20181638 Ver 3_More Info Requested_20200128

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
LINDA CULPEPPER
Director
Mountain Valley LLC
Attn: Kathy Salvaor
700 Universe Boulevard
Juno Beach FL 33408
NOR TFI CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
January 28, 2020
DWR # 20181638 v3
Alamance & Rockingham Counties
Subject: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Mountain Valley Pipeline — Southgate (MVP Southgate)
Dear Ms. Salvaor:
On August 14, 2019, the Division of Water Resources (Division) received your application dated August
9, 2019, requesting a 401 Individual Water Quality Certification and Jordan Lake Buffer Authorization
(15A NCAC 02B .0267) from the Division for your project. On September 23, 2019 the Division notified
you that your application was incomplete and requested additional information. On October 30, 2019
the Division received a response to our request. In addition, on November 19, 2019, the Division held a
Public Hearing regarding your application and received comments from the public until December 20,
2019. Upon review of the additional information submitted on October 30, 2019 and comments
received during the public notice and comment period, the Division has determined that your
application is incomplete and cannot be processed. The application is on -hold until all of the following
information is received:
1. The Division previously requested that you provide the exact locations and rate of discharge for
the hydrostatic test water to be used within the Project. In the response submitted October 30,
2019 you stated that you were working with various agencies to determine the appropriate
discharge locations and methods and will provide that information upon final determination.
This information is required for the Division to complete a review of the application in
accordance with 15A NCAC 02H .0506. 115A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(3)]
2. Section 2-12(h) of the application submitted to the Division on August 14, 2019 stated that
hydrostatic test water was anticipated to be procured from municipal sources. The additional
information submitted to the Division on October 30, 2019 states that "Mountain Valley
proposed to use a total of approximately 5.9 million gallons of water from the Dan River and/or
two municipal water sources for hydrostatic testing of the pipeline..". Based on this new
��f North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
J/ 512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
urnmrens.,, r///���
919.707.9000

Mountain Valley LLC
DWR# 20181638 v3
Request for Additional Information
Page 2 of 6
information, provide the location and rate of withdrawal, and the maximum, instantaneous
pumping capacity, and the percent of flow that the withdrawal represents in the water body at
the location during the projected time of year and in comparison to the lowest flow of record
and 7Q10. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(3)]
3. The Division previously requested that you "Provide a qualitative cumulative impact analysis for
the project. The analysis should follow the procedure/guidance outlined in the Division's
Cumulative Impact Policy for the 401 and Isolated Wetland Permitting Programs (Ver2.1. dated
April 10, 2004), available online:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdea/Water%20Quality/Surface%2OWater%2OProtection/401/Policies Gui
des Manuals/CumulativelmpactPolicy.pdf [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(4)]
The Division recognizes that you have provided a Cumulative Impact Analysis which follows
standards NEPA cumulative impact procedures. The Division's Cumulative Impact Policy
requires an analysis which is specific to the potential secondary and cumulative impacts from
anticipated development resulting from the construction of the pipeline. Please provide a step
by step cumulative impact analysis that is in accordance with the process outlined in the cited
Policy.
4. The Division received numerous comments expressing concern over potential sedimentation
and turbidity from the construction of the pipeline. The City of Burlington specifically expressed
concerns regarding construction activities within the Watershed Critical Area of the Stoney
Creek Lake watershed. The Division understands from the Division of Energy, Mineral and Land
Resources (DEMUR) that the proposed pipeline has submitted a partial Sediment & Erosion
Control Plans for review.
a. Provide an overview of the sediment and erosion control measures you plan to
implement as part of your Sediment & Erosion Control Plan, including if there are any
measures or steps you plan to voluntarily take above the minimum requirements and in
what locations you propose additional measures (e.g. implementing the requirements in
Section II.B. of the NCGO10000 Construction Stormwater General Permit, etc.).
The following comments are made in reference to the Attachment E: Updated Wetland/Waterbody
Impact Maps (previously Appendix M):
5. It appears that impacts could be avoided with a minor realignment or reduction of the
construction corridor on Sheet 3, impact W-A38-44 (small wetland with minor impacts from
ATWS). Please review this area and propose further avoidance and minimization, or provide
site -specific justification of why these impacts could not be avoided or further minimized: [35A
NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2)]
6. The Division acknowledges modifications that have been made to address Item #8 in the
September 23, 2019 request for additional information. As noted prior, although in some
locations a stream or wetland may not be present within the entire width of the construction
corridor, a reduction in the corridor to 75 feet would still provide avoidance and minimization,
and therefore should still be justified on site -specific merit, not solely the length of the stream

