Coastal Survey, Washington, D.C. United States Geological Survey 1898 Brooklyn, New York. 15 minute series. Topographic Surveys, Washington, D.C. 1966/1979 Jamaica, New York. 7.5 minute series. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
22
Stage 1B Archaeological Survey
A STAGE 1B ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY
for the Proposed NATIONAL GRID BROOKLYN-QUEENS INTERCONNECT
BOROUGHS of BROOKLYN and QUEENS, NEW YORK CITY KINGS and QUEENS COUNTY, NEW YORK
PROJECT ARCHAEOLOGISTS: David J. Bernstein, Ph.D. Daria E. Merwin, Ph.D. Mark S. Tweedie
The Institute for Long Island Archaeology Department of Anthropology State University of New York at Stony Brook Stony Brook, New York 11794-4364
January 2011
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
SHPO Project Review Number Involved State and Federal Agencies
09PR00796 United States Army Corps of Engineers New York State Department of Environmental Conservation New York Department of State Metropolitan Transportation Authority New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation Stage 1B; reconnaissance survey. Location: mostly along Flatbush Avenue, Brooklyn Minor Civil Divisions: 04701 and 08101 County: Kings (Borough of Brooklyn) and Queens Length: approximately 610 meters (2,000 feet) Width: approximately 1.5 meters (5 feet) Number of Acres Surveyed: approximately 0.3 acre (0.1 hectare) Coney Island, New York-New Jersey (1966/1979) Number and Interval of Shovel Test Pits: 30 shovel test pits generally dug at 15 meter (49 foot) intervals, with wider spacing in obviously disturbed areas. Number and Size of Units: N/A Width of Plowed Strips: N/A Surface Survey Transect Interval: N/A Number and Names of Prehistoric Sites Identified: none Number and Names of Historic Sites Identified: none Number and Names of Sites Recommended for Phase II/Avoidance: N/A David J. Bernstein, Ph.D., Daria E. Merwin, Ph.D.., and Mark S. Tweedie Institute for Long Island Archaeology State University of New York at Stony Brook January 2011
Phase of Survey Location
Survey Area
NYS DOT 7.5 minute Quadrangle Map Archaeological Survey Overview
Results of Archaeological Survey
Report Authors
Date of Report
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY .....................................................................................................................................ii LIST OF FIGURES AND PHOTOGRAPHS............................................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Area Setting ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS................................................................................................................. 5 Surface Survey............................................................................................................................................................... 5 Subsurface Testing ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 Results ........................................................................................................................................................................... 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................ 7 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................................. 8 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................................... 9 Appendix A: Locations of Sonar Targets ...................................................................................................................... 9 Appendix B: Shovel Test Pit Excavation Inventory .................................................................................................... 13 Appendix C: Project Maps........................................................................................................................................... 17
iii
LIST OF FIGURES AND PHOTOGRAPHS
Figure 1. Map of Long Island showing the location of the project area ....................................................................... 2 Figure 2. 1966/1979 NYS USGS topographic map, Coney Island, New York-New Jersey, 7.5 minute series showing the location of the project area. ....................................................................................................................... 3
Photograph 1. Looking south along Flatbush Avenue at excavation of a shovel test pit. ............................................. 4 Photograph 2. Auger coring a shovel test pit in the southern portion of the corridor. View is west. .......................... 4
iv
INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a Stage 1B archaeological survey performed for the proposed National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector in the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens, Kings and Queens County, New York (Minor Civil Divisions [MCDs] 04701 and 08101; Figures 1 and 2). The survey was conducted by the Institute for Long Island Archaeology at Stony Brook University in March 2009. All artifacts, field data, and photographs generated by this survey are curated at the Institute for Long Island Archaeology. A Stage 1A assessment performed by the Institute for Long Island Archaeology was completed in March 2009 (Bernstein and Merwin 2009). The report concluded that undisturbed portions of the National Grid BrooklynQueens Interconnector corridor, if they exist, have a moderate to high sensitivity for the presence of prehistoric and historic archaeological sites. However, it is likely that any cultural deposits are now very deeply buried beneath landfill. Most of the proposed construction will be contained entirely within the fill deposits (the upper six feet [1.8 meters] of sediment). Therefore, the potential for impact to any archaeological remains is relatively low. In addition, because of the potential for shipwrecks in Rockaway Inlet, it was recommended that the remote sensing data collected in 2007 by Ocean Surveys Inc. for the gas pipeline route be examined by an archaeologist familiar with sonar and magnetometer data. In addition, because of the potential for shipwrecks in Rockaway Inlet, it was recommended that the remote sensing data collected in 2007 by Ocean Surveys Inc. for the gas pipeline route be examined by an archaeologist familiar with sonar and magnetometer data. None of the 32 sonar targets identified by the Ocean Surveys field work (Ocean Surveys 2007:12) appear to be shipwrecks. Instead, the sonar targets protruding above the seafloor in the project corridor mostly measure less than two meters (6.6 feet) and likely represent modern debris, and in