20060690 Ver 7_401 Application_20091119

DAVIS-MARTIN-POWELL & ASSOCIATES, INC.
ENGINEERING • LAND PLANNING * SURVEYING
6415 Old Plank Road, High Point, NC 27265
[phone] • Fax [phone] • www.dmp-inc.com
TRANSMITTAL W• O tP9 o
Date: November 18, 2009
To: Cindi Karoly Re: City of Trinity
Department of Water Quality Phase 4B-Old Town Sewer
401 /Wetlands Unit DMP JN 090027
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
We are sending you attached the following items:
? Shop Drawings ? Samples ? Copy of Letter
? Prints ? Specifications ? Other
? Plans ? Disk
# Copies Drawin # Description Disposition
5 Pre-Construction Notification Form
5 Plan Sets (2 full size, 3 half size)
pRs@9ow I A-
N O V 1 cv' 2009
DENR - WATER QUALITY
TLAHDS AND ST010MATER B
Remarks
Please accept this application for your review. You may contact Randy McNeill or
myself in our office with any questions or comments.
Thank you,
By: & 62
Lisa S. Meadows, El
c: File
Ann Bailie-City of Trinity
t '
O?0F W ATFROG
p -c

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps: X Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: NWP 12 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? X Yes ? No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
X 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
?Yes XNo For the record only for Corps Permit:

?Yes XNo
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes X No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes X No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes X No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: City of Trinity, Old Town Sewer System Improvements
2b. County: Randolph
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Trinity
2d. Subdivision name: N/A

2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: Li %J U0
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: City of Trinity DENR • WATER CUALiTY CH
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
WriN, d
3d. Street address: P.O. Box 50
3e. City, state, zip: Trinity, NC 27370
3f. Telephone no.: 336-431-2841
3g. Fax no.: 336-431-5079
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ? Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Page 2 of 10
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): City of Trinity Easements
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: See Attachment Longitude: -
1c. Property size: N/A (sewer line project)
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
proposed project: Upper Tributary of Uwharrie River
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: WS -III
2c. River basin: Yadkin Pee-Dee
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The project site consists of residential, wooded areas, post office, daycare and retail spaces.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.0
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Project crosses 30 If of stream
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
To extend public sewer service throughout the project area in order to overcome public health issues associated with the
current septic systems.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Install public sewer lines with excavator.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past.
Comments:
? Yes X No ? Unknown
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
? Preliminary ? Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past? ? Yes X No ? Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes X No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
? Wetlands X Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T

W1 ?P?T ? Yes ? Corps
?No ?DWQ
W2 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W3 ? P ? T 0 Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ

W4 ?P?T [] Yes ? Corps
?No ?DWQ
W5 ? PC] T ? Yes ? Corps
?No ?DWQ
W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
?No ?DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ? P X T Temp. Exc. &
Stab. UT to Uwharrie X PER
? INT X Corps 404
X DWQ 401 25 15

S2 ? P X T Temp. Exc. & UT to U
wharrie X PER X Corps 404
34
15
Stab. ? INT X DWQ 401
S3 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S4 ? P ? T PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ?T ?PER ? Corps
? INT DWQ
S6 ? P ?T ?PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S7 ? P ? T [] PER Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 30
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individual) list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
0. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID Proposed use or purpose (acres)
number of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No if yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number - Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Temporary T impact required
131 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B2 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
133 ? PC] T ? Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Required stream crossings are proposed to be made as near perpendicular as possible and alignments have been shifted
where possible to avoid wetlands impacts.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Required stream crossings are reduced to a max. 15' wide to avoid excessive impacts.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ? Yes X No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps

2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project? ? Mitigation bank
? Payment to in-lieu fee program

? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ? Yes X No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ? Yes X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 0%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ? Yes X No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
No new impervious surface is being added.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
? Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
? Phase II
? NSW
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ? No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties
? HQW
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ORW
(check all that apply): Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ? Yes ? No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ? Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ? No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ® Yes ? No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ® Yes ? No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
® Yes ? No
letter.)
Comments: NEPA is approved for all of Phase 4
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
This project does not include any development, as it is designed to provide public sewer to existing homes only.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Sewage from this project flows by gravity into Trinity's Phase 4A-Contract 2 sewer system which is ultimately at the City of
Thomasville's Hamby Creek WWTP.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ? Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ? Yes ® No
impacts?
?
Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. ? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Website.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Website.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NC Historic Sites Website
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ® Yes ? No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: project has no fill and does not raise the base flood elevation
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? NC Floodplain Mapping Information System
L
?? II 14101
Ann 15CLihe -?, , -?-
,
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 10 of 10
IA
C
0 =
Z! E 'E
¦? 1-1 0
L ? U
O ci ?0
o
VIE
m
3L
o U)
H
'a
O
3: 3:
M ?
tD tD
? L(00
1
0 0
C (01 0)
i Z Z
0 L n oooo
V ri ri
Ln Ln
0 0
Ln Ln
m M
C
R
d M ?
0 I? N
0 t6
to U) (n
0
t
a
E u-) u
4- 06 oz?
o ; ;
0
fl' X X
w w
0
E
fC i i
Z ro m
D
D D
U)
c
Fi ,-- N
N
O
O
O
U
N
10-
Q.
CL?
z
Q
? ,
Environmental Assessment
As a part of the planning process for the Phases 3, 4, and 5 sewer extensions that are being financed
in part by USDA-RD, a comprehensive NEPA Environmental Assessment (EA) was conducted
between 2003 and 2005. An archeological survey of the sewer line routes along the Uwharrrie was
also conducted in 2005.
A copy of the cover of the EA, cover of an archaeological survey, letter indicating no significant
cultural resources were discovered and USDA-RD's letter's are enclosed to document the approval of
the EA.
This Phase 48-2009 Sewer Extensions project represents a small portion of the areas examined in
the EA.
CITY OF TRINITY
PHASES 3, 4, AND 5 SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
RANDOLPH COUNTY, N.C.
USDA RURAL UTILITIES SERVICE
NEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT
Lead Agency Contact:
Mr. H. Allen Hart
USDA, Rural Utilities Service
PO Box 970
Yanceyville, NC 27379
[phone] Extension 4
Municipal Contact: Project Engineer:
Ms. Ann Bailie, City Manager Mr. Randy McNeill, P.E.
City of Trinity, P.O. Box 50 Davis-Martin-Powell & Associates, Inc.
6701 NC Hwy 62 6415 Old Plank Road
Trinity, NC 27370 High Point, NC 27265
[phone] [phone]
ER Prepared By:
Robert J. Goldstein & Associates, Inc.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
8480 Garvey Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27616-3175
Tel [phone] Fax [phone]
RJG&A Project No. 2452

a ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS OF THE CAROLINAS, INC.
704 West Main Street Clayton, NC 27520
[phone] fax [phone]
December 5, 2005
Mr. Peter Sandbeck
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
507 N. Blount Street
Raleigh, NC 27699
RE: Archaeological Investigation of the Trinity Sewer Line
Dear Mr. Sandbeck:
Please find enclosed two (2) copies of the draft report entitled Archaeological Survey of the
Trinity Sewer Line, Randolph County, North Carolina. This investigation was conducted pursuant
to a State Historic Preservation Office request to examine select portions the proposed Trinity sewer
line that paralleled the Uwharrie River and three proposed pump stations. This investigation did
not identify any significant cultural resources and we are recommending that clearance to proceed
be granted
I look forward to receiving your comments. Please don't hesitate to call me at (919) 553-
9007 if you have any questions about this investigation.
erely,
awn Reid
Archaeologist
Enclosures
,cc: Robert Goldstein, Robert Goldstein and Associates, Inc. (w/2 report copies;)
Archaeological Survey of the 't'rinity Sewer Line
Randolph County, North Carolina
Prepared for
Robert J. Goldstein and Associates, Inc.
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by
MacKensie Cornelius Rachel Tibbetts
Archaeological Technician Archaeologist
and
Dawn Reid
Senior Archaeologist
under the irection of
o y Sout er m
cipal Investigator
Archaeological Consultants of the Carohnas, Inc.
2005
USDA ?a
Development U - I L
,J
United States Department of Agriculture
Rural Development
Greensboro Office
August 11, 2006
Robert Goldstein and Associates
.lessi O'Neal, Biologist
1221 Corporation Parkway, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27610
Re: EPA Correspondence, City of Trinity Sewer Improvements, Phases 3,4, and 5
Dear Ms. O'Neal,
This letter is in response to your correspondence to my office dated July 24, 2006. Rural
Development has reviewed the comments from EPA and a proposed response by the City
of Trinity. It is the opinion of the Agency that the environmental review process was
properly completed and that no reply is necessary to EPA by Rural Development or the
City.
Attached to this letter is a memorandum from the Rural Development State
Environmental Coordinator that will explain the agency decision in more detail. If you
require assistance or additional information, do not hesitate to contact me.
Best r gard ,
l H. Allen Hart
Area Specialist

