In a March 18 Kinder Morgan response to FERC, the Gazette gleaned the following that pertain to Mason:
Resource Report 4 – Cultural Resources
1. Address comments, such as one by Joe McGuire (20151016-4050) and the Town of Mason, New Hampshire (20151015-5110) that are concerned about how construction would impact property boundaries that are fieldstone walls built around agricultural fields and referenced in property deeds. Provide any information from coordination efforts with the appropriate state historic preservation offices on the mitigation and treatment plans.
In order to safely and efficiently install the pipeline, stone walls will have to be removed from the construction work area. The methods for removal of stone walls pre-construction and rebuilding post-construction will involve coordination between Tennessee and the affected landowner, and through consultations with the applicable SHPO office and the Commission Tennessee is in the process of evaluating stone wall/fences and will include that evaluation in Phase I Cultural Resource Reports to be filed with each state SHPO as well as the Commission. Ultimately, the applicable SHPO office will determine the significance of a stone wall, as well as the mitigation and treatment plans for each wall.
Resource Report 10 – Alternatives
6. Section 10.3 (page 10-22) – Include assessment and information where applicable for alternatives facilitating avoidance or minimization of impacts on lands associated with the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) program. Refer to the letter dated December 2, 2015 from the State of New Hampshire, Department of Resources and Economic Development that provides additional detail on the collection of accurate and officially confirmed LWCF Section 6(f) property information as well as identifying LWCF Section 6(f) areas that may be impacted by the proposed Project. Include the number of LWCF lands crossed as well as the total length of these lands crossed in each alternatives comparison table where applicable.
The State of New Hampshire, Department of Resources and Economic Development (“NH DRED”) sent a letter to Tennessee, dated December 2, 2015. The letter identified five potential parcels, acquired with LWCF funds, that they felt may be impacted by the Project. On January 28, 2016, Tennessee met with NH DRED officials to review Tennessee’s proposed alignment and to discuss the location of public lands, specifically those lands that may have been acquired with LWCF funds. After the meeting with NH DRED officials, Tennessee was able to confirm that only two LWCF parcels will be affected by the Project. One parcel is crossed twice and located in the Town of Mason and the other parcel is located in Londonderry.
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) 33-00501 (1 st Crossing NH WD, Mason, New Hampshire)
A re-route was evaluated for this parcel in conjunction with avoiding the Russell State Forest, the Spaulding Conservation Area, and the underlying stratified drift aquifer. To avoid these areas, Tennessee evaluated a new greenfield route as an alternative. After review and consideration, Tennessee has determined that the alternative route would have resulted in significant impacts in comparison with the currently proposed power line corridor.
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) 33-00501 (2 st Crossing NH FLE, Mason, New Hampshire)
Tennessee evaluated an alternative to avoid this parcel along with the Town of Mason. This alternative would co-locate with Highway 31 (leaving the proposed route Segment Q at MP 8.24 and returning to Segment J at MP 7.49). This alternative was rejected since it would add approximately 2.15 miles to the Project, add constraints associated with construction in heavily developed areas, and increase impacts to an Area of Critical Environmental Concern and Critical Natural Landscape.