several cases, dilapidated pilings. A map showing the location of the sonar targets is attached as Appendix A. Further, under the updated proposed work scope the pipeline is to be installed using directional drilling at depths 30 and 60 feet (9 and 18 meters) below the bottom of the Rockaway Inlet channel bottom. This is far deeper than the anticipated depth of cultural resources such as shipwrecks, thus eliminating potential impacts. The purpose of this study is to determine if the proposed construction of two parallel underground gas mains will impact archaeological remains of prehistoric and/or historic age. This required archival research and an archaeological survey with subsurface testing. The study was performed in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the Standards for Cultural Resource Investigations and the Curation of Archaeological Collections issued by the New York Archaeological Council (1995) and the Phase I Archaeological Report Format Requirements issued by the New York State Historic Preservation Office (2005).
Project Area Setting The project area is located in Brooklyn near the south shore of western Long Island, southwest of Jamaica Bay. The northern terminus of the proposed parallel gas mains is at the intersection of Avenue U and Hendrickson Street. It runs along Hendrickson Street and Hendrickson Place, where it joins the west side of Flatbush Avenue and continues south to the intersection of State Road and Beach 169th Street in Jacob Riis Park located in the New York City Boroughs of Brooklyn (Kings County) and Queens (Figures 1 and 2). The portion of the project area with proposed shovel testing is approximately 610 meters (2,000 feet) long and extends 1.5 meters (five feet) from the edge of pavement between Aviation Road and Rockaway Inlet. The Area of Potential Effect (APE) in the testable portion of the project corridor measures roughly 0.1 hectare (0.3 acre). Project maps for the archaeological survey are presented in Appendix C to this report. A detailed description of the environmental setting was provided in the Stage 1A assessment (Bernstein and Merwin 2009). The National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector APE is primarily grass covered with areas of dense vegetation, including briar, immature deciduous trees, and other perennial shrubs (Photographs 1 and 2). Disturbances resulting from earth-moving activities associated with the construction of Flatbush Avenue and a drainage basin are present along the southern portion of the project corridor. Disturbed areas have a low potential for the presence of intact archaeological deposits.
Figure 1. Map of Long Island showing the location of the project area.
Figure 2.
1966/1979 NYS USGS topographic map, Coney Island, New York-New Jersey, 7.5 minute series (scale=1:24,000) showing the location of the project area.
Photograph 1. Looking south along Flatbush Avenue at excavation of a shovel test pit.
Photograph 2. Auger coring a shovel test pit in the southern portion of the corridor. View is west.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS
Field Methodology A two phase survey design was employed to search for terrestrial archaeological remains in the project area. Similar survey designs, used in other areas of Long Island, have proven successful in detecting prehistoric and historic sites (Bernstein et al. 1999; Lightfoot 1986). The initial phase of the survey involved a surface reconnaissance and inspection intended to locate large and easily visible remains. The second phase entailed subsurface testing. Surface Survey. The entire project area was walked over in March 2009, with special attention given to examining exposed soil for artifacts or other surface manifestations of past activity. Vegetation patterns and topographic features which might provide insight into early land use were also noted. Ground surface visibility is fair throughout most of the project area due to sparse grass cover. No material other than recent debris (i.e., less than twenty years old) was encountered during the surface survey. Subsurface Testing. The second phase of the field survey consisted of the excavation of shovel test pits (STPs) designed to detect the presence of artifacts or features buried beneath the ground surface. In general, the APE was tested at 15 meter (49 foot) intervals. A wider interval of 30 meters (98 feet) was employed in areas with obvious ground disturbance adjacent to the existing drainage (Appendix C, Sheet 1-2). No subsurface testing was undertaken north of Aviation Road or south of the Marine Parkway Bridge due to thorough disturbance and filling (Figure 2). A total of 30 shovel test pits was excavated in the project area. Shovel test pits have a diameter of approximately 40 centimeters (16 inches). Shovel test pits were often dug well beyond the typical 60 centimeters (24 inches) depth, and eight shovel test pits were excavated further with an auger core to record the presence of dredged fill. The soil from each test unit was screened through six millimeter (1/4 inch) wire mesh. All photographs, artifacts, and field notes produced during this survey are curated at the Institute for Long Island Archaeology at Stony Brook University.
Results The specific data recorded in the field for each shovel test pit, including information on soil stratigraphy and artifacts, are found in Appendix B to this report. The general characteristics of the soils found in the project area are discussed in the Stage 1A report (Bernstein and Merwin 2009). The topsoil layer (referred to in the Appendix as the A0/A1 horizon), present in only two shovel test pits, consists of partially decomposed organic matter and dark brown loam, and extends to an average depth of eight centimeters (three inches) below the ground surface. All of the shovel test pits contained disturbed soils of varying thickness, a few of which contained large pieces of asphalt. The natural undisturbed subsoil horizon was not encountered in any of the shovel test pits. Instead, sandy dredged fill was observed in all of the shovel test pits and most of the auger core samples. Dredged fill consists of light gray silty sand, frequently with small marine shells. The presence of deep fill was verified by auger cores taken in eight shovel test pits. Four of the auger core samples were impenetrable beyond approximately 110 centimeters (40 inches) in depth, while the remainder were excavated to an average depth of 165 centimeters (65 inches) below ground surface (Appendix B). The ubiquitous presence of dredged marine fill in all shovel test pits is consistent with extensive twentieth century land-filling on Barren Island documented in the Stage 1A report (Bernstein and Merwin 2009).
No prehistoric artifacts and no prehistoric or historic period features were encountered during subsurface testing. The majority of shovel test pits contained recent trash (e.g., modern bottle glass, plastic) and asphalt, while eight shovel tests yielded a light density of other twentieth century materials (e.g. aqua window glass, cobalt bottle glass, clear bottle glass, wire nails, porcelain, other earthenware, brick, coal and slag) (Appendix B). This material has no research potential, and no further archaeological investigations are recommended.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Archival research and archaeological investigation for the proposed National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector in the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens, Brooklyn (Kings) and Queens County, New York indicate that the project area has a low sensitivity for the presence of intact prehistoric and historic period sites within the APE due to extensive land-filling. A total of 30 shovel test pits was excavated in the APE. Shovel test pits, generally excavated deeper than 60 centimeters (24 inches) below the ground surface (with eight shovel tests extended with auger cores), consistently encountered dredged marine fill. This observation supports the assertion that the construction of the National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector will not likely impact any intact archaeological deposits. No prehistoric artifacts and no prehistoric or historic period features were encountered during subsurface testing. Only recent trash (e.g., modern bottle glass, plastic), asphalt, ceramic utility pipe, and a light density of material likely dating to the twentieth century (e.g. window and bottle glass fragments, wire nails, brick, coal and slag) was recovered. This material has no research potential, and no further archaeological investigations are recommended.
REFERENCES
Bernstein, David J. and Daria Merwin 2009 Stage 1A Archaeological Survey for the National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector, Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens, New York City, New York. Institute for Long Island Archaeology, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Bernstein, David J., Michael J. Lenardi, and Daria Merwin 1999 Stage IB Archaeological Survey of the Kycia Property, Head of the Harbor, Town of Smithtown, Suffolk County, New York. Institute for Long Island Archaeology, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Lightfoot, Kent 1986 Regional Surveys in the Eastern United States: The Strengths and Weaknesses of Implementing Subsurface Testing Programs. American Antiquity 51:484-504. United States Geological Survey 1966/1979 Coney Island, New York-New Jersey. 7.5 minute series. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
APPENDIX A: OCEAN SURVEYS, INC. MAP OF SONAR TARGETS
APPENDIX B: SHOVEL TEST PIT EXCAVATION AND ARTIFACT INVENTORY
Basic descriptive data from the National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector project area are presented in the following appendix. Excavation, stratigraphic, and artifactual information are included. Excavation information includes shovel test pit (STP) coordinates relative to mapping datum, level number, stratigraphic designation (stratum), and starting (SD) and ending (ED) depths (in centimeters) for each excavated level. Shovel test pit numbers containing an asterisk (*) represent locations of an auger core sample. The following abbreviations are used in the appendix:
Stratum A0/A1-topsoil dist-disturbed
Soils bn-brown cb-cobbles dk-dark gb-gray brown gr-gray gv-gravel lm-loam(y) lt-light md-medium mo-mottled ob-orange brown pb-pebbles sd-sand(y) st-silt(y)
13
APPENDIX B: SHOVEL TEST PIT EXCAVATION AND ARTIFACT INVENTORY
STP 1* 2 3* 4*
5 6 7
8 9 10 11*
SD 0 70 0 5 0 66 0 13 38 65 0 56 0 0 18 27 0 22 0 22 0 30 0 41 64 0 20 51 0 25 0 13 0 17 0 27 0 24 0 17
ED 70 110 5 60 66 140 13 38 65 172 56 77 61 18 27 90 22 88 22 85 30 80 41 64 76 20 51 95 25 70 13 84 17 70 27 83 24 72 17 60
Stratum fill dist A0/A1 dist fill dist A0/A1 dist dist fill fill dist dist/fill dist dist dist/fill dist dist/fill dist fill dist fill dist dist/fill dist dist dist fill dist fill dist fill dist fill dist fill dist dist/fill dist fill
Soils gr st sd mo md bn lm sd dk bn lm mo md bn lm sd gr st sd mo md bn lm sd dk bn lm mo gb st sd mo dk ob lm sd gr st sd gr st sd mo md bn lm sd mo gr st sd w/pb,gv&cb dk bn lm mo md bn lm sd gr st sd mo lt bn sd lm gr sd dk bn lm sd lt gr st sd dk bn lm gr st sd md bn sd lm gr sd mo md bn lm sd dk bn lm sd w/gv mo dk gr sd w/gv gr st sd dk bn lm gr st sd dk bn lm gr st sd md bn lm sd gr sd dk bn lm sd w/gv lt gr st sd md bn lm sd mo gr sd dk bn lm gr st sd
Cultural Material 1 clear bottle glass finish, 1 brick asphalt recent trash coal, slag, recent trash concrete, recent trash 2 coal, 1 skeet
recent bottle glass, recent trash recent bottle glass, brick
coal, slag, recent trash, shell recent bottle glass, shell 2 slag, 1 scallop shell, asphalt recent trash
12
2 aqua window glass, 1 clear glass insulator, 3 wire nails asphalt 2 slag asphalt recent trash recent trash recent trash 3 clear bottle glass, 1 porcelain, recent bottle glass 1 other earthenware, 4 shell
13 14 15
16 17 18
1 wire nail, 1 utility pipe recent trash coal, slag, shell
14
19
56
dist/fill
mo gr sd
20 21 22* 23* 24 25 26
56 0 40 0 28 0 22 0 30 0 13 0 0 12 0 0 0 28 0 10
78 40 80 28 80 22 70 30 95 13 65 82 12 71 75 167 28 60 10 180
fill dist fill dist/fill fill dist dist/fill dist fill dist fill dist/fill dist fill dist/fill fill dist fill dist fill
lt gr st sd mo md bn lm sd gr st sd mo dk gb lm sd w/gv gr st sd md bn lm sd mo gr sd md bn lm sd gr st sd md bn lm sd gr st sd mo dk gb sd w/pb md bn lm sd gr sd mo gr st sd lt gr st sd md bn lm sd gr st sd md bn lm sd gr st sd
1 clear bottle glass base ...N.Y...ED...ONE, 1 porcelain, slag, asphalt shell recent trash coal, plastic
1 cobalt glass, asphalt recent trash recent trash coal, slag, shell coal, slag, asphalt, plastic 5 clear bottle glass, 1 porcelain base, 1 brick coal, slag, recent trash shell recent trash coal, slag, recent trash
27 28* 29 30*
15
APPENDIX C: PROJECT MAPS
17
February 17, 2011 Ms. Elizabeth D. Meade AKRF, Inc. 440 Park Ave South, 7th Floor New York, New York 10016 Re: National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect, Archaeological Testing Rationale Dear Ms. Meade, This letter is to clarify our rationale for field testing the proposed National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect gas pipeline project. A Stage 1A archival search and archaeological sensitivity assessment was conducted by our office in early 2009, and Stage 1B survey was completed in 2009 and described in our most recent report. The project area is located in Brooklyn near the south shore of western Long Island, southwest of Jamaica Bay. The northern terminus of the proposed parallel gas mains is at the intersection of Avenue U and Hendrickson Street. It runs along Hendrickson Street and Hendrickson Place, where it joins the west side of Flatbush Avenue and continues south to the intersection of State Road and Beach 169th Street in Jacob Riis Park located in the New York City Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. As discussed in the Stage 1A report, a substantial portion of the project area along Flatbush Avenue has witnessed extensive land filling, most dating to the 1920s. The depth of fill is likely variable along the survey corridor, but almost certainly more than six feet (1.8 meters, the proposed gas main trench depth) in most locations, especially where fill was placed to create land in formerly wet and marshy areas. A comparison of topographic maps dating from 1898 and 1966/1979 (see figure, below) indicates that the depth of fill likely exceeds ten feet (three meters) along the project corridor: modern elevations given on the 1966/1979 topographic map range between 10 and 20 feet (3 and 6.1 meters) above mean sea level, with an average elevation of 15 feet (4.6 meters) in areas that were at or very close to sea level (water or marsh) in 1898. In addition, much of the west side of Flatbush Avenue has been disturbed by road, building, and utility construction. Similarly, the portion of the project area along Hendrickson Street and Hendrickson Place (where the proposed gas pipeline is to be placed in paved roadway) has been thoroughly disturbed by cutting, filling, and grading for road, building, and utility construction. The southern terminus of the project area in Jacob Riis Park was not dry land until late in the nineteenth century, when the westward growth of Rockaway Peninsula passed what is now the location of the Marine Parkway (Gil Hodges Memorial) Bridge.
We recommended that all relatively undisturbed portions of the gas main project area be subject to a surface survey and subsurface testing. The surface survey included the entire project corridor, while subsurface testing was limited to the relatively undisturbed area opposite the entrance to Floyd Bennett Field, where historical maps indicate former Barren Island was dry land (area tested shown as blue dotted line on the attached figure). Areas where the gas line is to be placed beneath paved roads (including the northern portion on Hendrickson Street and Place; like Flatbush Avenue, much of which was water and marsh prior to twentieth century land filling [see figure]) were eliminated from subsurface testing. A total of 30 shovel test pits was excavated in the project area. Shovel test pits have a diameter of approximately 40 centimeters (16 inches), and most shovel tests were dug well beyond the typical 60 centimeters (24 inches) depth. Eight shovel test pits were excavated further with an auger core to verify the presence of dredged fill. Four of the auger core samples were impenetrable beyond approximately 110 centimeters (40 inches) deep, while the remainder were excavated to an average depth of 165 centimeters (65 inches) below ground surface. One auger core was excavated to 180 centimeters (six feet), the maximum depth of proposed disturbance. In all cases, dredged marine fill was encountered to bottom, a finding consistent with extensive twentieth century land filling in the area documented by historic maps. Please let me know if you have any questions or require additional information regarding the archaeological survey for the proposed National Grid gas pipeline. I can be reached at dmerwin@notes.cc.sunysb.edu or (631) 632-7618.
Sincerely,
Daria E. Merwin, Ph.D., R.P.A. Project Director, Institute for Long Island Archaeology
1898 land features superimposed on the 1966/1979 USGS topographic map of Coney Island, New York. Land that was dry on the 1898 topographic map of Brooklyn, New York is shown in dark green with solid boundaries, while land that was illustrated as marsh on the 1898 map is light green with dotted boundaries. Note that much of the project area was formerly marsh.
APPENDIX IV
Historic Resources Correspondence
David A. Paterson Governor Carol Ash Commissioner Historic Preservation Field Services Peebles Island, PO Box 189, Waterford, New York 12188-0189 518-237-8643 www.nysparks.com
March 30, 2009 Elizabeth D. Meade, RPA AKRF 440 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Re: CORPS/DEC/DOS/MTA National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnector Project Kings/Queens County 09PR00796
Dear Ms. Meade: Thank you for requesting the comments of the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for the proposed National Grid Interconnector project. We have reviewed the submitted documents in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. These comments are those of the SHPO and relate only to the Historic/Cultural resources. They do not include other environmental impacts to New York State Parkland that may be involved in or near your project. Such impacts must be considered as part of the environmental review of the project pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act and/or the State Environmental Quality Review Act (New York Environmental Conservation Law Article 8). Based upon our review, we offer the following comments: 1. Virginia Bartos of our National Register Staff notes that Floyd Bennett Field and Fort Tiden are located nearby the proposed development site. Both these properties are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. We look forward to reviewing any possible impacts to these properties and any other historic properties within the path of the pipeline. 2. Douglas Mackey of our Archeology Unit concurs with the Stage IA report and conclusions. He looks forward to reviewing the results of the 1B testing. . If you have any questions, I can be reached at (518) 237-8643, ext. 3282. Please refer to the Project Review (PR) number in any future correspondences regarding this project.
Sincerely,
Beth A. Cumming Historic Site Restoration Coordinator e-mail: Beth.cumming@oprhp.state.ny.us
An Equal Opportunity Employer/Affirmative Action Agency
Environmental and Planning Consultants

440 Park Avenue South 7th Floor New York, NY 10016 tel: 212 696-0670 fax: 212 213-3191 www.akrf.com
February 24, 2011 Amanda Sutphin New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission 1 Centre Street, 9th Floor New York, NY 10007 Re: National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect Project
Dear Ms. Sutphin: This letter is a follow-up to our February 10, 2011 telephone conversation regarding the above-referenced project. As you are aware, National Grid is proposing the installation of three new natural gas pipelines to reinforce its natural gas transmission and distribution systems and to provide for projected increases in energy demand in both Brooklyn and Queens in the Rockaway Peninsula. The project will be completed in two phases. Phase I will involve the installation of two parallel (12- and 26-inch) natural gas pipelines between the intersection of Flatbush Avenue and Aviation Road in Brooklyn and Beach 169th Street in Queens. Approximately 7,900 feet of the 8,300 feet of parallel pipeline in Phase I would be installed using horizontal directional drilling and the remainder would be installed using conventional cut-andcover construction methods. The 26-inch pipeline would be installed approximately 60 feet below the mud line of Rockaway Inlet and the 12-inch pipeline would be installed approximately 30 feet below the mud line of Rockaway Inlet within a designated cable crossing area. Phase II would involve the installation of a 30-inch steel natural gas pipeline beneath the roadways of Hendrickson Street south of Avenue U to Hendrickson Place then along Hendrickson Place to Flatbush Avenue south to Aviation Road (the northern terminus of Phase I)a distance of approximately 12,000 feet. The gas main would be installed in the roadway right-of-ways (ROW), approximately 42 inches below grade. This pipeline would be installed using conventional open trench construction methods except where is crosses the Belt Parkway, where horizontal directional drilling will be used. The Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study was submitted to your office in February 2009. At that time, the pipeline was expected to be installed along Flatbush Avenue from Avenue U in Brooklyn to Beach 169th Street in the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens. Since the preparation of that report, the project site has been modified slightly. At the northern terminus of the proposed pipeline, the proposed route now runs through Hendrickson Street, one block west of Flatbush Avenue, between Avenue U and Hendrickson Place, where it will turn east and continue along Flatbush Avenue as previously planned. The Phase 1B survey that was submitted to your office in February 2011 depicts the current route of the proposed pipeline and the change in the project site is represented in the studys conclusions. Please see the attached memo prepared by Daria Merwin, Ph.D., the Project Director, Institute for Long Island Archaeology, SUNY Stony Brook. The memo clarifies the testing strategy used during the Phase 1B archaeological survey and summarizes the evidence used to reach the conclusions presented in the study.
AKRF, Inc. New York City Hudson Valley Region Long Island Baltimore / Washington Area New Jersey Connecticut
Ms. Amanda Sutphin
February 24, 2011
In addition, at the time of the submission of the Phase 1A study in February 2009, the proposed project was subject to environmental review under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and a New York State agency was expected to serve as lead agency for the environmental review process. However, the lead agency is now expected to be a New York City agency; therefore, the project is subject to review under City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR). The project will also require permits and approvals from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the New York State Department of State (NYSDOS), the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), the New York City Department of City Planning (NYCDCP), the New York City Planning Commission (NYCPC) under the Uniform Land Use Review Procedures (ULURP), the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT), and the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation (NYCDPR). Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (646) 388-9811 or by email at emeade@akrf.com.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth D. Meade, RPA Archaeologist cc: Adam Yablonsky, Daniel DEletto, and Steve Dalton; National Grid Phil Sears and Jessica Zanca; AKRF
February 17, 2011 Ms. Elizabeth D. Meade AKRF, Inc. 440 Park Ave South, 7th Floor New York, New York 10016 Re: National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect, Archaeological Testing Rationale Dear Ms. Meade, This letter is to clarify our rationale for field testing the proposed National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect gas pipeline project. A Stage 1A archival search and archaeological sensitivity assessment was conducted by our office in early 2009, and Stage 1B survey was completed in 2009 and described in our most recent report. The project area is located in Brooklyn near the south shore of western Long Island, southwest of Jamaica Bay. The northern terminus of the proposed parallel gas mains is at the intersection of Avenue U and Hendrickson Street. It runs along Hendrickson Street and Hendrickson Place, where it joins the west side of Flatbush Avenue and continues south to the intersection of State Road and Beach 169th Street in Jacob Riis Park located in the New York City Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. As discussed in the Stage 1A report, a substantial portion of the project area along Flatbush Avenue has witnessed extensive land filling, most dating to the 1920s. The depth of fill is likely variable along the survey corridor, but almost certainly more than six feet (1.8 meters, the proposed gas main trench depth) in most locations, especially where fill was placed to create land in formerly wet and marshy areas. A comparison of topographic maps dating from 1898 and 1966/1979 (see figure, below) indicates that the depth of fill likely exceeds ten feet (three meters) along the project corridor: modern elevations given on the 1966/1979 topographic map range between 10 and 20 feet (3 and 6.1 meters) above mean sea level, with an average elevation of 15 feet (4.6 meters) in areas that were at or very close to sea level (water or marsh) in 1898. In addition, much of the west side of Flatbush Avenue has been disturbed by road, building, and utility construction. Similarly, the portion of the project area along Hendrickson Street and Hendrickson Place (where the proposed gas pipeline is to be placed in paved roadway) has been thoroughly disturbed by cutting, filling, and grading for road, building, and utility construction. The southern terminus of the project area in Jacob Riis Park was not dry land until late in the nineteenth century, when the westward growth of Rockaway Peninsula passed what is now the location of the Marine Parkway (Gil Hodges Memorial) Bridge.
We recommended that all relatively undisturbed portions of the gas main project area be subject to a surface survey and subsurface testing. The surface survey included the entire project corridor, while subsurface testing was limited to the relatively undisturbed area opposite the entrance to Floyd Bennett Field, where historical maps indicate former Barren Island was dry land (area tested shown as blue dotted line on the attached figure). Areas where the gas line is to be placed beneath paved roads (including the northern portion on Hendrickson Street and Place; like Flatbush Avenue, much of which was water and marsh prior to twentieth century land filling [see figure]) were eliminated from subsurface testing. A total of 30 shovel test pits was excavated in the project area. Shovel test pits have a diameter of approximately 40 centimeters (16 inches), and most shovel tests were dug well beyond the typical 60 centimeters (24 inches) depth. Eight shovel test pits were excavated further with an auger core to verify the presence of dredged fill. Four of the auger core samples were impenetrable beyond approximately 110 centimeters (40 inches) deep, while the remainder were excavated to an average depth of 165 centimeters (65 inches) below ground surface. One auger core was excavated to 180 centimeters (six feet), the maximum depth of proposed disturbance. In all cases, dredged marine fill was encountered to bottom, a finding consistent with extensive twentieth century land filling in the area documented by historic maps. Please let me know if you have any questions or require additional information regarding the archaeological survey for the proposed National Grid gas pipeline. I can be reached at dmerwin@notes.cc.sunysb.edu or (631) 632-7618.
Sincerely,
Daria E. Merwin, Ph.D., R.P.A. Project Director, Institute for Long Island Archaeology
1898 land features superimposed on the 1966/1979 USGS topographic map of Coney Island, New York. Land that was dry on the 1898 topographic map of Brooklyn, New York is shown in dark green with solid boundaries, while land that was illustrated as marsh on the 1898 map is light green with dotted boundaries. Note that much of the project area was formerly marsh.
Executive Summary
Keyspan tasked Earthworks to evaluate geologic strata for a planned directional drill for gas pipelines across Rockaway Inlet to Jamaica Bay, west of the Marine Parkway/Gil Hodges Memorial Bridge. Earthworks completed fourteen (14) SPT borings offset along the planned directional-drill path and an alternate directional-drill path. Nine (9) marine borings were drilled in Rockaway Inlet to an average of -90 ft MLLW (NAVD88). Two (2) land borings were drilled on the south side of Rockaway Inlet on Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority (TBTA) property in Queens, NY, to depths of -38 ft MLLW and -85 ft MLLW. Three land borings were drilled on the north side of Rockaway Inlet on TBTA property adjacent to Flatbush Avenue in Brooklyn, NY to depths from -92 ft MLLW to -60 ft MLLW. Borings were designed to investigate the sediments to 20 ft below the planned trajectory. The borings were offset by at least 40 feet from the planned directional drill path. The predominant material sampled is fine sand with traces of silt and medium sand (designated SP under USCS classification). This is equivalent to fine-to-medium-sized sand in the USDA classification. The fine sand is poorly graded having a narrow grain-size range. These sands occur in three main units: 1. Recent Holocene marine tidal and shore sands. These include sands comprising active sand waves in Rockaway inlet. 2. A upper unit of Pleistocene glacial outwash sands. 3. A lower unit of Pleistocene sands. There are no gravel layers thicker than 0.1 ft. Gray clay units less than or equal to 0.1 ft. occur locally in the Holocene. Red clay and green clay units inter-layered with silt in packages less than or equal to 0.2 ft. occur in the lower Pleistocene. The major concern for a horizontal-drilling project is fine sand that liquefies during drilling. During vertical drilling the liquefied fine sand was most problematic in the Holocene sediments and casing and drilling mud were required to achieve the final depth. The planned trajectory at 73ft MLLW (NAVD88) is located in the uppermost Pleistocene outwash sand. Earthworks cautions that care must be taken in the uppermost Pleistocene to maintain the pressure balance in the horizontal well. The lower Pleistocene layer with a top at -85ft MLLW is more stable as evidenced by higher recovery in the SPT spoon. A potential concern for the horizontal drilling was encountering artificial fill on both shores and historic garbage dumps on the north shore. The north shore is on the former Barren Island that was a major municipal dump throughout the 19th and into the early 20th century. The land was raised artificially, apparently using sand fill identical to the Holocene sand. Garbage dumps were not encountered. An examination of old maps revealed that this portion of Barren Island existed into the 19th century and was not a dump. An old tar road was encountered in boring KS-07-JB-13. Boring KS-07-JB-11 penetrated what appears to be a fallen and buried wooded dock topped with similar tar as the road. The edge of the dock is exposed on the shoreline. These obstacles are shallow and should not be encountered by the direction-drill pathways. The safety survey was completed on May 17, 2007. Earthworks acquired orthosonography, subbottom seismology, and magnetometry data. Verizon kindly provided a tone on the Bell Atlantic Cable to help with its location. Borings were relocated to avoid this active cable and other potential obstacles.
Earthworks
Plate 2. Geological Cross sections along the planned and alternative pipeline trajectories.
Subsurface Exploration of a Proposed Directional Drill Path beneath the Rockaway Inlet to Jamaica Bay, NY
Geological Cross Section along Planned Pipeline Trajectory

North northwest
Planned pipeline trajectory
South southeast
KS-07-JB-00
January 7, 2008 Station 0 +11.1
Projected 68.5' NE of midline
Holocene Marine Estuarine Sands

Horizon x
Pleistocene upper unit glacial outwash sands II

10x Vertical Exaggeration
Planned Trajectory for 12" & 26" Gas Mains
Location Map of Borings
Geological Cross Section along Alternative Pipeline Trajectory

North northwest
Alternate pipeline trajectory
South southeast
KS-07-JB-01
January 9, 2008 Station 05 + 03.1 May 11, 2007 Station 44 + 04.0
Projected 219.9' SW of midline
KS-07-JB-00
January 7, 2008 Station 02 +00.5
KS-07-JB-11
KS-07-JB-10
May 15, 2007 Station 40 + 81.3
KS-07-JB-09
Date 10, 2007 Station 36 + 64.3
KS-07-JB-08
May 14, 2007 Station 31 + 71.8
KS-07-JB-07
May 22, 2007 Station 27 + 57.5
KS-07-JB-06
May 16, 2007 Station 23 + 66.5
KS-07-JB-05
May 9, 2007 Station 18 + 40.2
KS-07-JB-04B
May 8, 2007 Station 14 + 9.8
KS-07-JB-03
May17, 2007 Station 11 +8.7
ate
Elevation (feet)
Horizon x
Bathr ymetr y
Holocene Marine Estuarine Sands
Estim
Bat
met hy
ry
for
Pla
nn
ed
tra
ject
ory
on
Alt
ern
ati
ve
je tra
cto
ry
pro
file
Elevation (feet)