Mountain Valley LLC
DWR# 20181638 v3
Request for Additional Information
Page 3 of 6
or wetland within the corridor. For some noted locations the October 30, 2019 response
indicated that wetlands were within agricultural fields and therefore further avoidance and
minimization was not proposed. All wetlands and streams must be evaluated equally for
avoidance and minimization regardless of existing quality. Provide a follow up review and
modifications for the locations identified below. Please also update the impact quantities as
appropriate. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2)]
a. Sheet 5, MP 28.0, W-A18-39 PEM and W-A18-26 PEM
b. Sheet 29, MP 38.7, W-A18-7 (7-2 through 7-7)
c. Sheet 32, MP 40.5 RR, S-A18-210 and S-A18-210-2
d. Sheet 61, MP 53.4, W-A18-83
e. Sheet 62, MP 53.7, W-A18-85
f. Sheet 63, MP 54.4, W-C18-67
g. Sheet 93, MP 68.3, S-B18-3
As a site visit is unable to be conducted at this time to verify the jurisdictional nature of the
following feature it must be considered jurisdictional and avoidance and minimization must be
evaluated as it would for all other jurisdictional features.
h. Sheet 55, MP 50.5, SS -SOIL- 18-02
7. The response letter dated October 30, 2019 indicates that "For all waterbodies, the project will
limit routine vegetation mowing or clearing up to a 30' corridor..." however the Updated
Wetland/Waterbody Impact Maps do not indicate a 30' permanent maintenance/operational
corridor in all locations. Please review the impact maps and adjust them, and the impact tables
accordingly. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2)]
8. Thank you for the site -specific Plan and Profile of the proposed conventional bore crossing of
Wolf Island Creek. The proposed machine pit appears to be within 2 feet of the centerline of
stream S-A19-269 which has the potential to cause instability or other direct and/or indirect
impacts to this channel during construction activities. Please provide a site -specific construction
sequence for this area that specifically addresses protection and restoration of stream S-A19-
269. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2)]
9. The Division recognizes the updated information provided in the October 30, 2019 response
regarding the Wetland and Waterbody Crossing Analysis however additional information is
again required for the following specific location: [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2)]
a. Sheet 34, MP 41.2 —As requested you have provided further analysis that incorporates
the practicality of a Conventional Bore which could avoid impacts to all 4 features at this
location. Please also provide an analysis of practicality of a conventional bore that
would avoid impacts only to Lick Creek and the adjacent tributaries.
10. At various locations within the project corridor, streams are present and parallel with the
corridor/pipeline. Thank you for the additional information that has been provided in the
October 30, 2019. The Division continues to have concerns regarding downstream water