Cc: Ned Giliispie
Dennis Delong
Ann Baillie
Henderson Building Suite 104 2301 W. fvfeadowview Rd Greensboro. HC 27407
Phone: [phone] • Fax [phone] • TDD: [phone] • Web: htlp7/Wv"/,rurdev.usda.c)ovmc
?ommilted to the future of rural communities.
'!JSDA is an equal opportunity provider, emplover and lender
To file a comniainl of oiscriminalion write USDA, Director. Df(ice of Civil Rights. Room .'.26-W. ip/hitten Budding. ?4` and
Independence Avenue. SVV.'Nashinglon. DC 20250-9410 or call [phone] (voice or TDD)
USDA ?u
Rura-?-
Development
United States Department of Agriculture
Rural Development
State Office
August 7, 2006
SUBJECT: City of Trinity, NC
Memo dated July 24, 2006 from Jessi O'Neal, RJGA
Regarding The City's Response to EPA Comments 10-31-05 and NCWRC
Letter dated 1-7-2005 about the Environmental Review for Phases 3, 4, and
5 of the Sewer Project
TO: H. Allen Hart, Area Specialist
USDA- Raral Development
Greensboro, NC
Allen,
I have reviewed the subject memo you forwarded to me from Jessi O'Neal and the letters
from EPA and NCWRC.
Given that the environmental report was prepared for the applicant and USDA-Rural
Development, and it was accepted by RD as our official Environmental Assessment, and the
Review process was properly completed, it is my opinion that unless some more recent
communication has been received from EPA and NCWRC other than the ones mentioned in
the memo from Jessi O'Neal and the City's draft response to EPA, that no reply from RD or
the city is necessary to either.
The Review Process:
On 07/26/2005 the July 5, 2005 draft of the environmental report prepared by RJGA was
accepted as RD's Environmental Assessment for the proposed Phases 3, 4, and 5 Sewer
Project for the City of Trinity. Authorization was given for you to notify the City to publish a
Notice of Availability of an Environmental Assessment and to distribute copies of the EA to
public agencies in addition to individuals who made a request.
On 08/02/05, letters and copies of the EA were mailed to NC Clearinghouse agencies and
federal agencies.
On 08/15, 16, & 17/2005 the "Notice of Availability of an Environmental Assessment" was
published in the High Point Enterprise for a 30-day public comment period. Included in the
Notice was the requirement to respond by September 14, 2005.
It was noted that no comments were received during the comment period. Based on no
comments being received, on September 19; 2005, I as the RD State Envirolu-nental
4405 Bland Road. Suite 260 Raleigh. North Carolina 27609
?hone (919) 8713-2000 , Fax [phone] • TDD [phone] • Web' hlto:/hwiw.rurdev usda.govmc
Committed to the future of rural communities.
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender."
To file a complaint of discrimination write USDA, Director. Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W .
'Alashinglon. DC 20250-94 10 or call (800) 795:;272 (voice I or (202) 720-6;382 !TDD)
Coordinator, made a recommendation to the RD State Director that he sign a FONSI (Finding
Of No Significant Impact) which he did on September 22, 2005.
A public notice of the Agency's (RD) FONSI was first published in the High Point Enterprise
on October 9, 2005. There was no additional comment period in the FONSI Notice. A second
public notification of the FONSI was printed in the local Archdale-Trinity News on 11/110, 17,
24/2005.
The 1-7-05 NCWRC Letter:
The 1-7-05 letter from NCWRC was received during the scoping process prior to the July 5,
2005 final draft of the ER being accepted as RD's Envirotmzental Assessment on July 26,
2005. The scoping comments in the 1-7-2005 NCWRC letter were considered in the
preparation of the EA and a copy of the letter was included in the exhibits to the EA.
Response to the NCWRC's 1-7-05 scoping comments were addressed by virtue of distribution
of the EA to NCWRC through the NC Clearinghouse process. No further response to
NCWRC is necessary.
The 10-25-05 EPA Letter:
The October 25, 2005 EPA comment letter to Jessi O'Neal of RJGA (received at RJGA on
10-31-05) should have been forwarded immediately to USDA - Rural Development for a
response by RD. It is noted that the response was received at RJGA after the published
comment period and after RD had already concluded the agency's environmental review
process with a FONSI signed by the State Director on September 22, 2005 which also stated
an EIS would not be prepared. Rural Development made a determination that the proposed
project did not rise to the level of environmental review that would require an environmental
impact statement. Rural Development only recently received a copy of the EPA 10/25/05
letter in July, 2006.
I have concluded, after careful consideration, the concerns in the EPA letter were adequately
addressed in the environmental assessment and the mitigation measures contained therein.
The mitigation measures were made part of the requirements in the letter of conditions
offering financial assistance to the applicant. It is somewhat evident that the author of the
EPA letter is not aware of some of the requirements of Rural Development's (Rural Utility
Service) Water and Waste Program, in particular the use of EJCDC contract documents, plans
and specifications, and the enforcement of and the use of best management construction
practices, adherence to permitting requirements, sedimentation and erosion controls, approval
of plans and specifications by the RD state engineer and by the proper state agencies, and the
requirement of the employment of an on-site construction inspector to ensure compliance
during the construction process.
The 7-3-2006 Draft Letter to Jessi O'Neal from the Citv of Trinity:
This letter could serve as a statement of' the City's methods of handling enforcement of
ordinances and policies to have on file for this project but it would not be necessary to
forward it to EPA or NCWRC.
Recommendation:
Rural Development's environmental review process was concluded on September 22, 2005
with a public announcement of the Agency's decision first published on October 9. 2005.

t 4
RD knows of no other concerns raised during the advertised public comment period for the
"Notice of Availability of an Environmental Assessment Unless there has been some
additional recent inquiry by EPA or NCWRC, I recommend that Rural Development make no
response at this time to EPA or NCWRC.
If there are other comments that have been received by RJGA, the project engineer, or the
City regarding the RD's Environmental Assessment, they should be forwarded to RD for our
review. Please advise RJGA, the project engineer, and the City, that in the future, whether on
this project or any future project, public agency or private individual comments received as
part of the environmental review should be forwarded immediately to RD upon receipt.
If you have any questions about this, please let me know.
Ned W. Gillespie
State Environmental Coordinator
Cc: Dennis Delong