Alternate Trajectory for 12" Gas Main
Key to Sediment Units

Holocene marine estuary sands
gray to brown fine-to-medium-grain-sized** sands Common features: some coarse sand and silt shells and shell fragments locally plant matter predominantly quartz grains
10x Vertical Exaggeration
Alternate Trajectory for 26" Gas Main
Pleistocene upper unit glacial outwash II sands

brown to red-brown fine-to-medium-grain-sized** sands
Common features: cross laminations mica grains red-brown and green grains very-fine-to-silt-sized heavy minerals
Beneath Rockaway Inlet the directional-drill pathway extends through this unit
Pleistocene lower unit glacial outwash I silts & sands

brown to red-brown to green-brown very-fine-to-medium-grain-sized** sands with trace to some silt; and rare clay
Common features: cross laminations fine mm-scaled laminations mica grains red-brown and green grains very-fine-to-silt-sized heavy minerals
This unit has pieces of varved clay and silt that were not well preserved in the boring samples. These may be thin units less than 0.5 feet thick or pebble to boulder sized rip-up clasts. **grain sizes are in USDA scale these fine-to-medium (USDA scale) sands are fine sand in the Unified Soil Classification Scheme
Northing: 148,170.3 ft
North Shore, Rockaway Inlet, Jamaica Bay, NY
driller: F.R., CM iI
Sheet 1 of 2
0.001 0.001
0.010 0.010
0.100 0.100
1.000 1.000
10.00 10.00
100.0 100.0
Particle size (mm) Particle Size (mm)
described by: W.B.Ward & M.B. Art, Earthworks, LLC
GRAVEL
USDA
FINES SAND
clay
Munsell
Sample type Sample interval Recovery (ft.) test sample Test sample Soil sample
silt
Elevation*
USCS Unified Soil Classification

GRAVEL SAND
Depth
vf f m c vc
MLLW 25.0 MLLW
fmc
USDA Classification
FINES
Description per split spoon
24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 80 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 -0.0 -1.0 -2.0 -3.0 -4.0 -5.0 -6.0 -7.0 -8.0 -9.0 -10.0 -11.0 -12.0 -13.0 -14.0 -15.0 -16.0 -17.0 -18.0 -19.0 -20.0 -21.0 -22.0 -23.0 -24.0 -25.0 -26.0 -27.0 -28.0 -29.0 -30.0 -31.0 -32.0 -33.0 -34.0 -35.0 -36.0 Continued to sheet 2 -37.0 *Elevation 0.0 = MLLW (tidal epoch (1983-2001) Vertical datum: NAVD 1988 -38.0 Continued to sheet 2 f SAND -39.0 trace silt
Gray m-f SAND
12 10 16
44
-21.0
SP
micas; fluidized
23 24
KS-07-JB-12
Easting: 1,015,058.5 ft Northing: 149,981.8 ft
driller: F.Navarro w/ N. Deire, CMI
Sheet 2 of 2

completed on January 11, 2008
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.00 100.0
described by: W.B.Ward & M.B. Art, Earthworks, LLC
GRAVEL
USDA
FINES SAND
clay
Sample type Sample interval Recovery (ft.)
silt
vf f m vc

Continued from sheet 1
GRAVEL
MLLW 25.0
fmc
USDA Classification
Soil sample
Test sample
Elevation*
Depth
FINES
SAND
45
oc a ay et, Ja a ca ay, Y
Sheet 1 of 2

driller: F.Navarro w/ N. Deire, CMI described by: W.B.Ward , M. Art w/ M. Bansak, Earthworks, LLC
0.001 0.001
0.010 0.010
0.100 0.100
1.000 1.000
10.00 10.00
100.0 100.0
GRAVEL
USDA
FINES SAND
clay
Munsell
Sample type Sample interval Recovery (ft.) Soil sample Test sample test sample
silt
Elevation*

GRAVEL SAND
Depth
vf f m c vc
MLLW 25.0 MLLW
fmc
USDA Classification
FINES
24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 80 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 -0.0 -1.0 -2.0 -3.0 -4.0 -5.0 -6.0 -7.0 -8.0 -9.0 -10.0 -11.0 -12.0 -13.0 -14.0 -15.0 -16.0 -17.0 -18.0 -19.0 -20.0 -21.0 -22.0 -23.0 -24.0 -25.0 -26.0 -27.0 -28.0 -29.0 -30.0 -31.0 -32.0 -33.0 -34.0 -35.0
Gray f SAND Gray m-c SAND Brown Brown
f-m SAND trace c sand laminae micas
Sod & Grass
ML/OL
Organic matter & rooots
Light-brown m-f SAND laminae
SP
f SAND trace m sand trace silt
SP
f SAND trace m sand
Light-brown m-f SAND
SM-SP SP SP
f Sand trace m sand
White f-m SAND charcoal fragments Brown
f Sand trace m sand f SAND
f-m SAND trace c sand laminae
Brown
f SAND
Brown
SP
f SAND trace m sand
f-m SAND trace c sand laminae micas
SP
f SAND trace m sand
f-m SAND micas
SP SP SP
f-m SAND f SAND trace m sand
Gray-brown f SAND; trace c sand & fine gravel Gray f SAND trace m sand Gray-brown m-c SAND;
f SAND
SP
f-m SAND
SP
f SAND trace m sand
Gray-brown f-m SAND; laminae micas
SP SP SP SP SP
f-m SAND
f-m SAND f SAND trace m sand
Gray f-c SAND Gray f-m SAND Red-brown c-f SAND Brown m-f SAND Brown
-36.0 Continued to sheet 2
m-f SAND
-37.0 SAND *Elevation 0.0 = MLLW (tidalf epoch (1983-2001) Vertical datum: NAVD 1988 trace m sand -38.0
46
58.0
-39.0
-21.0
Gray-brown m-c SAND;
trace mL ; mineral colors
57
KS-07-JB-13
Sheet 2 of 2

completed on January 4, 2008
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.00 100.0
described by: W.B.Ward , M. Art w/ M. Bansak, Earthworks, LLC
GRAVEL
USDA
FINES SAND
clay
silt
vf f m vc

GRAVEL
MLLW 25.0
fmc
USDA Classification
Test sample
Soil sample
Elevation*
Depth
FINES
SAND
47
Standard Penetration Test boring

Sheet 1 of 2

0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.00 100.0
Particle Size (mm)
clay
silt
vf f m c vc
GRAVEL
USDA
FINES SAND
Munsell
test sample
Elevation*
USCS
GRAVEL SAND
Depth
MLLW 25.0 MLLW
fmc
USDA Classification
24.0 23.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 19.0 18.0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0 24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 28.0 29.0 30.0 31.0 32.0 33.0 34.0 35.0 36.0 37.0 38.0 39.0 40.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 45.0 46.0 47.0 48.0 49.0 50.0 51.0 52.0
17.0 16.0 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 80 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 -0.0 -1.0 -2.0 -3.0 -4.0 -5.0 -6.0 -7.0 -8.0 -9.0 -10.0 -11.0 -12.0 -13.0 -14.0 -15.0 -16.0 -17.0 -18.0 -19.0 -20.0 -21.0 -22.0 -23.0 -24.0 -25.0 -26.0 -27.0 -28.0 -29.0 -30.0 -31.0 -32.0 -33.0 -34.0 -35.0
Continued 53.0 -36.0 to sheet 2
54.0 -37.0 *Elevation 0.0 = MLLW (tidal epoch (1983-2001) Vertical datum: NAVD 1988 55.0 -38.0 56.0
-39.0
f SAND 13
FINES
48
38.0
-21.0
with organic layer
13


completed on December 28, 2007
0.001 0.100 1.000 10.00 100.0 0.010
KS-07-JB-14
Sheet 2 of 2
GRAVEL
USDA
FINES SAND
clay
silt
vf f m vc

GRAVEL
MLLW 25.0
fmc
USDA Classification
Soil sample
Test sample
Elevation*
Depth
FINES
SAND
49
THE CITY OF NEW YORK LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION

1 Centre Street, 9N, New York, NY 10007 (212) 669-7700 www.nyc.gov/landmarks
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
NO LEAD AGENCY/SEQR-K,Q Project number 3/9/2011 Date received
Project: National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect Project
Comments: The LPC is in receipt of an Executive Summary and information about three borings completed by Earthworks in the area determined to be archaeologically sensitive. The LPC can now concur that there are no further archaeological concerns within the project area. cc: SHPO
3/16/2011 SIGNATURE 25686_FSO_ALS_03162011.doc DATE

Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect: Environmental Assessment Statement

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect: Environmental Assessment Statement

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

National Grid

Environmental Assessment Statement

Boroughs of Queens and Brooklyn, New York

CEQR NO. 12OOM001K

National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect

Appendix III: Natural Resources Correspondence Appendix IV: Engineering Drawings

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STATEMENT

PART I: GENERAL INFORMATION

2a. Lead Agency Information

2b. Applicant Information

Office of the Mayor

Action Classification and Type SEQRA Classification

LOCALIZED ACTION, SMALL AREA

23b, 29a, 29c, 29d

Board of Standards and Appeals:

SPECIAL PERMIT EXPIRATION DATE MONTH

ZONING SPECIAL PERMIT, SPECIFY TYPE MODIFICATION OF RENEWAL OF

SPECIFY AFFECTED SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION

EAS FULL FORM PAGE 2

Department of Environmental Protection: Other City Approvals:

State or Federal Actions/Approvals/Funding:

(gross sq. ft.)

Total square feet of non-applicant owned development: YES

sq. ft. (width x length)

606,500 backfilled in trench

cubic feet (width x length x depth) Number of additional workers?

Number of additional residents?

Does the project create new open space?

(sq. ft) (pounds per week) (annual BTUs)

Analysis Year CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 2

Phase I 2013; Phase II 2014

Public Facilities and Institutions

Publicly Accessible Open Space

Other Land Use

EAS FULL FORM PAGE 4 EXISTING CONDITION Parking (continued)

Other (includes street parking)

If yes to any of the above, describe:

3. COMMUNITY FACILITIES: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 6

4. OPEN SPACE: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 7

EAS FULL FORM PAGE 7 YES NO

5. SHADOWS: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 8.

8. NATURAL RESOURCES: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 11

10. WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 13

EAS FULL FORM PAGE 8

11. SOLID WASTE AND SANITATION: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 14

15. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 18

17. PUBLIC HEALTH: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 20

EAS FULL FORM PAGE 9 YES NO

19. CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS: CEQR Technical Manual, Chapter 22

20. APPLICANTS CERTIFICATION

LEAD AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE (FOR CITY-SPONSORED PROJECTS)

Assistant to the Mayor

Office of the Mayor

Robert R. Kulikowski, Ph.D.

December 02, 2011

EAS FULL FORM PAGE 11

Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan Project Tracking Form

Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan Project Tracking Form

A. GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION

National Grid Brooklyn-Queens Interconnect Project Name: Project Description

Project Schedule (build year and construction schedule):

Phase I 2012-2013, Phase II 2013-2014

Identify land use of adjacent sites (include any open space):

N/A 7. Is project within 100 or 500 year floodplain (specify)?