Mountain Valley LLC
DWR# 20181638 v3
Request for Additional Information
Page 4 of 6
quality protection during construction activities when a stream is parallel within the project
corridor. In Attachment J — Representative Detail Sheets, it appears that timber mats will be
used directly over the pipeline trench where stream S-A18-140 is parallel to and directly above
the proposed pipeline. It is unclear how the trench will be constructed, and the pipeline will be
installed below timber mats. It is also unclear in this area how the portion of channel will be
dewatered and how the dewatering outlet (location not shown) will maintain protection of the
downstream adjacent wetland. The September 23, 2019 request for additional information also
specified a need to provide site -specific restoration details for these areas. The Division is
specifically concerned with any proposal to restore the channel to pre -construction location
when the channel is parallel with the pipeline and within the operational workspace, as long-
term maintenance activities are likely to have permanent impacts to the channels. The Division
acknowledges that some of the requested information is being developed as part of the
Sediment and Erosion Control Plan to be reviewed by DEMLR, however in areas with direct
stream impacts and long term stream stability concerns the Division will require submittal and
review of detailed information. DWR and DEMLR will communicate agency requirements to
each other as necessary. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2)]
11. On Sheet 68, MP 56.5 and Sheet 69, MP 56.7, thank you for specifications regarding the type of
dewatering method to be used at these locations. Please provide further details regarding
dewatering sequence, specifically the Division is concerned with how the pond will be
dewatered once the inflow is routed through the dam and pump system, and how downstream
water will be protected during dewatering and/or sediment removal within the ponds. Please
also provide a pond restoration detail/sequence which indicates how flow will continue to be
supplied to the downstream channel during pond refilling. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2)]
The following comments are made specific to Jordan Buffer Rules and the portion of the project that lies
within the Jordan Lake Watershed. [15A NCAC 02B .0267]
12. Provide specific details of how diffuse flow shall be maintained for all above ground facilities
with new impervious surfaces within the Jordan Lake Watershed in order to document
compliance with the diffuse flow provisions of the Jordan Buffer Rules.
13. Provide a detailed buffer restoration plan for all temporary workspace areas within Zone 1 that
are not within the operational corridor shown on the plans. The plan must include a replanting
plan, a vegetation monitoring plan, and proposed success criteria. Please ensure that the
restoration plan is also in accordance with Item (n) of the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rules
15A NCAC 02B .0295. The Division acknowledges that some of the requested information is
being developed as part of the Sediment and Erosion Control Plan to be reviewed by DEMLR,
however in temporarily impacted buffer areas the Division will require submittal and review of a
detailed buffer restoration plan to ensure it meets the requirements of the Jordan Buffer Rules.
DWR and DEMLR will communicate agency requirements to each other as necessary.

Mountain Valley LLC
DWR# 20181638 v3
Request for Additional Information
Page 5 of 6
14. It appears that there are still buffer impacts along an intermittent stream that is unlabeled on
Sheet 87 at MP 65.6 that serves as the outlet of the pond and joins S-A18-250 that have not
been shown on the Proposed Pipeline Route and Impact sheet.
Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0502(e) and 15A NCAC 02B .0267, the applicant shall furnish all of the
above requested information for the proper consideration of the application. Please respond in writing
within 30 calendar days of receipt of this letter by sending one (1) copy of all of the above requested
information to the 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
OR by submitting all of the above requested information through this
link: https://edocs.deg.nc.goy/Forms/Supplemental-Information-Form (note the DWR# requested on
the link is referenced above).
If all of the requested information is not received within 30 calendar days of receipt of this letter, the
Division will be unable to approve the application and it will be denied as incomplete. The denial of this
project will necessitate reapplication to the Division for approval, including a complete application
package and the appropriate fee.
Please be aware that in accordance with 15A NCAC 01C .0107 (a) "While work on an environmental
document is in progress, no DENR agency shall undertake in the interim any action which might limit the
choice among alternatives or otherwise prejudice the ultimate decision on the issue."
Please be aware that you have no authorization under the Water Quality Certification Rules for this
activity and any work done within waters of the state may be a violation of North Carolina General
Statutes and Administrative Code.
Please contact Sue Homewood at 336-776-9693 or [e-mail] if you have any
questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Jeff Poupart, Chief
Water quality Permitting Section

Mountain Valley LLC
DWR# 20181638 v3
Request for Additional Information
Page 6 of 6
cc: Heather Patti, TRC Environmental Corporation (via email)
David Bailey, USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office (via email)
Olivia Munzer, NCWRC (via email)
Todd Bowers, EPA (via email)
Christopher A. Militscher, Chief, NEPA Section, Strategic Programs Office, USEPA, 61 Forsyth St
SW, Atlanta GA 30303
Maria Clark, NEPA Section — Region 4, USEPA, 61 Forsyth St SW, Atlanta GA 30303
DWR WSRO 401 files
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit