20060645 Ver 2_Individual_20110613

oL-P - oLP 'A S ua-
Letter of Transmittal
S&ME, Inc. 9751 Southern Pine Blvd. *S&ME
Charlotte, NC 28273
[phone]
[phone] fax
N.C. Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27604-2260
WE ARE SENDING YOU
? Shop drawings
® Copy of letter
DATE: 06.09.2011 1 JOB NO: 1356-10-041
ATTENTION: Mr. Ian McMillan
RE: Application for Section 404 Individual Permit
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road
Landfill Expansion
® Attached ? Under separate cover via
? Prints ? Plans ? Draft
? Report
- the following items:
? Specifications
COPIES DATE NO DESCRIPTION
5 06.09.2011 1 Copies of Individual Permit Application
1 - 2 Check for Processing Fee
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW:
? For approval ® For your record
? As requested ? For review and comment ?
? FORBIDS DUE: /_ ? PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS: Attached please find the above. Please contact myself or Darrin Peine, S&ME if you have questions, Thank you.
SIGN:
COPY TO:
?I'Ail?
RR&RUWAP
JUN 1 3 2011
MC - WATER CXI&P
wEl'MO AND STOR "TER BRANCH
IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED, PLEASE NOTIFY US AT ONCE.
This Letter of Transmittal and the documents accompanying this Letter of Transmittal contain information from S&ME, Inc., which is confidential and legally
privileged. The information is intended only for use of the individual or entity named on this Letter of Transmittal. If you are not the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on these documents is strictly prohibited.
S&ME SFG-001
(Rev. 04/04)
APPLICATION FOR SECTION 404 INDIVIDUAL PERMIT
CRAIG ROAD LANDFILL EXPANSION
DUKE ENERGY - BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
BELEWS CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA
S&ME Proj ect No. 1356-10-041
Prepared for:
P Duke
IEnergyo
526 South Church Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Prepared by:
*S&ME
Charlotte, North Carolina
June 9, 2011
S&ME
June 9, 2011
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Attention: Mr. John Thomas
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-2260
Attention: Mr. Ian McMillan
Reference: Application for Section 404 Individual Permit
Craig Road Landfill Expansion
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station
Belews Creek, North Carolina
S&MEPrcj ect No. 1356-10-041
USACE Action ID Nos. 201100972 & 200421105
Dear Mr. Thomas and Mr. McMillan:
S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) wishes to submit this application for a Department of the Army
Section 404 Individual Permit (IP) and a corresponding North Carolina Individual Water
Quality Certification (IC) for proposed impacts to waters of the U.S. in connection with
the project referenced above. We are working on behalf of Duke Energy, who will be
considered the applicant. Included with this application is a completed ENG FORM
4345 in Appendix I and a check in the amount of $570.00 for North Carolina Division of
Water Quality processing fee.
S&ME, INC. / 9751 Southern Pine Blvd/ Charlotte, NC/p704.523.4726/f704.525.3953/www.smeinc.com
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit SWE No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
If you need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
S&ME
?,Z t?'
Kenneth Daly, P.E.
Senior Project Engineer

Darrin M. Peine, QEP
Natural Resources Project Manager
Senior Review by Dane Horna, V.P., P.E.
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ......................................................................... 1
2. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS ............................................................................. 2
3. PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED ......................................................................... 4
4. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK .............................................................. 4
5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS ................................................................................. 6
5.1 Alternative A - Do Nothing ............................................................................... . 7
5.2 Alternative B - Landfill Expansion with Stream / Wetland Avoidance ............ . 7
5.3 Alternative C - Proposed Landfill Expansion Configuration ............................ . 8
5.4 Alternative D - Other On-Site Location ............................................................ . 9
5.5 Alternative E - Develop Off-Site Location ...................................................... 11
5.6 Alternative F - Disposal at an Existing Regional Landfill ............................... 12
5.7 Alternatives Evaluation ..................................................................................... 13
5.8 Alternatives Conclusions .................................................................................. 14
6. AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION ................................................................. 15
7. PROTECTED SPECIES ......................................................................................... 15
8. CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................... 17
9. PROPOSED COMPENSATORY MITIGATION ............................................... 18
LIST OF TABLES IN REPORT
Table T-1 Alternative D - Other On-Site Locations
Table T-2 Federally Protected Flora and Fauna Summary
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2 USGS Topographic Map
Figure 3 2010 Aerial Photograph
Figure 4 USDA Soil Survey Map
Figures 5A / 5D Approximate Waters of the U. S. Maps
Figures 6A / 6D Project Impacts Maps
Figure 7 Expansion Area
Figure 8 Duke Property
Figure 9 Regional Area
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix I
Appendix II
Appendix III
Appendix IV
Appendix V
Appendix VI
Completed ENG FORM 4345
Site Photographs
Estimate of Land Area Needed
Agency Correspondence
Mitigation Proposal - NCEEP
Tables
LIST OF TABLES IN APPENDIX VI
Table 1 Proposed Impacts
Table 2 Alternatives Analysis Comparison
Table 3 Alternatives Analysis - Comparative Cost Estimate
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Duke Energy (Duke) owns and operates Belews Creek Steam Station (BCSS) that is
located in North Carolina, in the southeastern portion of Stokes County, adjacent to
Belews Lake. The plant address is 3195 Pine Hall Road, Belews Creek, North Carolina
27042. The proposed Craig Road Landfill expansion is located on the BCSS property
south of the steam station adjacent to Craig Road. The proposed Craig Road Landfill
expansion project involves construction of additional landfill areas in future phases for
coal combustion products generated by the coal burning process.
The Phase I portion of the Craig Road Landfill, including associated perimeter berms,
ditches, stormwater management systems, operation facilities, and roads, was constructed
in 2007. The facility is operated under a current permit to operate, Permit No. 8504,
issued by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section. Based on current disposal rates,
the Phase I landfill area will reach capacity in the second quarter of 2013.
Proposed future landfill areas will be designed and permitted in approximate five-year
operational phases consistent with current Solid Waste Section permitting requirements.
Jurisdictional impacts for the Phase I of the Craig Road Landfill were authorized under
Nationwide Permit 39 (USACE ID No. 200421105).
The general project area is a portion of Duke Energy Corporation's BCSS property,
located on Tax Parcel No. 6982-00-64-2715, in Stokes County, North Carolina
(36.266160°N, -80.071100°W). The location of the subject property is depicted by the
Site Vicinity Map (Figure 1), the appropriate portion of the 2003 Belews Lake, N.C.
USGS Topographic Map (Figure 2), a 2010 Aerial Photograph (Figure 3), a USDA
Stokes County Soil Survey Map (Figure 4), an Approximate Waters of the U.S. Map
(Figure 5), and a Project Impacts Map (Figure 6). Provided below is a list of pertinent
information relating to the site and the permit applicant:
Applicant: Duke Energy Corporation
Mailing Address: Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station
3195 Pine Hall Road
Belews Creek, NC 27009-9157
Attention: Mr. Tom Leap
Telephone Number: 704-382-7271
Address of Project: Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station
3195 Pine Hall Road
Belews Creek, NC 27009-9157
Closest Waterway: West Belews Creek (Stream Index No. 22-27-9-(3)
Class C Waters
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
River Basin: Roanoke
County: Stokes
Coordinate Location of Site: 36.266160°N, -80.071100°W
USGS Quadrangle: Belews Lake, NC
2. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The Craig Road Landfill is located on the southwestern portion of the BCSS property and
is approximately one mile south of the BCSS. The site is characterized by rolling
topography consisting of ridges and valleys typical of the North Carolina Piedmont. The
Craig Road Landfill Phase 1 is approximately 31 acres in area and was designed to
provide an estimated three years of operating capacity. Construction of the Craig Road
Landfill Phase 1 was completed in late 2007 and operations began in 2008. The Phase 1
landfill area is surrounded by a landfill access road, two leachate ponds, and a stormwater
management basin.
The proposed landfill expansion area is located south of the existing Craig Road Landfill
Phase 1. The proposed landfill expansion area consists mainly of wooded ridges and
valley areas and is bounded on the north and west by Belews Creek. The proposed future
landfill area is bounded by Craig Road to the east and the Duke property line to the south.
The landfill expansion area generally slopes from east to west towards Belews Lake.
During Phase 1 construction, soil was excavated from the ridge areas and stockpiled at
two locations within the proposed landfill expansion area. Landfill operations facilities
including a field office, vehicle maintenance facility, and a lay-down yard are located
within the proposed landfill expansion area.
Site drainage for the existing and proposed future landfill areas is generally bounded by
the Craig Road alignment on the east with surface water runoff directed to stormwater
management features west of the landfill and ultimately into Belews Lake. Ground
surface elevations range from approximately 830 feet near Craig Road to 750 feet near
drainage features located on the north and west sides of the site. Groundwater recharge
in this area originates from the local ridges and discharges to areas of lower topography
as valley creeks and streams.
S&ME conducted a jurisdictional delineation of the proposed Phase I Craig Road
Landfill area in March 2004. The jurisdictional boundaries were subsequently surveyed
and mapped by a registered land surveyor. The map was submitted to the U. S, Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) Raleigh field office and approved on November 8, 2004
(USACE ID No. 200421105).
S&ME conducted a jurisdictional delineation of the proposed landfill expansion areas on
November 11, 2010. Stream and wetland boundaries within the landfill expansion area
were located with a Trimble° GeoXH GPS unit capable of sub-meter accuracy, and
mapped on Figure 5 -Approximate Waters of the U.S. Map. The jurisdictional
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
boundaries were subsequently surveyed and mapped by a registered land surveyor. A
request for jurisdictional determination was submitted to the USACE and North Carolina
Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) on January 21, 2011 and approved on May 25,
2011 (USACE ID No. 201100972).
The USACE and NCDWQ visited the landfill expansion area on March 1, 2011 to review
the November 11, 2010 delineation, and discuss a pre-application meeting with the
applicant and S&ME. Based on comments received from the NCDWQ during the site
review, a revised map was submitted to the USACE and NCDWQ on April 8, 2011.
Representative photographs of the landfill expansion area are provided in Appendix H.
Photos 1 through 4 depict the general habitat types. Streams and wetlands identified in
the landfill expansion area are described below.
2.1 Stream SC1 and Wetland WC1
Stream SCI and Wetland WC1 are shown in Figure 5B and Appendix H as Photos 5 &
6. This stream enters the Craig Road area from the south and is associated with forested
Wetland WC1 (0.017 acres). Stream SCI scored 33.5 on the DWQ Stream Classification
Form, indicating perennial flow. The stream headwaters exhibited sedimentation,
possibly contributed from observed stream head-cutting, which has filled the upper
portion of the channel and converted it into a section of seasonal relative permanent water
(RPW) for approximately 170 linear feet (If).
2.2 Streams SC2 and SC3
Streams SC2 and SO are shown in Figure 5B and Appendix H as Photos 7 & 8. These
streams enter the Craig Road area from the south. Stream SC2 scored 29.5 on the DWQ
Stream Classification Form, indicating intermittent (seasonal RPW) flow. Stream SO is
very similar in nature to Stream SC2 and scored 26.5 on the DWQ Stream Classification
Form, indicating intermittent (seasonal RPW) flow. Approximately 113 if of Stream
SC2, located at a point below a stream head-cut at the project boundary, was identified as
perennial RPW.
2.3 Stream SC4
Stream SC4 is shown in Figure 5B and Appendix H as Photo 9. This stream is located in
the southwest corner of the project area and flows off-site to the west. The stream is
characterized as a perennial RPW for its entire length (approximately 1,0171f) within the
project boundary.
2.4 Streams SC5 and SC6
Streams SC5 and SC6 are shown in Figure 5C and Appendix Has Photos 10 & 11.
Stream SC5 is located approximately center of the project area and flows off-site to the
west. The stream is characterized as a perennial RPW for its entire length (approximately
1,9171f) within the project boundary. Stream SC5 is associated with Stream SC6, a29 If
seasonal RPW tributary. Stream SC6 scored 26 points on the DWQ Stream
Classification Form, indicating intermittent (seasonal RPW) flow.
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
2.5 Stream SC7
Stream SC7 is shown in Figure 5C and Appendix H as Photo 12. This stream is located
north of Stream SC5 and also flows off-site to the west side of the project area. This
stream is characterized as a perennial RPW for its entire length (approximately 8841f)
within the project boundary.
2.6 Stream SC8 and Wetland WC2
Stream SC8 and Wetland WC2 are shown in Figure 5D and Appendix H as Photos 13 &
14. This stream is located in the northwest corner of the project area and flows off-site to
the west. The stream is characterized as a perennial RPW for its entire length
(approximately 8391f) within the project boundary and is associated with forested
Wetland WC2 (0.136 acres).
2.7 Stream SC9 and Wetland WC3
Stream SC9 and Wetland WC3 are shown in Figure 5D and Appendix H as Photos 15 &
16. This stream is separated from Stream SC8 by forested Wetland WC3 (0.05 acres).
The stream is characterized as a perennial RPW for its entire length (approximately 243
If) within the project boundary.
2.8 Stream SC10 and Wetland WC4
Stream SC 10 and Wetland WC4 are shown in Figure 5D and Appendix H as Photos 17
& 18. This stream and wetland complex is located at the northwest project boundary.
Stream SC10 is characterized as a perennial RPW for its entire length (approximately 135
If) within the project boundary. Forested Wetland WC4 (0.055 acres) abuts Stream
SC10.
3. PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the proposed Craig Road Landfill expansion is to provide necessary
disposal capacity for the coal combustion products that are generated at BCSS. The main
coal combustion products produced during electricity generation are fly ash and flue gas
desulfurization (FGD) residue. These coal combustion products are currently disposed
of at two permitted on-site landfills; the Craig Road Landfill and the FGD Landfill.
Based on current projections, the Phase 1 Craig Road Landfill will reach its capacity in
the second quarter of 2013. Based on current projections, the FGD Landfill will reach
capacity in the first quarter of 2014. The proposed Craig Road landfill expansion is to
secure coal combustion product disposal capacity for future BCSS power generation.
Duke Energy expects to produce electricity at this facility at least until the year 2045.
Based on current projections BCSS needs waste disposal capacity for the next 32 years to
accommodate station operations.
4. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK
The proposed landfill expansion project entails extending the existing Phase 1 Craig
Road Landfill to the south. The proposed landfill expansion will be organized and
developed in approximate five-year operational phases consistent with NCDENR Solid
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
Waste Section regulations and permitting requirements. Based on anticipated waste
generation rates, the proposed landfill expansion is estimated to provide about 25 years of
disposal capacity.
The Craig Road Landfill areas were evaluated for available waste management capacity,
access, operation, groundwater and surface water monitoring systems, and operational
flexibility. In general, anticipated landfill construction will require installation of erosion
and sediment control measures, clearing, mass grading of existing ridges and valleys to
establish landfill base grades, constructing a stormwater management system, and
constructing the landfill liner system.
Consistent with the existing Phase 1 landfill, the proposed landfill expansion will be
constructed with a composite liner system. From the top down the liner system will
consist of a leachate collection system, a 60-mil thick high density polyethylene (HDPE)
geomembrane, a geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) with a permeability no greater than 5x10-9
centimeters per second (cm/s), and prepared subgrade.
A stormwater management system will be developed to control and manage stormwater
within the landfill area and around the landfill perimeter. Perimeter berms and diversion
ditches will divert overland flow from entering the proposed landfill area. Stormwater
adjacent to the landfill will be controlled by diverting run-on away from disturbed areas
of the site and collecting runoff from disturbed areas in ditches that lead to sediment traps
and basins. Stormwater will be managed and controlled within the landfill by
operational, intermediate and final covers. Stormwater contacting the waste material will
be diverted to the leachate collection system. Stormwater infiltrating the waste material
will be collected in the underlying leachate collection system of the landfill liner.
Contact water and leachate will be conveyed to leachate storage basins and transferred to
the BCSS active ash basin.
The proposed landfill development is organized in approximate five-year operational
capacity increments, referenced as phases. The five-year operational capacity is based on
current estimated coal combustion product generation rates. The landfill development
approach is to provide the most volumetric capacity over as small an area as possible.
The optimal landfill layout that satisfies the development approach consists of side-by-
side, contiguous phases developed in sequence. That is, with each new phase developed
next to and connected to the prior phase. Waste placement in each new phase will lie
over or "piggy back" on the prior phase, thus providing more volumetric capacity for the
given area. This development approach decreases the overall land area required to meet
the project need because it maximizes the volumetric capacity for a given area. In
summary, this development approach provides for economically and environmentally
responsible waste management because it decreases the resources needed (land, soil,
jurisdictional impacts) for the waste management capacity gained.
Consistent with the North Carolina Piedmont Region, the BCSS site and the current
landfill areas, the proposed landfill expansion area is characterized by rolling topography
consisting of ridges and valleys. Surface water and groundwater from the local ridges
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit SWE No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
discharge to lower topography areas as valley creeks and streams. In turn, the proposed
landfill expansion area contains various streams and wetland areas.
Proposed impacts resulting from the Craig Road Landfill expansion project are
summarized in Table I in Appendix VI which denotes the total jurisdictional features to
be impacted as "grading/fill placement impacts". Project grading design plans will not
extend the full length of the project area streams because site topographic constraints
restrict grading in the vicinity of the down stream terminus (Figure 6). As currently
designed, the proposed project would permanently impact 0.27 acres of forested wetland
and 4,592 linear feet of stream. In addition to the proposed stream impacts, the existing
Craig Road Landfill previously impacted 701f of stream.
5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
An alternatives analysis and the proposed selection of Alternative C, proposed landfill
expansion configuration were developed with consideration of environmental impacts,
cost, solid waste regulations, and whether or not the alternative meets the project purpose
and need. The following alternatives were analyzed:
• Alternative A
• Alternative B
• Alternative C
• Alternative D
• Alternative E.
• Alternative F:
do nothing;
landfill expansion with stream / wetland avoidance;
proposed landfill expansion configuration;
other on-site location;
develop off-site location; and
disposal at an existing regional landfill.
The alternatives were evaluated for known and/or anticipated environmental impacts.
Given the dominant geographical / topographical ridge and valley features in the
Piedmont Region, we can infer that the larger the landfill facility, the greater the chance
of impacts to jurisdictional stream and wetland features. Additionally, it was assumed
that locations closer to the BCSS facility would generally have less of an environmental
impact due to decreased hauling distances and associated air and noise pollution from
truck traffic.
Another consideration during alternatives analysis was cost in terms of design,
construction, operations, closure, etc. Certain alternatives had unique costs, such as a
property acquisition costs, landfill disposal (tipping) fees, and costs of constructing
additional infrastructure.
A third consideration was current solid waste regulations, especially pertaining to
permitting and design. Solid waste regulations require subsurface exploration and
monitoring for permitting. This information is also used in landfill design. Significant
subsurface exploration and monitoring has been conducted within the proposed landfill
footprint and therefore provides data in support of Alternatives B and C. The existing
Craig Road Landfill is anticipated to reach capacity by the second quarter 2013; a facility
must be available to accept waste before this time to continue BCSS operations. Data
acquisition at sites outside of this area would require a significant investment in time and
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
resources, and would likely not provide enough time to design, permit, and construct a
landfill facility before the existing Craig Road Landfill reaches capacity.
The alternatives and their relative characteristics are described in further detail in the
following paragraphs.
5.1 Alternative A - Do Nothing
Alternative A is the "do nothing" approach. In this approach, the landfill expansion
would not be constructed; therefore, the existing stream and wetland areas would not be
disturbed.
5.2 Alternative B - Landfill Expansion with Stream / Wetland Avoidance
Alternative B would involve constructing the proposed landfill expansion only within the
general areas of topographical ridges, avoiding the valleys where streams and wetlands
exist. S&ME developed conceptual landfill expansion boundaries (limit of waste
footprints) considering the topography of the area and delineated stream and wetland
limits. The limit of waste footprint was developed by assuming a 50-foot stream buffer
offset and an additional 100-foot offset to allow for grading and installation of perimeter
structures such as roads, stormwater management facilities, and leachate management
systems.
The resulting Alternative B landfill footprint is illustrated in Figure 7 and consists of 2
separate, isolated, landfill footprints within the proposed expansion area. The estimated
footprint areas are approximately 30.4 acres and 49.8 acres totaling approximately 80.2
acres.
Based on these footprints, S&ME developed conceptual landfill grading plans to estimate
the possible gross landfill volume. Estimates indicate that Alternative B can provide
about 5,709,000 cubic yards of gross capacity. Based on anticipated waste generation
rates of 900,000 cubic yards per year, Alternative B could provide up to 6.3 years of
disposal capacity. This is less than the estimated disposal capacity for the life of the
BCSS and less than the anticipated disposal capacity of Alternative C.
Alternative B, landfill expansion with stream / wetland avoidance, is desirable for the
following reasons:
• This alternative avoids impacts to streams and wetlands;
• There is sufficient subsurface information to complete permitting and design in
the project need timeframe;
• Construction and operations remain on Duke Energy property, in turn providing
for;
o Increased site security;
o Decreased disturbance to neighbors during construction and operations;
o Decreased haul distance / cost;
o No need to construct additional infrastructure (power, leachate treatment
systems, water supply, perimeter fencing/security, etc.);
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
o Property acquisition is not required; and
• Estimated cost per cubic yard of airspace is moderate.
However, there are drawbacks to this alternative, including:
• Due to the decreased footprint size and inability to piggy-back landfill cells, the
landfill airspace volume per acre is decreased and therefore the lifetime is also
decreased;
• Due to the short lifetime in comparison to other alternatives, additional landfill
expansion would be required in the future which may include impacts to streams
and wetlands; and
The cost per cubic yard of airspace is higher than Alternative C.
5.3 Alternative C - Proposed Landfill Expansion Configuration
Alternative `C' would involve developing the proposed landfill expansion over the
general areas of topographical ridges and across the valleys where streams and wetlands
exist. The proposed Alternative C layout is based on the landfill development approach
of providing the most volumetric capacity over as small of an area as possible. This
consists of side-by-side, contiguous phases developed in sequence. That is, with each
new phase developed next to and connected with the prior phase where new-phase waste
filling will piggyback over the prior phase.
S&ME prepared a conceptual landfill expansion footprint considering the topography of
the area while working to avoid impacts to delineated jurisdictional streams and
wetlands. The resulting Alterative C landfill footprint is illustrated in Figure 7 and
provides an estimated approximate footprint area of 124 acres. S&ME developed a
conceptual landfill grading plan based on this footprint to estimate the possible gross
landfill volume. Estimates indicate that Alternative C can provide about 21,230,000
cubic yards of capacity. Based on anticipated waste generation rates of 900,000 cubic
yards per year, Alternative C could provide up to 23.6 years of disposal capacity. This is
less than the estimated disposal capacity for the life of the BCSS and more than the
anticipated disposal capacity of Alternative B.
Alternative C, the proposed landfill expansion configuration, is desirable for the
following reasons:
• There is sufficient subsurface information to complete a permitting and design in
the project need timeframe;
• Construction and operation remain on Duke Energy property, in turn providing
for;
o Increased site security;
o Decreased disturbance to neighbors during construction and operations;
o Decreased haul distance / cost;
o No need to construct additional infrastructure (power, leachate treatment
systems, water supply, perimeter fencing/security, etc.);
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
o Property acquisition is not required; and
• Estimated cost per cubic yard of airspace is low compared to other alternatives;
and
• This alternative provides the longest estimated lifetime and comes closest to
meeting the project needs. This relatively long lifetime means less future landfill
development to meet project needs.
The drawback to Alternative C involves known stream and wetland impacts relative to
the other alternatives. However, developing an off-site location will likely require
jurisdictional impacts that are unknown at this time.
5.4 Alternative D - Other On-Site Location
Alternative `D' considers the possibility of developing a landfill at other locations within
the BCSS property owned by Duke. The Duke property at BCSS surrounds Belews
Lake. An overview of the Duke BCSS property is illustrated in Figure 8. Based on
review of the current Duke BCSS property, S&ME identified six potential landfill
development areas as shown in the following table:
Table T-1
Alternative D - Other On-Site Locations
Site Approximate
Gross Area
Location
Comments
Number (acres)
south end of Discontinuous from existing landfill facilities;
1 67 Isolated area;
property Unlikely access from BCSS property
southwest end Discontinuous from existing landfill facilities;
2 33 of property Isolated area;
Possible access from BCSS property
southwest end Discontinuous from existing landfill facilities;
3 41 of property Isolated area;
Unlikely access from BCSS property

4
120 east of existing
Craig Road Adjacent to existing landfill facilities;

Landfill Access from BCSS property (Craig Road)

5
76 south of
existing FGD Adjacent to existing landfill facilities;

Landfill Access from BCSS property (Craig Road)
north of Adjacent to existing landfill facilities;
6 65 existing FGD Access from BCSS property (Egypt Road)
Landfill
Note that in the past development of the current Craig Road Landfill and FGD Landfill,
Duke evaluated areas on the BCSS property for potential landfill development. Those
evaluations concluded that the two current landfill locations were the preferred on-site
locations. Review of the property illustrated in Figure 8 indicates open areas ranging in
size from about 33 acres to 120 acres. These locations are indicated in Figure 8 as site
numbers 1 through 6. Site numbers 4, 5, and 6 are located in the south-central BCSS
property in the vicinity of the Craig Road and FGD Landfills. Site numbers 1, 2, and 3
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
are located on the south end of the BCSS property further from the existing Craig Road
and FGD landfills.
In comparison to Alternatives B and C, and site numbers 4 and 5, site numbers 1 through
3 and 6 are less likely to be suitable for landfill development. Site numbers 1 through 3
and 6 are small in potential usable area (ranging from 33 to 67 acres) in comparison to
the other sites and they are somewhat disconnected from the BCSS property and from
existing landfill facilities. Jurisdictional features within Sites 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 have not
been identified; however, considering the typical ridge and valley terrain similar to the
proposed Craig Road Landfill expansion area, jurisdictional features are anticipated
within these sites.
Sites 4 and 5 appear to be more suitable for landfill development based on the acreage
and location on the BCSS property in the vicinity of existing Craig Road and FGD
landfill infrastructure. Around 2003 Duke Energy conducted a site reconnaissance for
candidate landfill sites within Sites 4, 5, and 6. The landfill site reconnaissance resulted
in selecting the existing Craig Road and FGD landfill sites. In 2004, jurisdictional
streams and wetlands were identified and mapped within the existing Craig Road Landfill
site in support of landfill permitting (USACE Action ID 20041105). S&ME mapped
jurisdictional streams and wetlands within the proposed Craig Road Landfill Expansion
area and Site 5 in 2010 in support of the Craig Road Landfill expansion and possible
FGD Landfill expansion.
For the purposes of analysis, S&ME estimated conceptual landfill expansion boundaries
(limit of waste footprints) for Sites 4 and 5. Assuming a square footprint, the length of
each side of the facility was calculated by taking the square root of the total area. The
length of each side of the waste footprint was calculated assuming a one hundred foot
offset from the facility boundary. Next, the length of each side of the waste footprint was
squared to approximate the limit of waste footprint area. Finally, the available airspace
was approximated by using the ratio of airspace to waste area as calculated for Option B.
Based on this process, the resulting waste footprints for Sites 4 and 5 are 100 acres and
60 acres, respectively; the airspace for Sites 4 and 5 are 7,120,000 cubic yards and
4,270,000 cubic yards, respectively; and the anticipated lifetime is 7.9 and 4.7 years,
respectively. This is less than the estimated disposal capacity for the life of the BCSS
and less than the anticipated disposal capacity of Alternative C.
Alternative D, developing another on-site location (locations 4 or 5), is desirable for the
following reasons:
• Construction and operation remain on Duke Energy property, in turn providing
for:
o Increased site security;
o Decreased disturbance to neighbors during construction and operations;
o Decreased haul distance / cost;
o Limited need to construct additional infrastructure;
10
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
o Property acquisition is not required; and
• Estimated cost per cubic yard of airspace is moderate in comparison to other
alternatives.
However, there are drawbacks to this alternative, including:
• There is not sufficient subsurface information to complete landfill permitting and
design in the project need timeframe;
• Due to the decreased footprint size and inability to piggy-back landfill cells, the
landfill airspace volume per acre is decreased and therefore the lifetime is also
decreased;
• The extent of jurisdictional features within Site 4 is currently unknown;
• Due to the short lifetime in comparison to other alternatives, additional landfill
expansion would be required in the future which will likely include additional
impacts to jurisdictional features; and
Estimated cost per cubic yard of airspace is higher than Alternative C.
5.5 Alternative E - Develop Off-Site Location
Alternative `E' considers the possibility of developing a landfill at a location not owned
by Duke Energy. For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that the proposed
location would need to be large enough to construct a landfill with the same capacity as
Alternative C. An estimate of land area needed is attached in Appendix III. The results
of the estimate indicate that approximately 313 acres would be required to construct a
landfill, appurtenant facilities, and a borrow soil source.
Although specific parcels of land were not identified, given the dominant geographical /
topographical ridge and valley features in the Piedmont Region, we can infer that a
property of this size within the general vicinity of BCSS would have similar jurisdictional
stream and wetland features. Additionally, development and operation of an off-site
location may cause additional environmental impacts to wildlife, increase haul distances
and costs, and be a disturbance to neighbors.
Alternative E, developing an off-site location, is desirable for the following reasons:
• May potentially minimize impacts to jurisdictional features; and
• Potentially identify a property that allows for construction of a facility with a
relatively long lifetime.
However, there are drawbacks to this alternative, including:
• It is not known if landfill construction in these areas will impact streams and/or
wetlands;
• Will need to acquire property;
• There is not sufficient subsurface information to complete landfill permitting and
design to meet the project need timeframe;
11
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
• Construction and operation do not remain on existing Duke Energy property
resulting in;
o Decreased site security;
o Increased disturbance to neighbors during construction and operations;
o Increased haul distance / cost;
o Increased need to construct additional infrastructure (power, leachate
treatment systems, water supply, perimeter fencing/security, etc.);
o Requires property acquisition;
o Likely public opposition creating additional permitting challenges; and
• Estimated cost per cubic yard of airspace is high relative to other on-site
alternatives.
Although this alternative may potentially minimize impacts to streams and wetlands by
identifying an alternative landfill site, the extent of impacts to jurisdictional features is
currently unknown. Additionally, since the landfill is unlikely to be contiguous to
existing Duke property, landfill construction and operations are likely to be more
obtrusive. Also, this alternative is less cost-effective than Alternative C. For these
reasons, developing an off-site location was considered the fourth most desirable option.
5.6 Alternative F - Disposal at an Existing Regional Landfill
Alternative `F' considers the possibility of hauling coal combustion products from the
BCSS to an existing permitted landfill facility for disposal. Based on review of existing
permitted landfill facilities in the region, one possible candidate is the Hanes Mill Road
municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill located in and operated by the City of Winston
Salem. The location of the Hanes Mill Road MSW landfill relative to the BCSS is shown
in Figure 9.
S&ME personnel discussed the possibility of hauling and disposing coal combustion
products from the BCSS to the Hanes Mill Road landfill with City of Winston Salem
landfill management staff. Landfill management staff indicated that the landfill currently
accepts on the order of 240,000 tons per year of waste and has an estimated 20 years
remaining disposal capacity at that rate. Current Duke projections indicate annual coal
combustion product disposal needs on the order of 900,000 tons per year.
Alternative F, disposal at an existing regional landfill, is desirable for the following
reasons:
• Will avoid impacts to on-site jurisdictional features; and
• Landfilling could begin immediately.
However, there are drawbacks to this alternative, including:
• Consuming regional MSW disposal capacity with the collateral effect of requiring
other future landfill development in the area;
• MSW landfill capacity would be consumed in several years requiring future
MSW and coal combustion product landfill development;
12
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
• This alternative does not meet project needs; B C S S needs waste disposal capacity
for the next 32 years to accommodate station operations;
• Increased haul distance / cost; and
Estimated cost per cubic yard of airspace is high compared to other alternatives.
5.7 Alternatives Evaluation
Alternatives A through F were compared based on geometric attributes such as acreage,
volume, and associated lifetime; location attributes such as distance from the facility and
location on or off Duke property; and anticipated environmental impacts, and costs. The
alternatives evaluation is summarized and presented in Appendix VI, Table 2. Cost
estimates supporting the alternatives evaluation are summarized in Appendix VI, Table 3.
Estimates of cost were subdivided into categories as shown in Table 3. Cost assumptions
are summarized as follows:
• Property acquisition costs were based on an internet search for properties greater
than 201 acres for sale in Stokes County;
• Engineering, construction, haul, and closure costs were based on S&ME's
experience with similar projects;
• Additional infrastructure costs were estimated to be approximately 5 percent of
the total cost; and
• Tipping fees were based on the Hanes Mill Road Landfill high-volume tipping
fee.
These cost estimates were developed for comparison purposes only, and should not be
interpreted as definitive cost estimates for design, construction, operation, or closure.
Based on the alternatives evaluation, alternatives A through F were subjectively ranked
as follows.
• Alternative A can be characterized as the "do nothing" approach. In this
approach, the landfill expansion would not be constructed; therefore, the existing
stream and wetland areas would not be disturbed. This alternative was not
selected because it does not meet the need to provide for continued and future
coal combustion product disposal capacity.
• Alternative B (proposed location with stream/wetland avoidance) avoids impacts
to streams and wetlands within the proposed Craig Road Landfill expansion area;
however this alternative falls short of the project need lifetime and would require
future landfill expansion or development on Greenfield sites. Considering the
regional geology and topography, it is likely that streams and wetlands would be
impacted during future landfill expansions at other locations. For these reasons,
landfill expansion with stream / wetland avoidance was considered the second
most desirable option.
• Alternative C (proposed location) unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional features
are proposed within the Craig Road Landfill expansion area; however, this
13
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
alternative will provide airspace for approximately 24 years of facility operations
and it is the most cost-effective option in terms of anticipated cost per cubic yard
of airspace. This alternative comes closest to meeting the project need lifetime.
Additionally, the impacted streams and wetlands are not currently identified as
navigable waterways, high quality trout streams, or contain habitat suitable for
listed endangered / threatened species. The impacted streams and waterways flow
directly to Belews Lake, which is owned and operated by Duke Energy. For these
reasons, the proposed landfill expansion configuration was considered the most
desirable option.
• Alternative D (other sites on Duke property) falls short of the project need
lifetime and would require future landfill expansion or development on greenfield
sites. Considering the regional geology and topography, it is unlikely to avoid
impacts to unknown jurisdictional features. This alternative is less cost-effective
than Alternative C. For these reasons, developing another on-site location
(locations 4 or 5) was considered the third most desirable option.
• Alternative E (developing off-site property) may minimize impacts to unknown
jurisdictional features, however based on the general topography of the region and
considering estimates indicate that more than 300 acres of property would be
needed, similar quantities of jurisdictional impacts are possible. Whether or not
this alternative could provide for the project need lifetime is uncertain. This
alternative likely requires developing a previously undeveloped, greenfield
property. Additionally, since the landfill is unlikely to be contiguous to existing
Duke property, landfill construction and operations are likely to be more
obtrusive. Also, this alternative is less cost-effective than Alternative C. For
these reasons, developing an off-site location was considered the fourth most
desirable option.
• Alternative F (disposal at a regional landfill) may avoid impacts to on-site streams
and wetlands, however it does not meet the project need timeframe and regional
MSW solid waste disposal capacity would be reduced substantially. Additionally,
disposal at an existing regional landfill would require an increase in haul distance,
cost of waste transport and tipping fees, and increase in truck traffic. For these
reasons, disposal at an existing regional landfill was considered the fifth most
desirable option.
5.8 Alternatives Conclusions
Alternative C, the proposed landfill expansion configuration, was selected as the best
alternative based on the factors of environmental impacts, cost, solid waste regulations,
and whether or not the alternative meets the proj ect purpose and need. Although
jurisdictional features will be impacted, review of the alternatives indicates that some
stream and wetland impacts are likely unavoidable to meet the project need on the order
of 32 years for the life of BCSS.
For example, while developing Alternatives B, D-A, and D-B combined will avoid
impacts it would require developing an estimated 240 acres to provide a capacity on the
order of 19 years. In comparison to Alternative C, these alternatives combined require
14
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
about two times as much land area to provide about 75 percent of the estimated
Alternative C Capacity (18 years/24 years).
Alternative C provides the most efficient land use in terms of the volumetric capacity
generated for the land area developed and as a result, provides the most cost-effective
alternative. With respect to solid waste regulations, Alternative C is very likely to satisfy
siting and design criteria and gain Solid Waste Section permit approval on the basis that
it is an expansion of an existing approved and permitted landfill, much of the
design/permitting basis information has already been developed, and it can likely be
developed prior to the existing Craig Road and FGD landfills reaching capacity. In
addition, Alternative C was evaluated as the best alternative because it comes the closest
to meeting the project need, providing an estimated capacity on the order of 24 years.
6. AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
As stated in the alternatives analysis above, permanent impacts to jurisdictional features
are required in order to construct the landfill phases. Permanent jurisdictional impacts
are associated with 0.27 acres of forested wetland and 4,592 linear feet of stream.
Impacts to Streams SCI, SC2, SC3, SC4, SC5, SC7, SC8 and SC10 were minimized by
restricting grading in the vicinity of the down stream terminus, thus avoiding
approximately 1,418 If of stream impact. Additionally, work areas have been minimized
to the extent practicable and have been limited to what is necessary to facilitate the
proposed work. Following construction, disturbed areas within the work site will be
restored, and excess material will be removed to a high ground disposal area.
Appropriate temporary erosion and sediment control practices will be implemented
during construction. Specifically Erosion and Sediment Control permits will be obtained
and plans will be followed. Beyond construction, through the facility life cycle
continuing on into landfill operations, closure, and post-closure, Best Management
Practices (BMPs) employed for the project will be in compliance with the current
versions of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design
Manual," and the local governing authority.
7. PROTECTED SPECIES
To comply with applicable sections of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16
USC 1531-1543), S&ME conducted a review of the species that were identified on
websites managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Natural Heritage Program
(NCNHP) as federally protected species in Stokes County and neighboring Forsyth
County. The following table lists the species that were identified with an explanation of
Federal and State rankings included at the end of the table.
15
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
Table T-2
Federally Protected Flora and Fauna Summary
Species Federal
Status State
Status County Status
Bog Turtle T S/A T Forsyth - current
(Glyptemys muhlenburgii) Stokes - no record
James spinymussel
(Pleurobema collina) E SR Forsyth - no record
Stokes - current
Red-cockaded woodpecker E E Forsyth - historic
(Picooides borealis) Stokes - no record
Schweinitz's sunflower
(Helianthus schweinitzii) E E Forsyth - no record
Stokes - historic
Small-anthered bittercress E E Forsyth - historic
(Cardamine micranthera) Stokes - current
T = Threatened, E = Endangered, SR = Significantly Rare, S/A = Similarity of Appearance
As part of the protected species review, S&ME also consulted the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program (NCNHP) Geographic Information Systems (GIS) database Virtual
Workroom and Element Occurrence (EO) Database for a listing of endangered or
threatened species EOs within or near the project area. This review found no EOs
pertaining to federally protected species on record within a two-mile radius of the project
area.
Bog turtle habitat usually contains an abundance of sedges or mossy cover. The bog
turtle also depends on several micro-habitats for foraging, nesting, basking, hibernation,
and shelter. The bog turtle is listed as "threatened due to similarity of appearance" in
Forsyth County and no record in Stokes County. No areas resembling the habitat
requirements for this species were observed in the project areas, and no bog turtles were
observed during the field investigation.
The James spiny mussel is listed of current record for Stokes County and is associated
with the Dan River Basin, including Belews Lake. This mussel is characterized by a
rhomboidal, convex shell with spines, and is most often found in second or third order
channels with a cobble or sand substrate (Bogan, 2002)1. The current scope of work did
not include field review for aquatic species; however, the project area waters are
predominantly made up of first order streams that do not appear to contain aquatic habitat
suitable for the James spiny mussel.
The red-cockaded woodpecker is listed of historic record for Forsyth County and no
record in Stokes County. The red-cockaded woodpecker's range is closely linked to the
distribution of southern pines. Loblolly and longleaf pines that are 60-plus years old are
generally selected for nesting sites. The woodpecker usually excavates nest cavities in
trees infected with a fungus that produces red-heart disease. Preferred nesting sites
' Bogart, A.E., 2002. Workbook and key to the freshwater bivalves of North Carolina. North Carolina
Freshwater Mussel Conservation Partnership, Raleigh, NC 101 pp, 10 color plates.
16
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit SWE No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
generally include relatively open, mature pine stands with an undeveloped or low
understory layer. Foraging habitat is typically associated with pine or pine-hardwood
stands that are 30 years or older, with a preference for pines with a diameter of 10 inches
or larger.
No areas resembling the habitat requirements for this species were observed in the project
areas, and no red-cockaded woodpeckers were observed during the field investigation.
The habitat of Schweinitz's sunflower is open woods, roadsides, and power line rights-of-
way (R/W), often on basic soils with bare spots or a gravel component. The preferred
sites are characterized by abundant sunlight and little competition in the herbaceous
layer. This plant is listed of historic record for Stokes County.
The edge habitat around project wooded areas, the margins of past logging roads, the
Craig Road R/W, and other isolated areas of potential habitat were reviewed for the
presence of Schweinitz's sunflower. No individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower were
observed during the field investigation.
The small-anthered bittercress is most often found in wet areas such as streambanks,
seeps, wet rock crevices, and wet woods. This plant has small white flowers and is
characterized by its small anthers. The small-anthered bittercress is listed of current
record for Stokes County, however, though some wet woods and seep areas were
observed in the project areas, no individuals of small-anthered bittercress were observed
during the field investigation. Additionally, it should be noted that, according to the
NCNHP virtual workroom, known records of small-anthered bittercress do not exist
within a two mile radius of the project area and the nearest existing records of this highly
localized plant are over 14 miles away in the northern part of Stokes county.
S&ME also provided scoping letters to the USFWS and NCNHP on November 19, 2010.
The FWS responded on December 10, 2010 that according to their records and a review
of the information S&ME provided, no federally listed species or their habitats occur on
the site.
The NCNHP responded on November 24, 2010 that they have no record of significant
natural communities, significant natural heritage areas, or conservation managed areas at
the site nor within a mile of the project area.
A copy of the FWS and NCNHP correspondence is provided in Appendix IV.
8. CULTURAL RESOURCES
A scoping letter was provided to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) on November 17, 2010, requesting their review of records regarding cultural,
archaeological, or historical resources in or near the project area. The SHPO responded
on December 20, 2010 that no historic resources would be affected by the project.
A copy of the SHPO correspondence is provided in Appendix IV.
17
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit S&ME No. 1356-10-041
Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion June 9, 2011
9. PROPOSED COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
There is no private mitigation banking instrument in the project watershed. To mitigate
for the proposed 0.27 acre of wetland impact and cumulative 4,6621f (45921f proposed
impacts + 701f previous impacts) of stream impact, Duke Energy has requested and
received acceptance for payment to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP). A copy of the acceptance letter is provided in Appendix V.
18
N °
ek
T°wn Fork .?-?-
Stokes
County
'Qun

Forsyth
County
58
407
?a
er \ stz
90
Forsyth
County
ckingham
County
W

0 County
? d ? 158
e?e? e\dsv?\\e ?- - 9,r
?0 FZ'reef
Project Area
z
REFERENCE:
THE ABOVE INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED ESRI STREETMAP DATASET. PLEASE NOTE THIS MAP IS FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THERE ARE O 0.5 1 1.5
NO GUARANTEES ABOUT ITS ACCURACY. S&ME, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DECISION MADE
OR ANYACTIONS TAKEN BY THE USER BASED UPON THIS INFORMATION. Mlles
SCALE: AS SHOWN SITE VICINITY FIGURE
NO.
DATE. 4-1-2011 S&ME Duke Energy Belews Creek Station
DRAWN BY DDH Landfill Expansions
Stokes County, North Carolina
CHECKED BY DP PROJECT NO: 1356-10-041
Stokes I
Countyl
A
C2
Guilford
`, County
?
REFERENCE:
THE ABOVE INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED FROM THE NC ONEMAP WEB SITE. PLEASE NOTE THIS MAP IS FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT ISNOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THERE ARE A,", 0
op 400 ;800 1,200,
NO GUARANTEES ABOUT ITS ACCURACY S&ME, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FORANY DECISION
MADE OR ANY ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE USER BASED UPON THIS INFORMATION.
F.66?
SCALE: FIGURE
AS SHOWN 2010 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH NO.
DATE 6-6-2011 Energy Belews Creek Station
DRAWN BY DDH ��ME Duke Landfill Expansions
CHECKED BY WWW.SMEINC.COM Stokes County, North Carolina 3
L DP- PROJECT NO: 1356-10-041

r

FsC2
ZA
r
FpC2
I
SfC
CSA
cpp?
0 CsA: Codorus loam, 0-2% slopes, occasionally flooded O Project Area
0 FpB2: Fairview-Poplar Forest complex, 2-8% slopes, moderately eroded Perennial RPW
0 FpC2: Fairview-Poplar Forest complex, 8-15% slopes, moderately eroded Seasonal RPW
- FpD2: Fairview-Poplar Forest complex, 15-25% slopes, moderately eroded Culvert / Pipe
0 FsD2: Fairview-Siloam complex, 15-25% slopes, moderately eroded ® Wetlands
- SfC: Siloam fine sandy loam, 8-15% slopes
0 SfD: Siloam fine sandy loam, 15-25% slopes
- W: Water
REFERENCE: SOIL SURVEY GEOGRAPHIC (SSURGO) DATASET FOR STOKES COUNTY
THE ABOVE GIS INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED FROM USDA GEOSPATIAL DATA GATEWAY WEB SITE. PLEASE NOTE THIS MAP IS
FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THEREARE NO
GUARANTEES ABOUT ITS ACCURACY. S&ME,INC.ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FORANY DECISION MADE ORANYACTIONS
TAKEN BYTHE USER BASED UPON THIS INFORMATION.
SCALE
W

Ud
r

8
AS SHOWN USDA SOIL SURVEY MAP FIGURE
NO.
Duke Energy Belews Creek Station
DATE: 4-1-2011 S&ME
DRAWN BY D DH ;-' Landfill Expansions
Stokes County, North Carolina
I HECKED BY WWWSMEINC.CO'
DP PROJECT NO
1356-10-041
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WERE DELINEATED IN THE
FIELD BYS&ME PERSONNEL ON 11-11-2010. BOUNDARIES HAVE
BEEN SURVEYED BY WSP SELLS, A NC REGISTERED LAND
SURVEYOR. JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WERE VERIFIED IN
THE FIELD BYTHE USACE AND NCDWQ ON 3-1-2011.
mi
CO.
Perennial RPW n �'
M'
Seasonal RPW
Wetlands '. r
EDProjectArea
F-
---------------
REFERENCE:
THE ABOVE GIS DATA WERE OBTAINED FROM NC ONEMAP AND NCDOT GIS WEBSITE. PLEASE NOTE THIS MAP IS FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THERE ARE NO 0 500 ,OOO �SOO
GUARANTEES ABOUT ITS ACCURACY. S&M E, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DECISION MADE OR ANY
ACTIONS TAKEN BYTHE USER BASED UPON THIS INFORMATION.
Feet
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROXIMATE WATERS FIGURE
OF THE U.S. MAP - INDEX NO.
DATE: 6-6-2011DDH S&ME P
Duke Energy Belews Creek Station
DRAWN BY: Landfill Expansions
WWW.SMEINC.COM Stokes County,North Carolina
CHECKED BY: DP PROJECT NO: 1356-10-041
a. .
MAP
5D
Y'
k:
x b
MAP 5C
,<
CO.
Perennial RPW n �'
M'
Seasonal RPW
Wetlands '. r
EDProjectArea
F-
---------------
REFERENCE:
THE ABOVE GIS DATA WERE OBTAINED FROM NC ONEMAP AND NCDOT GIS WEBSITE. PLEASE NOTE THIS MAP IS FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THERE ARE NO 0 500 ,OOO �SOO
GUARANTEES ABOUT ITS ACCURACY. S&M E, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DECISION MADE OR ANY
ACTIONS TAKEN BYTHE USER BASED UPON THIS INFORMATION.
Feet
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROXIMATE WATERS FIGURE
OF THE U.S. MAP - INDEX NO.
DATE: 6-6-2011DDH S&ME P
Duke Energy Belews Creek Station
DRAWN BY: Landfill Expansions
WWW.SMEINC.COM Stokes County,North Carolina
CHECKED BY: DP PROJECT NO: 1356-10-041

NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WERE DELINEATED IN THE
? FIELD BYS&ME PERSONNEL ON 11-11-2010. BOUNDARIES HAVE
BEEN SURVEYED BY WSP SELLS, A NC REGISTERED LAND
SURVEYOR. JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WERE VERIFIED IN
? THE FIELD BY THE USACE AND NCDWQ ON 3-1-2011. -- 0
ri `{
k Yry';? . r .. .+5
t' .?? ? : ? M .: ?`A vii , •-•
a? ? Yom.
MAP 6D ?,^ ?, ?, x
w. ?
r SST{ ? ? . ?, 4 t gZ,. r :• ? ?? 3 y ?
MAP 6C y tiK k;
Gtr ?.i ?' ? ?? .? ?$(, sr ?' ¦ $i?' ,? ? .Ce'"?? ? 4°'?.
kd 7 C` ff. ++1? f'' c s fi. 2 i'+
?? MAP 6
E3r
14
? ` ?-:y ?,yj?[T?jkt .• y ?p"a.?LrtB['??S - ?. k'?i° S' .
s x 'pp yR P .
¦¦ ¦ ¦¦.
¦: Limits of Grading / Impact
Perennial RPW
Seasonal RPW
® Wetlands R ,T a?
??.x:` L0. ? _ r L ?' e t'?j°&• c ?-•:.
r t grog y r::
Project Area
f
REFERENCE: ?.t
THEABOVE GIS DATA WERE OBTAINED FROM NC ONEMAPAND NCDOTGIS WEBSITE. PLEASE NOTE THIS MAP IS FOR``.`
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THERE ARE NO A ¢
GUARANTEES ABOUT ITS ACCURACY. S&ME,INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DECISION MADE OR ANY f O,a t.?500 ?OOO;'e15OO
ACTIONS TAKEN BYTHE USER BASED UPON THIS INFORMATION. .,••, .'Feet
_ ?•i1[° ' ,} ._ ,k;, .: •.. ,.,' T.s. 2.1•i{.?K'.- _ s..:m?_en.' .-,f.'. _ ..8?'.1"?Y..S. S •'{rr: -%?2 r; _
SCALE: AS SHOWN FIGURE
PROJECT IMPACTS MAP NO.
DATE: 6-6-2011 H S&ME Duke Energy Belews Creek Station
DRAWN BY DD
: Landfill Expansions
Stokes Count North Carolina
CHECKED BY: DP PROJECT NO 1356-10-041
.-.,
.- /r, .
. / ,.:
v
h 4 t r
1
41,
,"h
k• . ?
,o.
{
e
h:
4
1
F y
(k:l. r~ .,
i
J'?,
}\
a•k , y;
- f
'ii ,
R ! 1
x-
1
-
,'. ASP .- .
lyj
'.w r
t
t y ,, ,;•
?N .
t

'!, r+ 3? `{ w i '? °f? Sy ?A. } 1 tb -1 A. 'r F7W4v. T'{ R., ,?'4 Y r,J 1?
t b0; +? ?? ,\ Y i , t L N :tip Y . A F 1 1gR ' [ ..;.t_
! , a ',,, k 'fif t /;a'?A ,a:- .1 i; din ?- 5 1 's .l '? t ;'r`S 5t ° 1.. 5! ,p .:.e:?
#- ? i?,. g a- tR rs t '<` ,?,.' ,.,. P !x 4 h:.` : i •' 4 ! :F kN # t ° , . , ." LIZ
s - r ?, ,' .r
11
? - _ ;?' ,:?, .V,1?0 ? ? , . r , iO I ? ... ...
1},Vt a r
s t 'scii ''1 r}?'?, s t z 4! s?. ?," r
txi,?' i b ,1. Mq.?2?'1t 5P x,14 y M11 `5 Y i ?yir IM t?F 4. k t y ?m[ is ?y??S j-f
, . Z-4 1: ,? , - ?- .) -1 - - -?: . I . ? . . , . ? I.,.,;, " t a? <N,.`f r s.r+4 g&k? e S #4 xi• ?t r
« N
!'. :' .t 'L acct i , c t ! i
I"- x ?° r is 1 "th ?' f
« ! ,_? K
t: 4 y'4,-. ,aLA id f" a tta?w .?5' +
°1Y.` „. " - ..,1Y 5 t ,
,d„' S..k t•?`iyR S *'{ r4 y1i hk3 - 'Rr -. t'
\ r :r;,6a4. Asa ,.s' 'e? .N, ..t.:y a Rk1^,.b) : ?r:;? :; .. ?! ,k, , 9
t + 3 t @ h ? _? ,, -?,?t.z!o?'? - , .. I I , '.. ? ?...__ ,_ , - ?, - T _tk"? 3- ,fit P?A27yy •. ,F r 1' 1. t W `P`. s' b x :?.: t N / d: ;'Ij 'It .
xy . .:?,.r- k y ? ,t Y ;\ a ::'? s b tai , + 1
r ` c ,' sax ' Gy p., •;m? P '?;t.2 ? t r %d , L7 1 &I Y xr2 y , r +hw"? /:Ief,<:7 !.. .Li ^ y
d
` G $'
yi d. ;' : - ,? - a -.. ,q, , r *1 r ,- r nw1 Y), y ,` 2 1 a >?`
- § s,1 w a y", 6 a,.. " r r
11
a c? P,
- y ,r 2? , 1? .. w x : M .f& W f
I 110 _- , T t ? ,5! rA " y4 y,i
t r . r. y¢ a ,^ T? -t ,? rxti:y `S •? ,, >v ?!'a 5 ?- 'k !4 a, = a {, ?- t .?4WJ { '',At w ViA .u tr' `? n• y,'3 ? ? ?,:' {• t
11
y ;t : ,n:. , 5 , y n f I L , % T•, P rr r... ^ .;: ?y4 t" _...:?
s., •.?` 4 r t s •. ;, a•. s v VS 'g ,?'^S. 1.b{k9? ° ?t? '6?` ?[ a r.•, i
Stream .
??:' ': "? .,? s, SC7 A ., x? `9?r ,?` Z.? :?,? ,#*:' , ?? ?
4 x 1 e aT ,-, l
x . r
#?JN ,;: ?•'8841foflm act' 's, ?` t `P s `'#' V .' xv?p '°* C, 3
r r e , ysti, rs p r ,, ~ 4 SM1 u*cE r axcNws ?" W. P 4 a ..,,? g h s.r, x ? Pwr + i 'I, I I rs d? a •"
r,; w t..-, ia,> ?? 4, t',
,? 5+. -:.s, x y. k _`::. sl ,.n.a4+'. t -?':'t. ',.:ta rlP?x, ., ,,u?:. v+t >.la i?j? `.3. ' , }.wi ?,?,''.'a` k .s-kt ,.r.'r"y?. s : `+f.
r - n 'k . ?. ,.., ....y "h 4. .7 f •.:,::, 5 .? ?Y 1.1'4, e. , . :.,' ?`• * X\ :. b ,t',a': aye }'`., .'g '.i ? 'r . '?' ,x?+.. d i ,? .
?*
t . . sC ?, Y' ?,
f ,? !' 1(P ,. 3. ' .'?.;;:' c v -`a a y.; F ?, : as t 'p<- ;' q '" Q , . t: :. t. 5 p a V vt ., k ,,, a 04 ?-o
1, I A 1 , 1 F .F S " S. , ' ,?.. r {?x 4 v t:.. o >a 9, ' 4? ^?,}, w
4 r - tt zV .'1 „ a , F $Y '4- 4° y}:'?{ \ :i? r"'? r -Y -., .. s } V •? ,.? •. kpF lk. r ;..^ r °Y ": : i 3, :'.. , .> 4 r '. , t?c ! A ,?+r ,V `Tr '; r `v - v , p i ?'a o .4' s };4.. , ! • ,ti,t,,.4 . ,( .c. ' >p? s `F s P 4 tii , M" .:'; r y ,b . : 1 i , ' 4. .' •
lk_
i., y . ,.. r ! 4,3 ,.4 Sr vi . ° t.' d + 4zFy:• s iti' ! S }; -. 4r #k 5?k? : e ", 4 .$ c'. , § r„;. ,
n a . 1 ^ w w.
-S i:i i'f j V- ,. 1.1. b•Y','rb 4 _..?f. L rte! ^. t 3'b.. -t•!, ?5:. , ?? ^} 4 :n. 1M1,, e l: "" ?,. 's l: :. L.. \?
n 4. t+s'?,. 1t .,: 4: ? ) ..£y'. -?.Y ; yc [+?•i`,+ ;..q. s. >t,; ., i) ,,..Sc a:r•, .ay^ ro,q'?,? a -
Y „? y Y 51 a, F ,h' i,? ri a'&':,
1 t M1 t'
fi F Y
`', S
?kr *.. # t .,i.1 f kt?$ ay J ,, 3C ::, rF s} s7 441 s? s { . q„Ta '?,a ri`,i a;r 4 E1#? # R::9' r A. . p" N .:f p ?- i d s ,rd
r
,. f ,...?.'ti r v .r _, S , i [sir: ,.ri"rav ^t,i ?y2 '.w bx, t '?' t ,
13111
B +k l..;, 3 #, i w:..LA, f :!`1 > r? y , • 5, ... , : 14 ,s: y% t 1 s^?, ?: a '. ,y. -,#" Ike , S ' M' . `Ir'k'-,vt.. v a k ,.c ': '.'?? + ..Y-'J,? e¢•-e1 A '' ',1 r ` Q 11 - <:ay, ?ti. :d, ,3:rij. 1 .t.-,; :d ,_ ra. >,•; ,a..ta ti e , - r.,^ .i
:t,: s ?t', f 'Y"'t" ;rtr,..,; r x e, ?ytn $% :„ :. -va k.S.,e;.? 'ti 1 v;Y aR&rort34r,. t: txi ., •rY .n„..... M r.?:1:1 dl, °•h 4 ,t.E ,.
4;r. ... R?, k, , ',,c +. 4`. C' .s;. i^7ka ^?? it r w;.r. ..f.i )?: . S?'r} 's K ?- ., -,
n.
-W., :^1 -1 -V' t
a* ?,,.- A k. .r;!?. 4 ,, ... d 3 .+:r 'Ss •'y ei t wF? a 11 I R -v -2-, -Y. 5:., "ear t- a.. 5,. ,a '.r. M'Eb4}' ,k .1 i't t. h •,'a5 ..:'?. ?:....' P kkQ ?1;Y"? ! .'*'y:: J .yk ry ry. ?a. ` k t', l R' Ik. ..
J{
. 't i : 'ate
_t - ,. ?P k' .i a... „ ?: ; w'rt : ? g ? ?, °n i
f'
4 LS'" r {? l'.
? !
.tr. l .
.1 "? '. k 4 a.
r t 1 c;. ff• ii; $ ,or t" I rRr :. 1 ;!1{k, ?c,¢ ? ?' c ,'w, ?_ti Yr r?'`j??*a,,t` '? [ s ". ?k Fyr r ? 11, -
i° ~ ? T f :1?. y ,v, t' 1 .1 "4r . ?1r h ,t1S p, •,w j , r t o}, c 1f t- ' [k k :4 ,..}"a . /': ; v .. , >hi y :_[.s . 9.1. e
M. .r!
py L
e .WU "` :: 7 d" r -': ,. l* S ?,!,' { 4• T m 1 d'
rrr• x ". k Tkl:..l x'tM,r . "i - ?u t544,"- i .is,'AF. Y M1 ?'t .? iii
Y >
k, 4 :4F H ...• 'a§.. ',: D Y Vic'. rtk •::'*," ..o f A#.,r', V,!?I ,? ?,`'I.. 4 `kl n ,A.: .': n'. ., :.aP
r.., , 't x; ?' .
5
% S
a 1 ?4 f ,
;;44. g. '4 4k , 1' r
W. " 4. Lt S l* i
x it t 3 Y *•,' E` 1 n,
A
€ 1 + r :!
]6 4"
? i r , Ste?tw..? P-, •4 w .?i?b ?:1 .4 , Y' `i r; Y ! - ' y 3 r c y? rN ,^ A i A s iF A. .a 11 ( ..+.'. zarr ..:5• 2;r' ' S r" - 4 , .`+>eac? ?. ti3 ., y... ? i,.t R # .iR *r+r V R'', m. <! :qt. r Y ,. d',J a ? 4b' y 1 t ..'r w - ` a`
.:: ' . ..,a. . ;,., 4 - „ , t k.' r - i a. :'. ! a. t S 'C'. 1:..-. M -, % . i e - r":..' ":b .ih.?, ?'t m.,l'.. f ?t5;., Y.:. 4 k.. ...t: [y. R , 9 r R , ;t?,,.:; _
. ,... r t .-, :. a _ .. ,•+° '? .d,. . , 5 .,'.., ,; .., . •., r?' .. :...:_ '\- Ilu ' . a 's.:'" .a>:' r . ,.. . ` . n,+A .' .- ,a, ...-w„ n,,. '? °? '=:*t °.5
._., {,:. s•..",.-, -: ?, - ae .+ , v, ''. !"., r., i .i,- :, qs, . . s.„ .3t' •,_ , a ye. ,? :' v4 ', . a..v
. . ,"L')" spa'# y ,, b. uc h'f1
,.,. , ; .?: , ti .. . .± ...., -, .::.. r..,. V^,. "-r4' , .,, ., .7 ,
4 s 1 K 't+1 v 9
t 4 G
b 4'
,. w K a? k'jkr,N - m l ,y h ,-qL".,-- $?' ?t.?'' t . - e :s, -S? w r ftk tI:} 11 u ?r:a'?0 1i
r. _ 1 " ''pro -,•r.,r: '•'?kw 11 r:a i..'.r t t>r 3 t . ,,a-'i .. r^. .r`'b .1 "?'.+.. AS't a ir!• *`::p'?'rr 8" ,-j ,f }:.1 Y ah,..;,} -,hu c. .9', °?+ t• ,? •
..; -F -, ,... ',a 4' .I-.? iiN-.. .:Y,$?' .iv srr..r ,4 ."-5^ ,, ,, s' ,k e - ?,x+2 a. yy?,,..3 . w,., :, $ i?l ±
; fir,: li ',. 4 1 i, , ' 4te 4« >!r- S r [ ?,,a' r ,.,? St s, e, »•h:. ? w F l rah ?.5 . mt'w* ,,'%,-_. , ' A. -1, I ? A' r k
?
. r
a` k .:F S ; "$t A
+ .
'
7; t : i, ,' ,° -? '. °`- , 4 S..k .Tr . P r .. !s- 4 *;Z, ,_ 4 Mt, ." a } o 5 a•:: C 4 [..t,..:<. y ;
;N sS ,e :? . > , ' 4i 1. s? X1'±4, a 4' .1 f xF=; ?., t.. ,,kC
t? a. } ?; r 3 :?r,:, ,a ,,?,., ;r,>? } ?'4., ,. ;n. ... ,,.e , IiC ?_rr, '. fi;'.t i ,:, .p ,
k-'' t V1t; ,y, °r v. 2,.: tx "r -, iM1'-"",. ? '.r • i. ,r #.. 1 ;r w , ,. t
' g,; ., a {; =4, '4 1, 1a, k,.. ' 4 3... e,, .- J., #? +t fr! l ? W ¢ `'c t•,.i
r4 r 4• •j z r a'.4 y y.. *.,- 8:d1 U :+ t,..
- .1P . • .i..;y k t [ ? 1a , e a }.? i :- s a t ',1'" 1i R ,r 4 - !: ?'' k ' 4 + a e , bY b? , ? ? J +.y,f i :•$: ° i
1 :'.>" f' , i n , ,< ,n' 11.?e ,ek. r{ ,+ ti! s c1 Fa' y.' k M , T,.. +°a `i" R t , Arr:' ?.
-,e f la :jM1 e,r x3;" ' `(., ;'y.V, Zlk.+ Y ..a ` a..'';yk M1 J:. 1-? ? V. :`,` YS ,;.n+. `bl ct ;;k a .. ' f u:!k? ?, _s 3 i , S. , >At1 ? r
I .Y ! V # ?'. ,.o- 'YAMS'. sfi may`.,...'
? a . , - ,K ;:, 2'r " r ;e , A t ; 'rE : , fi;i . ° ? ,4 q r. ., -r ,,, t
,, y :,' i ;g , , ? . '' ?
1 4 ,e. ?><'n ¢kr" t ,e4, k.,w.a l• ¢: <. + ? ,f''..4.+ ..4.,t.•'; h :?,''w a ?. 1 1v, . '
41. 9* ?.4Y y^ Y'f' ., F' rw A. S;° 4 kY'i' p.s
??.
r'• L 4
!.'? i y` •Z e1.''.,? ,! w t.c%`} 31,ti.:{?, r - ,{+<,a?.t,,,.,s Sa ''F&11 y;.,:' ?S 'P' r^ CV., 3 ;..' °. 6':.v wAM13 T l.in.? e y
Ty. ':3R s. k 'k ?' : k
1 .tar ,'..•,k.4 , 't , , , _' `, •;i F -p t fi' Y+',.',Lr f , ';", -,! ..;i. ..•} 11 •''" ?!. j. % .,H., r`af `.'4K 214; +,yY e,.'
y
.?:- i >k', 5. .A p. <?',ra. ,.? : •,. 'k. : y3. A A,f l a , l+a 1 x :.i.. ,..;
> a'." t
, .,. ( t ., 5... • .? J ^'.,: I, r- 1 ., :. p ' h l4.,...'-, r ",?q,??' .w •Sk.;??Fk bf r` _,?° , : ' 4 %5 ',r , .a, B u
5 ? 1, e', ,1i
y rY: r 1 i t..$". 6.1 a;
,. {,4r.3 65 r ., , r- kt!' ,w. , {
-;. ,. ,
4 ,'S :"' >.- 4 , yr 4. : .R. ,:a• . y? ,r a. ;._ eh 1 c . ,
. L .,h,.. l«t,,:,r,,. -an ,;:• "' .' •.rv. ? s..: k . t ': , vl i s 'awl f . "I ?. ?9?` ..%. . 1w
t'. }' #:
tF a
..d: s , , a4k" yy
,vro,. s„ ,
tr,a 1;..1.;i ,,. s.:: rk.-tti `(., 'i.y+,. n :v..,,,.,:i <",• tr ??' i 6, ,:, r y? p. fi`' y?' .
. a 'i -
-:: --.; '?1 la.. ? .?+:.h? , w. ,. #'1..1 , +,R t.. „. - i?. ..n 4 erh. ,` as . -Z #a, #." t '' , °, x i I'+• r ,:. "' t,;. . ,?X.'?' - , L
.g_ .,y,. ,, r!.. .r a5,v, ^` : ,-&`?' i },•` x .,,?.. rwrt: 1" akt k'41 . . °a s „i` ,,• ,a f.,1. al-. i ! :.,"}?1 ?`1,r"A,
,4i.:...'i" .l ., . e. .. ., ?kVS: .,,t'.'. sr .K.w. q. ,.,t.4 .+' '..:x' i-., a ..}r? } ?T§'.R.X
+i ,.1 y,. 5.F• ?.... 'hp. ., t .,. .',gg _, ,. : ,ate * ' a '. q:* ?I }y $....- 9'... f.?- r@. f.. '.?. t'4 C a ?S !Yfj .,,..
y.r, ?, +, r. .?r?k a, x. kir, ,z,41 t• ?°et`x r• ',h Per, hb`: .,+`.;. ,.^ a;
'rJ
'; P ,1 '$9 •.•. a e. r , 'i1' a S - e y . ;q ,,. t t t... y[ „s SS:. ,,
`+'.t.P ,!, p'.. ;i (.. ...,4' -.Y r a!V' -. L w ?1. h-. :..'5_N. .6 to >x,%.
N 4. • C4 f,, lei" y *
l "?W, .A:r? T 1':,,k 1"?° 54,,? 'R. JI k
} p
'C`
' ., ?4 ..,tro ! 'r.,w` Sri -? ? ti K. `!7. uyle :'s,7 s+ - r. # k? ?"„1 5° i.• r .,E ';kw M1+ i ,'1 r{ 'y tip, - °? ..[* + «
g ,f ;
. - ., .nL .it L:c2' 4 yW.,«..: gift a..{:*,- .,,Yh -.#?s i{,i ll, .* 4e, }., y, ?, ' Y .,1 .. y ,`A ktl k' b "f #, ? 11?•,
A t 4 P , M S, h 7 ,,;,j- t, y , .'-4 j?P j.{ t,.' h V•h,.x 1,. #I^T > ?` t'" r!h J M1. A4", ?.1: . - 11 O ,r t q a, Stream SC6 ?? _. F, III
'Ct 278 ?. ;f r, Ft}' .1+? ,h1, n" a, .. s t!' i4 ,1 ? pa: 1G, _g,4'."'? 'r}; , .. ,nl's,^;, ,)+9l F r -: '? A. ' 4r;? M' 3 r _.
. ,,.,, a H,q ,.,, .; ,,3. i.'v .!Fk-•' F,.'Hw`F. 1ry^ s ry `r °st: f t,, rts. ;:.P2t r??:,. r, ,: k??, „?Sw' ?1! v: '4J" y,?p' ',!„:RT?f
F ,,, .t a s ? 1F ?' ?P/. ;,? If of Impact
w
,F. , .,. , ...,. * .., :. f ...'1.0 ry :. I. ?4: st !F%? ' ,,s- ti.' r,,,, ,I , -, ,h • , 1?rn A 291 ,t%.4" m ...
I 91 y#`?r , 2 M1 l - j -, aV , ei,,4e iat .? S` iwe? ' 4 ,,;' °•' R, `y, . N,.,-: ? i : `'t * : l ? :. ?i s5 4 ?":,: t" s . v! , e ^ n
I ... # b T i t, , 4' Y 4?y 7, ,qY - A ,
r ?. ii` { '. ,{. s+ -.?, r, x, ^1? ,.n Y\'<, s 4 ? , w"4? r.'.: y
Ae s?t<'' > b': f t?' yet`; oto - t^.r _ a _x_ ; r r
., e , r i ? t Stream SC5 !.. „ s °;r yr
1 h° ri. v ti :a ?k F S? = 5'!r 1r I,v 1 . fh?i, id ''`?• k??P ,l??' 's`ly ? Wi fti yK ? . ;? r„ V 4 ??3. ..n L' ? kP
k ;, ?l , , ) - s: u+ 1,894 If of Impact ? ? p 8r P. a "
?
11 , ft 4>Fi ° `w + a°, i ?,? e, y ±C a .? ? r', ;.:t: ?x2 U n, e4?'. ' ^k..? ,,° t +i?:
y°RL 1< a >' : ? '! T k
OL? a'F ,. ;-W." 4 ?t. i?? -
t, , - ' :'' (W. 411, 2•. ti. , , i '? # i' ,^_:, ?'S i' ° ' 1 a , A„ '"a. a1f,," r :'. V, A ''s
If * ? -,,;.:a ,,? . >v;1, .? . + - ,,. _< yk .,... ;. ? N -1 ?' ?? .1. ,`, " `t 1i?? ,gY" 1:. a „4 ,.s-.I ,^?'-im r •':°: ,. i'k,, .!,' ,.e t y"c`&.. ? ' 3' v 1 , , ?P ? 1 i ? -
N' ? $ , 1M 1 , - g ? ? ) u >e ?." e tea. a k , s _ s,
•. • , ,+" gehr Cv c , -4t- ,x '!' K ', ? 1 .+r, a N 'B'=es4 '? w y ;..P ?' a ,ly'.;a 5
2 y, .y; '11 ±,. , - , VL 'v, - rpG ^`x`1r''!96, L a ?'. ,K•:-M` ? ate iV [ ';a pa ' `v „ . : ,»•. •,,,., ,.9p, r??•,kt ! r,My ?!
?r
y, ,., -'" f:. P.??1? 'stsb ?.Q,?. F ti . , a, ? ??
(: J r ,.' ,, G -,Y T d.?, ill Y Y. 1i.a,. ft gl 4 r, }n<
v A ' .4 w, 4
k, x rhw. lit F . Fri,,, ...,-—
?`'
.
v, Tdr71 dk.3_ : Z -.: 4;tALe t ,,O 1r . t ••t, '' y' r 5. y ;.e1 . I '*T, pok,,, • a?'rr`v+_ - ??' k 11
1. I? ,x
,Flh , `
ly,. ha "?, 1 •31"\"0..,: ' , ri 4"'?iIW4 -
Y a- ']W 2F . ,..r c ;,,a, s*.; '?'? JHf,: r wJ• n"t '. . "
f, ' '° ` , . :s(+liP ?.. ,,, ,-; r , . aM f ,", '? J k '' "y?,#' ; i y, ,^ r' „,, .m:. '''. ?F?", ,. "? .„ r'? i .` '? ,' -
.\'
; 1 1 - }" - - . g? .' tiy " -.,,F Y• , ?.5 ,,t °,, , , ; w -, . ? a .a r .,+v.• ;P it,1"?' ,.v : ,".ir4 .'Pr, ,,?d: ' a, ,Ny+ " .. ?, , ,,, , _j'. I* I °? i\ ,, `m nom. 1` : h s -?'°,e. ?d'' 1sy%^: , d'i '.:: ""+ . <+t.: ,y'i?,a w .! ?`:?` 'f .,., -,F+ 'W` .,..p ?. ,P`:`
t - .-1. F ' -- .?. , \ .` + ss ` 1 k ` ,-"s • s:, ? :: +?; k ; m>; :. , `ak i,t.. .,,?t° . "+,+. '.,y} '.P 'r°. I 10
. 4ti t \
,, 1k9eSl,? <,YF, ?-1, ,• Ys;,;r; ,sn'i't -,-r t, au ,4rb+.,;s4.?t '? t7 P,I':f , A# 4+ A M?A y p Fbi Of-- '`?°ea+g+t yr, q '?' ?x
1 . r,1, :,1%S4.,, '9*.= rev' ,s•':,, ! `.tw a n??ptr?... s,•w, r vp„vt -.m e 11 ,k
C l ' iy .\ a, 5+ „.-s+rv ?:wr,` rte'' c - +.?'"_ a N?? ?: r„??r{'. • •;+ ' ?c ;:.? „n ,
L
' ,.5 y y" r i+ u' ? r nrp 1p rt° w°
? M Y i ,?.
?- r is w , „ -? «:-. ? .::. M z.* ,-,,? '? %=w / _:et ?k
\ . 1,x »,l, r? "ice ?v - PNy" ?? ?J? .'" +.?`# r4 ? - , ;A, + ., Tf .
! 1 t: ,a+ A' Wad': :,UM ?.a :.•roi"°IO -, ?•/A°f,`y/" ?C ,. ,?u. •,,a A, ,. . 1-Irl e \3 i T s,ya s.. ar 4F , s> S. i n!+1`51 i?„, y' 1 '°"b ,wY ? '' ...?
r ,h _ , . N? ' ;,e v Wfi ? ,4w::-g xw,,, y Limits of Grading /Impact
:"` ",. ?:I 101X~ ,' -Perennial RPW 1 1". eT s r « .., ed + ?: 1 cr . 1 ? °w, ro1k{r u, ,, a r % e'1 , 'F
I r fir «+! "; . i`
Fm y„iYY:fr' ;ir ,4 "".p' ?R,?? . ?( ? I "LJ P A. - " • -s1' y + „ Sf,Z ;? "1.
vi ? .- 1 ® M1 "'O' a .S? ? .. -, I w
a « ~.?. ? y, ., . I. ,? ? * ;;?. ,R Seasonal RPW
® 1 ^ ®.. -,-,?Yr -cie? a `?:, Wls ... ,r ?, '' ,k,_ ,vrm;w-Vs?y tie ? + y
k11 !A '?° G ?,Frl .
n."•"` 3; ?? ?,` - Culvert/Pie
`e .4 IT?`°:•.,^ 1I, f`. ra ti1r,'x i "?T?,Qr A, ;1 ? 0?;, "A M Wetlands . 1-1
REFERENCE: I NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WERE DELINEATED IN
THE ABOVE GIS DATA WERE OBTAINED FROM NC ONEMAP AND NCDOTGIS WEBSITE. PLEASE NOTE THIS ?? a q'`t?'?i ' ?PrO?ect Areas 11 . THE FIELD BY S&ME PERSONNEL ON 11-11-2010. BOUNDARIES ,? " 300 2 ft Contours
MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER HAVE BEEN SURVEYED BY WSP SELLS, A NC REGISTERED kry ?p
USES. THEREARE NO GUARANTEESABOUT ITSACCURACY.S&ME, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY LAND SURVEYOR. JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WERE ^ « 5T
FOR ANY DECISION MADE OR ANYACTIONSTAKEN BYTHE USER BASED UPON THIS INFORMATION. VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE USACE AND DWQ ON 3-1-2011.FPAt ' •./86'n A A
`k? - 10-ft Contours
= 0-
C) Q G

O

C)
m M
0
Z y
0 O U

LO ?
O
II O

LO
0 C)
Z -
F
LU _U
a 0
u0 a
W
1
(
2 (
(
1
1
6
i
4
y
,1
a
O
G a C
?
H co °
Z vi M
"`fit
UN
(n (a 0
O
Q
IL 3: CL Z
C @ W
G ?y
IIIIIIIIIII mw=
>''O O
H °1-U
CJ N
W Y
W
O
O = CO
7
1
4
FIGURE NO.
6C
r
7.? Iv
y\s!` 780 °Y {ky? ?y f •r r
ell
17 r.
1 ki
?i:• 111111 ,? Y
-. , k o`?• '?i,{. ?', r,kC4 Iii
C) Q
N o
t t ,
A-Z
m
r1 d' ?4 a z ?' c? m
C:) LU
77
F a w
.ls S [ i + .. ?? Q 2
loll-
... ?` '1 AA r '` ,t,.il1° + 3:, is > °Kr' \ t ? d i
i• u
a q i Bl,. ?p
:i i l . v 5 Y \+ #Z 'ry`a ,r y Y - P }11 P `t C'y? +?" ?,` ? ? M1 y t? ?+? ? O
} Y .. yh b
IIII ? I•tC-- I ? ? ?? 6 P tb?' ?4 ? ? Yr ?` 3`? '{,? ? y? ? ?y ? ? .f ?,??? .. ? ?
4?, LO
?P+ Rt r*r' ##t r S A3 qt vt+' ?? 0
a 5 #"9 ti ?» k T'a 7 vOt s
¢4s4A s C ? 5 'S'& ti ? u?r - r ? U ?
?°?, ?.? ,n > tr?re h"? ` r? 1 ? k F ..'?o`} +.. ?r, $ ? ? t?? ?#t i rQ , a ? ? 4? ? I.,
.?3 ???t•# ???,rdr'3P StreamSC8 W
.¢," i r s o +'+ y r.; RF? ' f ?,;t a •1 ct`' ^•r .+'? + , i •„'t
768 If of Impact
Ok?? \I? C. Z
Z2 Y"
~ YYht 5. ,5L !» °r t :Wetland WC2 4 MY?'\' t n ,?h,,j ` `?'y? W
D y rid`. 1 1 #1.4,; ?? '++ ip p.. t y2 aa, v ° T i 'a'?
t r§ 1"F ?d"• •,? , > r.- * r#?.,.rY}.L ??+a? >#?' 0.136 Acre of Impact t :.y ' .r ?y? ?? ?,; '.,'. •? ? N
,, k, 7.,, ra ! +' { h,` 1 r r, ? ? Y i'41. 11' 11
c w # 5 t tii5a ! w!
r ? b ?. ¢ e
rc??A ?! t. # tYb M
r `;r?y t' ?' -'+ °TrA s ?4. tl b r 1,tR i y + A ;? y?, ?tti'• \ +?' 1 y.{;s.M .? ° j a.,, ?? ?'??
a Y , 1 !i ?'' ,t ° ti N?
':I?P'?y& ! ,c?`?? r -.°_w ?e?,? 1 ? ? r`y, : .r, ?,,"'? ? AZ\\i4?`? tgi?.r ? ? r ° `B.•??r . '?,. ? .i'
,0 N, w ?i'', \ R ?,? o:°?' d??'-'.# `.•14 it ?•+: ` ± ?, :?'. r,b k, ?+? ?, { \'' o Y\ •? 15 Y L +µ .'• na 't
At.
Our ?Ct ?.? 1lrE ttt .r ?`i?,`,`? s 5r/? s s ,art F\*;'`y?i ni 'rMlr? 'p'"
Sf i }? yl ° d r xY t
2 [CP r 4 4 1?y+ i? . a 4u§ b ! Y
Auk
Wis to s t r
IfOn»? +?' G+d?'z t r t, r i! r ar rkv ?t ??' k? ei ^,t
r d• "?k'aT? y x.. ?°e-N ?.. ? $ ??.y , r?. .? rr +? ? k ,? ?:A y? 1! ' ? ?i s ?'?`k y' ??. • ?1
•idd"?s? l? StreamSC9
` c ?` ' `?y` 't? ? I i v y 4 ,? ? ?3 # . y ?? , ; 243 If of Impact ?Z
Wetland WC3 ; e .'. r}, ??1'h.?. ?? 0
i
•A I .. ? S., »r 1;pr ? - { ?,,„,?y ?? ? 4 ?.?."' 't ??R• a r?'z? :: ? >r? ?? t t ,'?,? ':?? ? N c
I ?I 0'05 Acres of Impact
JI ,11? ','AS r .d§ ?r 'u aq > ` ?? a § t?yv «r I 'p?p y W k ? ? v+
•??(° \ o^,Str~ .y.'"7µ,'y`'+1 L`'ry y x,. M9 ;'Nt ? F („)
t
.0 L
i:v
:?i'a. y • Stream SC10 ?',Z sk , ,
LVjj? ?
,nowm- (n (0 0
95 If of lm act r, . era ,• a.
+
° IL
l U ;i?r k A±tYc - 1',. p?4 : r ?•Wat" t ?, 34''`'??0? '„?,C';?F 14 y (tf: ® N X Z
p
`yAt£r4a 'P1 r[`e+ -111>
ry
?1)
C+, t. t ,t? -,yt - w _"?': tin@.e` e A °IP1`.Py h'"yq .'w-++ssY ?`?c•!. - w 7
?yv, 'r rot K +°•';? r.?{?!";• y?w.`y?l k x33 ` ,i4rx a
4?r ?rgerwm?4 r`b r c U
P, k°?'ay w #D .'} " ,'?. • r,. •4: Wetland WC4 r ?•, V?'?bdl'?i, :. ?? ?.` bn.:;P hltirw'?.una. Wyk?:. a /? N J 0
.? 0.055 Acre of Impact
W Y
,?:s"-A r.? G. Yy`i rr?, a '.9 k `S r `r•;y§, c'Y;4S 4n r y
IN%
iii s AA P !` r !`, ?`v, 4?? \ 1 ?a $$$ r +. x , •. O N
1 I ,??p°{Pl. •; 4 ?" 1. - ?? Mr?"? ?. ?` 'Ma =k r+ P +rH.h/
m ,arit?? c.. ,d y1y t1 Q yat = rit4r ",` ? fi•u w? x? W v 0
Limits of Grading l Impact
`, ? +?, a ?,-? ? ? y /' , y ...
Perennial RPW
?I pv
t 'i ''d # S. ?+,-'v46L71''i?.4.r ''r° ?I???V. N' ? ?:,i. § ?' # b /?'. »`*'.
?9= Seasonal RPW
..?vv ?•.? ? ?;:+'`1 R ?'? 1 4vwv w ° 'r. r ,?'. !
j?y ttyr dfi. B, qp,t -aft
Hp w 4 ,? ' a` n? z' , ' a. Sl s#t Fyn M;M':" 114 SPY p f" z, r,
Z, :. yd ' :, ># :.r h, 4,'A .?e W'y?r ? Qi M" µ 9 r 6 t' yy}4 fS# ' ..p 5 y1 s Culvert /Pipe FIGURE NO.
? ,l '? •'R ,?.: •.,? >?„'.?•^ .,r.. ,r ,r t?PA? L.. ie.. ?a? :tv.? 5M Y'.'?`p :??,\ # j?".?i°`?\, + } ?'Y? ? 1,.??,7 ?r rS0 /v'P
1§ R.'.1: S t • ,'?i-,, . 'ry-£. T `Jfry f..yy9941 ?' L v !1 y S Y q?? y, ???
lpl I, ex 7'.?`? _,KI?',. ti F t 4 t? r r 41? ?\ Nx Wetlands
REFERENCE: NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WERE DELINEATED IN v ' ?? r ?`'* Pro ect Areas
t THEABOVE GIS DATA WERE OBTAINED FROM NC ONEMAPAND NCDOTGISWEBSITE. PLEASE NOTE THIS THE FIELD BY S&ME PERSONNEL ON 11-11-2010. BOUNDARIES, +?`ir r ??•`? '.V i 1 6D
MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER HAVE BEEN SURVEYED BY WSP SELLS, A INC REGISTERED 300 2-ft Contours
USES. THEREARE NO GUARANTEESABOUT ITSACCURACY.S&ME, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY LAND SURVEYOR. JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WERE
FOR ANY DECISION MADE OR ANYACTIONSTAKEN BYTHE USER BASED UPON THIS INFORMATION. , VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE USACE AND DWQ ON 3-1-2011. mol Feat r'.,'q•,l 10-ft Contours

's

750 k?rr ry.. q

'CRLF Phase 1

Alternative B Limit of Waste
°
-- ,__ _ Alternative C Limit of Waste
r
11
'
_ - „-; - Alternative C Grading Limits
- a
:
5-ft Contours

750- Wetlands
,
Streams
REFERENCE:
THE ABOVE WATERBODY DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM THE NATIONAL HYDROGRAPHY DATA SET. STREET GIS a
DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM ESRI. HYDROLOGY AND WETLANDS JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WERE
DELINEATED IN THE FIELD BY S&ME PERSONNEL ON 11-11-2010. DISTURBED AREA INFORMATION WAS v X
OBTAINED FROM S&ME, INC. AND WSP SELLS, INC. PLEASE NOTE THIS DATA IS FOR INFORMATIONAL 0 600 1,200
PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THERE ARE NO
GUARANTEES ABOUT ITS ACCURACY. S&ME, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DECISION Feet
MADE OR ANY ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE USER BASED UPON INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM THE ABOVE DATA. :,,:.,;_ *? F •?"r 4,.. -
SCALE: 1" = 600' EXPANSION AREA FIGURE
NO.
Duke Energy Belews Creek Station
DATE: 5-31-2011 - S&ME
1DRAWN BY: CHR Landfill Expansions
WWW.SMEINC.C0[..: Stokes Count North Carolina
CHECKED BY: KRD PROJECT NO: 1356-10-041
?o •?? ?.? -, ? i ' ... tiro I .
g
I?
b A
k I ti 1 No.6,,65.09,acres ;
p w No 5.95 acres v, Q
Stokes County
No.,4, 120.27 acres r?
i Rockingham County
No 3 41.47,acres
Forsyth County,,No 2y32.71 acres Guilford County
No. 1'66.69 acres
??? ` oad
rk
* 4+
Alternative On-Site Locations
CRLF Phase 1
. } . 9 CRLF Expansion
., ,
® Duke Property
Waterbody
REFERENCE: County Boundary
THE ABOVE WATERBODY DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM THE NATIONAL HYDROGRAPHY DATA SET. STREET GIS '
DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM ESRI. HYDROLOGY AND WETLANDS JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES WERE
DELINEATED IN THE FIELD BY S&ME PERSONNEL ON 11-11-2010. DISTURBED AREA INFORMATION WAS
OBTAINED FROM S&ME, INC. AND WSP SELLS, INC. PLEASE NOTE THIS DATA IS FOR INFORMATIONAL 0 7,000 14,000
PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THERE ARE NO
GUARANTEES ABOUT ITS ACCURACY. S&ME, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DECISION Feet
MADE OR ANY ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE USER BASED UPON INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM THE ABOVE DATA. ..
SCALE: 1" = 7,000` DUKE PROPERTY FIGURE
NO.
Duke Energy Belews Creek Station
DATE: 5-31-2011
DRAWN BY: CHR Landfill Expansions Q
-- S&ME
.SMEINC.C®? Stokes Count North Carolina V
CHECKED BY: KRD PROJECT NO: 1356-10-041
APPENDIX I
COMPLETED ENG FORM 4345
?-
rrr
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
CB I OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-003
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 5 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
Searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send
comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to
Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite
1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-003), Washington, DC 20503.
Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction
over the location of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authority: 33 USC 401, Section 10; 1413, Section 404. Principal Purpose: These laws require permits authorizing activities in, or affecting, navigable
waters of the United States; the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, and the transportation of dredged material for the
purpose of dumping it into ocean waters. Routine uses: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit.
Disclosure: Disclosure of requested information is voluntary. If information is not provided, however, the permit application cannot be processed nor
can a permit be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the proposed activity. An
application that is not completed in full will be returned.
(ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS)
1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
(ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BY APPLICANT)
5. APPLICANT'S NAME 8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME & TITLE (an agent is not required)
Duke Energy Corporation - Mr. Tom Leap S&ME, Inc. Mr. Ken Daly
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
3195 Pine Hall Road 9751 Southern Pine Blvd.
Belews Creek, NC 27009-9157 Charlotte, NC 28273
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NUMBERS WITH AREA CODE 10. AGENT'S PHONE NUMBERS WITH AREA CODE
a. Residence a. Residence
b. Business 704-382-7271 b. Business 704-523-4726
11. STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize (see attached agent authorization) to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this
application and to furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see instructions)
BCSS Craig Road Landfill Expansion
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable) 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
West Belews Creek Duke Energy Belews Creek Steam Station
3195 Pine Hall Road
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT Belews Creek, NC 27009-9157
Stokes NC
COUNTY STATE
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see instructions)
36.266160 N, -80.071100 W and Tax Parcel No. 6982-00-64-2715
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Raleigh, NC use 1-40 W. to NC-68 N, left at US-158 W then continue to NC-65 W/Belews Creek Road. Turn right onto
Pine Hall Road and then right at Duke Power Steam Plant Road.
ENG FORM 4345 - ONLINE CESPK-CO-R
18. NATURE OF ACTIVITY (Description of project, include all features)
The proposed landfill expansion project entails extending the existing Phase 1 Craig Road Landfill to the south. The
proposed landfill expansion will be organized and developed in approximate five-year operational phases. Construction will
require installation of erosion and sediment control measures, clearing, mass grading of existing ridges and valleys to
establish landfill base grades, constructing a stormwater management system, and constructing the landfill liner system.
19. PROJECT PURPOSE (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)
The purpose of the project is to provide necessary disposal capacity for the coal combustion products that are generated.
Construction of the landfill expansion is anticipated to commence in Spring 2012, and developed in approximate five-year
operational phases with an anticipated completion date of 2045.
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. REASON(S) FOR DISCHARGE
see attached description
21. TYPE(S) OF MATERIAL BEING DISCHARGED AND THE AMOUNT OF EACH TYPE IN CUBIC YARDS
see attached description
22. SURFACE AREA IN ACRES OF WETLANDS OR OTHER WATERS FILLED (see instructions)
see attached description
23. IS ANY PORTION OF THE WORK ALREADY COMPLETE? YES O NO O IF YES, DESCRIBE THE WORK
The Phase 1 portion of the Craig Road Landfill, including associated perimeter berms, ditches, stormwater management
systems, operation facilities, and roads, was constructed in 2007.
24. ADDRESSES OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, LESSEES, ETC. WHOSE PROPERTY ADJOINS THE WATERBODY (If more than
can be entered here, please attach a supplemental list)
see supplemental list
25. LIST OF OTHER CERTIFICATIONS OR APPROVALS/DENIALS RECEIVED FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL AGENCIES
FOR WORK DESCRIBED IN THIS APPLICATION
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL* IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
see supplemental list
* Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building and flood plain permits.
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information
in this application is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am
acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant.
SI NATURE,90"APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United
States knowingly and will fully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false,
facticious, or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any
false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
ENG FORM 4345 - ONLINE CESPK-CO-R
BLOCK II
STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date: 5 January 2011
Project Information
*S&ME
S&ME Project Narne: Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Ash Landfill
Type of Project: Jurisdictional Delineation, Permitting
Location: Stokes County, North Carolina
Property Owner/Representative Information
Business Name:
Mailing Address:
City, State, Zip Code
Telephone No.
Contact:
Duke Energy
EC I Oc/ PO Box 1006
Charlotte, NC 28201-1006
704.382.7271
Tom Leap
Agent Information
Business Name:
Street Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Telephone No.
Contact:
S&ME, Inc.
9751 Southern Pine Boulevard
Charlotte, N.C. 28273
704.523.4726
Darrin Peine, QEP
Authorization: I _ Z?17- on behalf of
41 ( nt t Sigr?Aire)
Duke Enemy hereby authorize
(Name of Landowner Project Sponsor)
S&ME, Inc. to act as agent for the above-mentioned project.
BLOCK 24.
ADDRESSES OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, LESSEES, ETC. WHOSE
PROPERTY ADJOINS THE WATERBODY
Identify Page 1 of 8
Parcels
Pin: 6991-03-24-1766
Name1: CONRY, JEFF G;CONRY, SHERIANNE E
Account Number: 155926533
Address 1: 352 LAKE POINT LN
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: BELEWS CREEK, NC 27009
R Show Full Description
Pin: 6982-00-02-7581
Name1: BRATHWAITE, LESLIE R;BRATHWAITE, ANGELA D
Account Number: 2519
Address 1: 1060 GEORGIA RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
n Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-98-2639
Name1: BRAY, DAVID THOMAS
Account Number: 57735
Address 1: 4325 PINE HALL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-98-1506
Name1: BRAY, SAMMY EDWARD
Account Number: 2934
Address 1: 4335 PINE HALL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-99-5279
Name1: BRAY, THOMAS WAIN;BRAY, JUDITH SMITH
Account Number: 25114
Address 1: 4273 PINE HALL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6991-01-49-7551
Name1: CRAVEN, FLOYD T
Account Number: 155893521
Address 1: 509 W PARKWAY
Address 2: PO BOX 390
City,State,Zip: HIGH POINT, NC 27262
F+j Show Full Description
Pin: 6972-00-91-7610
Name1: DALTON, ALMA H
Account Number: 1662
Address 1: 4056 PINE HALL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Q Show Full Description
Identify Page 2 of 8
Pin: 6982-00-01-4573
Name1: DALTON, GEORGE WILLIAM
Account Number: 155979059
Address 1: 1060 GEORGIA RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Show Full Description
Pin: 6982-00-02-3366
Name1: DALTON, GEORGIA WILLIE ESTATE
Account Number: 1970
Address 1: 1060 GEORGIA RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Show Full Description
Pin: 6983-00-42-4076
Name1: DALTON, MARVIN H JR
Account Number: 156008927
Address 1: PO BOX 184
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Show Full Description
Pin: 6991-01-25-5532
Name1: DANIEL, ROBERT HARRIS DR;DANIEL, SHARON C
Account Number: 156023056
Address 1: PO BOX 10
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: MCCLEANSVILLE, NC 27301
Show Full Description
Pin: 6993-05-19-9069
Name1: DAVIS, JANE WILLIAMSON
Account Number: 156026802
Address 1: 1140 DR HANES RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: PINE HALL, NC 27042
Show Full Description
Pin: 6994-03-30-6341
Name1: DIXON, DAVID L;DIXON, JUDY W
Account Number: 155893049
Address 1: 1205 DR HANES RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: PINE HALL, NC 27042
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6981-00-14-5920
Name1: DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION
Account Number: 155919469
Address 1: PO BOX 1007
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: CHARLOTTE, NC 28201
Show Full Description
Pin: 6982-00-64-2715
Name1: DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION
Account Number: 155919469
Identify Page 3 of 8
Address 1: PO BOX 1007
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: CHARLOTTE, NC 28201
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6991-01-26-7316
Name1: DUKE, POWER COMPANY
Account Number: 16140
Address 1: ATTN: TAX DEPT PB05B
Address 2: PO BOX 1244
City,State,Zip: CHARLOTTE, NC 28201
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6982-00-67-6849
Name1: DUKE, POWER COMPANY
Account Number: 16140
Address 1: ATTN: TAX DEPT PB05B
Address 2: PO BOX 1244
City,State,Zip: CHARLOTTE, NC 28201
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6991-03-44-5395
Name1: DUNLAP, TIMOTHY FRANKLIN;SHARPE, JULIE ANN
Account Number: 156015833
Address 1: 9108 MT CARMEL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: STOKESDALE, NC 27357
Show Full Description
Pin: 6993-01-37-7458
Name1: FARMER, ROBERT A JR;FARMER, PENNY R
Account Number: 4504
Address 1: 1242 RIVER RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: PINE HALL, NC 27042
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-87-3606
Name1: HAIRSTON, ALBERT
Account Number: 8542
Address 1: PO BOX 43
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6983-00-62-7082
Name1: HAIRSTON, J H;HAIRSTON, LENA
Account Number: 8819
Address 1: C/O JACQUELINE HAIRSTON
Address 2: PO BOX 191
City,State,Zip: BELEWS CREEK, NC 27009
0 Show Full Des_c..ription
Pin: 6982-00-18-5694
Name1: HAIRSTON, JAMES T HEIRS
Account Number: 8799
Address 1: 3906 PINE HALL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Identify
0 Show Full Description
Page 4 of 8
Pin: 6982-00-03-5785
Name1: HAIRSTON, JAMES T HEIRS
Account Number: 8799
Address 1: 3906 PINE HALL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6981-00-54-7417
Name1: HAIRSTON, JOHN LOUIS ESTATE
Account Number: 39127
Address 1: C/O TIMOTHY HAIRSTON
Address 2: 6920 TERRENCE KNOLL RD
City,State,Zip: BELEWS CREEK, NC 27009
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6981-00-54-5426
Name1: HAIRSTON, JOHN LOUIS ESTATE
Account Number: 39127
Address 1: C/O TIMOTHY HAIRSTON
Address 2: 6920 TERRENCE KNOLL RD
City,State,Zip: BELEWS CREEK, NC 27009
Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-67-2631
Name1: HARTMAN, CHESTER DALE
Account Number: 4529
Address 1: 4640 PINE HALL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-66-9364
Name1: HARTMAN, KEITH DALE;HARTMAN, SHARON L
Account Number: 32841
Address 1: 1407 CAMP CAROLDALE RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-65-5474
Name1: HAWKINS, CHESTER M;HAWKINS, NANCY K
Account Number: 4780
Address 1: 1180 BURCH RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-65-3777
Name1: HAWKINS, CHESTER M;HAWKINS, NANCY K
Account Number: 4780
Address 1: 1180 BURCH RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Q Show Full Description
Identify Page 5 of 8
Pin: 6971-00-88-8129
Name1: HILLBILLY HIDE AWAY
Account Number: 11146
Address 1: C/O SAMMY BRAY
Address 2: 4335 PINE HALL RD
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-76-8444
Name1: HOLLAND, BOBBY L;HOLLAND, WANDA F
Account Number: 60424
Address 1: PO BOX 774
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6993-09-16-4457
Name1: JARVIS, JOSEPH R;JARVIS, ROSANNA B
Account Number: 58776
Address 1: 1871 PINE HALL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: PINE HALL, NC 27042
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6981-00-54-7617
Name1: LUBKE, NORMAN E JR;LUBKE, JERRI J
Account Number: 156021487
Address 1: 7801 CRAIG RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: BELEWS CREEK, NC 27009
Show Full Description
Pin: 6972-00-88-8667
Name1: MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS INC
Account Number: 156029049
Address 1: 2710 WYCLIFF RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: RALEIGH, NC 27607
? Show Full Description
Pin: 6993-09-15-2569
Name1: MCNAIRY, EVELYN AYERS TRUST
Account Number: 23562
Address 1: C/O WALTON MCNAIRY TRUSTEE
Address 2:1411 SANDPIPER CIRCLE
City,State,Zip: SANIBEL, FL 33954
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6993-01-48-3218
Name1: MITCHELL, R BERKLEY III
Account Number: 155904751
Address 1: 1324 RIVER RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: PINE HALL, NC 27042
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-87-0560
Name1: NEAL, GARY WAYNE
Account Number: 4977
Identify Page 6 of 8
Address 1: 4477 PINE HALL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6993-00-13-0655
Name1: NEAL, LATIMER BRIGGS III;NEAL, DAVID LINDSAY;NEAL, LOFTIN MARTIN;NEAL, CHARLES
ALLAN;NEAL, LATIMER BRIGGS IV;NEAL, NICHOLE SUZANNE WEST;NEAL, KEITH JARVIS;NEAL, SHELL[
JANE;NEAL, GARY PRESTON
Account Number: 156017290
Address 1: PO BOX 3505
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: KILL DEVIL HILLS, NC 27948
R Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-77-9320
Name1: NEAL, MARGIE
Account Number: 21504
Address 1: 4497 PINE HALL ROAD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6973-00-73-4188
Name1: NIFONG, NORMAN L
Account Number: 155893302
Address 1: 1220 SAURA FARM RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
Show Full Description
Pin: 6982-00-79-2781
Name1: PARIS, COREY R;PARIS, JENNA R
Account Number: 156032613
Address 1: 2832 PINE HALL RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: BELEWS CREEK, NC 27009
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-76-5548
Name1: PARRISH, CLARENCE NELSON
Account Number: 156012605
Address 1: 1510 GREENVIEW DR
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: KERNERSVILLE, NC 27284
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6971-00-64-6606
Name1: STEWART, WILLIAM
Account Number: 61776
Address 1: C/O WILLIAM STUART
Address 2: 8050 OLD PINE HALL RD
City,State,Zip: BELEWS CREEK, NC 27009
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6983-00-21-7894
Name1: THOMAS, JOHN C;THOMAS, BARBARA T
Account Number: 29559
Address 1: 333 C EAST MONTCASTLE DR
Identify Page 7 of 8
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: GREENSBORO, NC 27406
Show Full Description
Pin: 6982-00-06-5073
Name1: WESTMORELAND, DAN T;WESTMORELAND, KAREN A
Account Number: 156008933
Address 1: 1413 MIDDLETON LOOP RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: WALNUT COVE, NC 27052
0 Show Full Description
Pin: 6982-00-79-8715
Name1: WITHERS CHAPELS CHURCH
Account Number: 19182
Address 1: PO BOX 101
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: PINE HALL, NC 27042
Show Full Description
Pin: 6981-00-55-2043
Name1: WOODY, GRACIE DAVIS
Account Number: 58168
Address 1: 7804 CRAIG RD
Address 2:
City,State,Zip: BELEWS CREEK, NC 27009
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6983-00-23-3359
Name1:
Account Number:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City,State,Zip:
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6992-00-40-9566
Name1:
Account Number:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City,State,Zip:
Q Show Full Descri tp ion
Pin: 6992-00-41-7426
Name1:
Account Number:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City,State,Zip:
Q Show Full Description
Pin: 6993-09-06-6637
Name1:
Account Number:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City,State,Zip:
Identify
® Show Full Description
Page 8 of 8
Pin: 6992-00-43-6567
Name1:
Account Number:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City,State,Zip:
0 Show Full Description
Click on the map to identify another object in Parcels.
BLOCK 25
LIST OF OTHER CERTIFICATIONS OR APPROVALS/DENIALS RECEIVED
FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL AGENCIES FOR WORK
DESCRIBED IN THIS APPLICATION
Permit list to support IP Application
Agency Type of Permit Date Applied Date Permit Granted
NCDENR - Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section Site Suitability (Permit Amendment to Existing Permit No. 8504) Anticipated June, 2011 Anticipated 1st Quarter 2012
NCDENR - Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section Permit to Construct (Permit Amendment to Existing Permit No. 8504) Anticipated 2nd Quarter 2012 Anticipated 2nd Quarter 2012
NCDENR - Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section Permit to Operate (Permit Amendment to Existing Permit No. 8504) Anticipated 4th Quarter 2012 Anticipated 1st Quarter 2013
NCDENR - Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section NPDES Erosion and Sediment Control Permit NCG010000 Anticipated 2nd Quarter 2012 Anticipated 2nd Quarter 2012
APPENDIX II
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
rr?
1 Young scrub pine-dominated habitat typical within
the upland portions of the Project areas.
Area with deciduous canopy and steep topography
Taken by: DDH
Checked by: DP
- = &ME
Date Taken: 11.11.2010 1 t
View within the young scrub-pine habitat.
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Proposed Craig Rd Landfill Expansion Area
Belews Creek Steam Station
Stokes County, North Carolina
Project No.: 1356-10-041 Photo Page 1
2 Lespedeza ground cover typical within the non-
wooded portions of the Project areas.
Taken by: DDH SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
M E Proposed Craig Rd Landfill Expansion Area
Checked by: DP Belews Creek Steam Station
Stokes County, North Carolina
Date Taken: 11.11.2010
Project No.: 1356-10-041 Photo Page 2
Stream SC8 (perennial RPW).
6 Forested Wetland WC3.
Forested Wetland WC4.
Taken by: DDH SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
M E Proposed Craig Rd Landfill Expansion Area
Checked by: DP Belews Creek Steam Station
Stokes County, North Carolina
Date Taken: 11.11.2010
Project No.: 1356-10-041 Photo Page 3
17 Stream SC10 (perennial RPW).
14 Forested Wetland WC2.
APPENDIX III
ESTIMATE OF LAND AREA NEEDED
rr?
&ME JOB NO. 1356-10-041
SHEET NO. 1 /6
DATE 05125/2011
JOB NAME Duke Energy - Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion COMPUTED BY CHR
SUBJECT Alternatives Analysis - Landfill Footprint Size Estimate CHECKED BY 1
`!` ?,• ? t
COMPUTATIONS BY: Signature ( .1.0i,+•, ? Daterr= - "
Name Cedric Ruhl. P.E.
Title Promeet Engineer
ASSUMPTIONS Signature - ?- L Date i
AND PROCEDURES
CHECKED BY: Name Kenneth Daly, P,E,
Title Senior Proieet Engineer
COMPUTATIONS Signature _ Date
CHECKED BY:
Name Kyle Baucom, E.I.
I itlc Staff Professional
SENIOR REVIEWED Si nature Date
BY:
Name Jason Reeves, P.E.
Title Senior Proieet Engineer
REVIEW NOTES 1 COMMENTS:
ME Joe NO. 1366-10-041
SHEET No. 2/6
DATE 05/25/2011
J08 NAME _Duke Energy - Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion compuTED BY ?C//HR
SUBJECT .Alternatives Analysis - Landfill Footprint Size Estimate CHECKED BY ]SP-
OBJECTIVE:
Duke Energy anticipates constructing an expansion for the Craig Road Landfill for its Belews Creek Steam
Station facility in Stokes County, North Carolina. As part of the stream and wetland permitting process, several
waste disposal alternatives were considered. One alternative is to acquire property for landfill construction.
This calculation estimates the required property area, given an assumed airspace volume.
METHOD:
For the purposes of this calculation, the proposed landfill facility will be assumed to be a pyramid shape with a
minimum required top deck area of 2 acres.
CALCULATIONS:
1. Estimate the total anticipated required airspace volume
The proposed landfill expansion will have a gross capacity of approximately 21,500,000 cubic yards. For the
purposes of this calculation, it was assumed that property acquisition would accommodate a landfill of similar
capacity.
2. Define geometric volume relationships
For the purposes of this calculation, the proposed landfill facility is assumed to be a pyramid shape with a
minimum required top deck area of 2 acres, as shown in the following figure.
&ME
JOB NAME Duke Energy - Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion
SUBJECT Alternatives Analysis - Landfill Footprint Size Estimate
f
Hi
P1. sm -HTZ-
P^ P2 T
SECTION VIEW
PI
Figure 1: Landfill Geometry
General geometric relationships, assuming a square pyramid, are stated below.
V = 113BH
P=P'
P=2ZH
Where:
V = volume of a pyramid;
B = base area of a pyramid;
H = height of a pyramid;
P = length of one side of the base of a pyramid; and
Z = side slope of a pyramid, i.e. "Z"H:1 V.
Jas NO. 1356-10-041
SHEET NO. 316
DATE 0512512011
COMPUTED BY CHR
CHECKED BY _ K9
Equation 1
Equation 2
Equation 3
PLAN VIEW
ME JOB NO. 1356-10-041
SHEET NO. 4/6
DATE 0 512 512 0 1 1
JOBNAME Duke Energy - Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion coMPUTED BY ?CiHR
SUBJECT Alternatives Analysis - Landfill Footprint Size Estimate CHECKED BY
Assuming that the landfill requires a flat deck, the effective volume of the landfill can be calculated with the
following equation.
^ V,.,,, - V:,,P =113B<<,fur H,.., -1 / 3 Bf p Ht,,r
Equation 4
From the relationships shown in Figure 1 and Equation 2, Equation 4 can be re-written as follows.
Veffec.,,ve = 113B,o,u,hro,a, -113B,,,nh,,,, -113(P2 )2 (H, + H2)-113(P, )2 (H,) Equation 5
Substituting Equation 3 into Equation 5, Equation 5 can be re-written as follows.
vlm ffl ire =113[2Z(H, + H2 }]2 (H, + Hz) -113(2ZH, )2 (H,) Equation 6
Assuming a 2-acre minimum top area (approximately 300 feet by 300 feet square), P1 = 300 feet and, from
Equation 3, Hi becomes 15012 feet. Equation 6 can be re-written as follows.
Vejje1,,Ve =113{300 + 2ZH2 }2 {15012 + Hz) - (4,500,00012) Equation 7
3. Calculate the anticipated required limit of waste dimensions
The effective volume as calculated by Equation 7 must be greater than the total anticipated required airspace
volume. The anticipated required limit of waste dimensions are calculated in the fallowing table.
TABLE 1: REQUIRED LIMIT OF WASTE DIMENSION S
Total Required Total Required Limit of Limit of Limit of Limit of Limit of
Airspace Volume Airspace Volume Side Slope Waste Waste Base Waste Waste Waste
{Z} Height Width Base Area Base Area Volume Check
(ZHAV) {1-12} {P} {B} {B} V
SCYI (ft3) feet ft ftx ac c
21,500,040 580,500,000 3.0 315 2,190 4,796,100 110.10 21,556,500 OK
ME
JOB NAME Duke Energy - Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion
SUBJECT Alternatives Analysis - Landfill Footprint Size Estimate
4. Calculate the anticipated required landfill dimensions
JOB No. 1356-10-041
SHEET NO. 5/6
DATE 05/25/2011
COMPUTED BY CHR
CHECKED BY KB
Assume a one-hundred foot offset from the limit of waste dimensions as calculated in Step 5 for construction of
ancillary facilities such as perimeter berms and stormwater conveyance features. The anticipated required
landfill dimensions are calculated in the following table.
TABLE 2: REQUIRED LAN DFILL DIME NSIONS
Limit of
Waste Base Landfill Base Landfill Landfill
Width Width Base Area Base Area
(l')
ft (ft) (ft) (ac)
2,190 2,390 5,712,100 131.13
5. Calculate the anticipated required borrow area dimensions
Soil will be needed during landfill construction, operation, and closure. Assuming an average borrow area
depth of 20 feet, the anticipated required borrow area dimensions are calculated in the following table.
TABLE 3: REQUIRED BORROW AREA DIMENSIONS
Limit of Soil for Assumed Borrow Borrow
Waste Facility Landfill Soil for Soil for Total Soil Borrow Area Area

Base Area Base Area
Construction Operations Closure Demand
Area Depth
Footprint
Footprint
(ac) (ac) (cy) tcya (Cy) (cy) (feet) ft2 (ac)
110.10 131.13 2,115,593 2,150,000 532,900 4,798,493 20 6,477,965 148.71
For the purposes of this calculation, soil required for landfill construction was assumed to be an average of 10
feet over the facility area, soil for operations was assumed to be 10 percent of the airspace volume (Step 1), and
soil for closure was assumed to be an average of 3 feet over the landfill area.
6. Calculate the anticipated required facility footprint
The required facility footprint is calculated by adding the footprints calculated in Steps 4 and 5, as shown in the
following table.
M E
JOB NAME Duke Energy - Belews Creek Steam Station Craig Road Landfill Expansion
SUBJECT Alternatives Analysis - Landfill Footprint Size Estimate
TABLE 4: REQUIRED FACILITY FOOTPRINT
Required
Landfill Base Borrow Area Facility
Area Footprint Footprint
(ac) (ac]
ac
131.13 148.71 279.85
7. Calculate the anticipated required property area
JOB NO. 1356-10-041
SHEET NO. 616
DATE 05125/2011
COMPUTED BY CJHR
CHECKED BY 1 PJ
Assume a one-hundred foot buffer is required between the landfill facility as calculated in Step 6 and adjacent
property boundaries. The anticipated required contiguous property area is calculated in the following table.
TABLES: REQUIRED PRO PERTY AREA
Required
Facility Base Required
Property
Property
Facility Width Property Base Area Base Area
Footprint (ft) Base Width (mil (ac)
fac)
279.85 3,491 3,691 13,626,636 312.62
CONCLUSIONS:
Based on the assumptions described in this calculation, a contiguous property area of approximately 315 acres
will be required to construct a landfill facility and borrow area with an approximate airspace equal to the
proposed landfill configuration.
APPENDIX IV
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
rr?
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
December 6, 2010
Mr. Darrin M. Peine
Mr. David Homans
Mr. Joey Lawler
S&ME, Inc.
9751 Southern Pine Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28273-5560
Dear Mr. Peine, Mr. Homans, and Mr. Lawler:
Subject: Site Assessment for Expansion of the Belews Creek Steam Station Industrial Landfills,
Stokes County, North Carolina (S&ME Project Nos. 1356-10-041 and 1356-10-042)
In your letter dated November 19, 2010 (received November 26, 2010), you requested our
comments about the subject project. We have reviewed the information you presented and are
providing the following comments in accordance with the provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act; the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.
661-667e); and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543) (Act).
Duke Energy is currently proposing two landfill expansion projects (Craig Road ash landfill
expansion and a flue gas desulfurization (FGD) landfill expansion, collectively "Project") located
at its Belews Creek Steam Station (BCSS) facility in Stokes County, North Carolina. The Craig
Road expansion project area is about a 140-acre tract located east of Pine Hall Road, west of
Craig Road, and north of the Stokes and Forsyth County boundary. The FGD expansion project
area is on about 65-acres located just northeast of the Craig Road expansion project area. Craig
Road extends north and south roughly between the two project areas.
The proposed Craig Road ash landfill expansion project involves construction of additional
landfill cells for ash byproducts generated at the BCSS and will comprise future development in
five-year operational phases. Similarly, the proposed FGD landfill expansion project involves
construction of additional landfill cells for storage of gypsum generated during the FGD process
and will comprise future development in five-year operational phases. The combined proposed
projects entail the clearing of about 200 acres of disturbed and undisturbed (hardwood and pine)
forested areas.
Endangered Species. According to our records and a review of the information provided, no
federally listed species or their habitats occur on the site. However, obligations under section 7
of the Act must be reconsidered if. (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action
that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2) this
action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new
species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the identified action.
Erosion Control and Wetland/Stream Protection. The treatment of storm water leaving the
project area is a concern. We recommend installing and maintaining stringent measures to control
erosion and sediment in order to prevent unnecessary impacts to aquatic resources downstream of
the project site. Disturbed areas should be reseeded with seed mixtures that are beneficial to
wildlife. Fescue-based or other nonnative or exotic invasive species mixtures should be avoided.
Native annual small grains appropriate for the season are preferred and recommended to quickly
stabilize bare soils while native seed mixtures become established. Perimeter erosion-control
devices should be installed prior to any on-the-ground activities. Frequent maintenance of these
devices is critical to their proper function in order to minimize sediment discharge from the project
site.
Please note that though coal fly ash and gypsum are not considered hazardous waste, fly ash does
contain trace elements (nitrate, selenium, cadmium, arsenic) that can be mobilized by water and
cause toxicity to aquatic life and gypsum can significantly alter the acidity/alkalinity and water
hardness of aquatic systems. Therefore, if fly ash and gypsum are to be used as structural fill,
adherence to the requirements outlined in 15A NCAC 13B.0.1700 will be particularly important
because of proximity to water. These requirements include, in part, not placing ash within 50 feet of
wetlands and streams, isolating fill from storm water during filling, keeping fill slopes less than 3:1,
and maintaining the fill area as a nondischarge structure. The separation requirement may not be
met given the stream/wetland fill. Nevertheless, to keep the fill from discharging, an impervious fill
base and cover is recommended. Should nondischarge not be achieved, we recommend that the
discharge be periodically tested for toxic elements, and a remediation plan should be executed in a
timely manner should standards be exceeded. This would be similar to the monitoring that would be
required to ensure compliance with groundwater standards (15A NCAC 2L).
We recommend that any environmental document prepared for this project include the following
(if applicable):
1. A complete analysis and comparison of the available alternatives (the build
and no-build alternatives).
2. A description of the fishery and wildlife resources within existing and
required additional rights-of-way and any areas, such as borrow areas, that
may be affected directly or indirectly by the proposed project.
The acreage and a description of the wetlands that will be filled as a result of
the proposed project. Wetlands affected by the proposed project should be
mapped in accordance with the Federal Manual for Identifying and
Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. We recommend contacting the
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to determine the need for a
Section 404 Clean Water Act permit. Avoiding and minimizing wetland
impacts is a part of the Corps' permitting process, and we will consider other
potential alternatives in the review of any permits.
4. The extent (linear feet as well as discharge) of any water courses that will be
impacted as a result of the proposed project. A description of any streams
should include the classification (Rosgen 1995, 1996) and a description of the
biotic resources.
The acreage of upland habitat, by cover type, that will be eliminated because
of the proposed project.
6. A description of all expected secondary and cumulative environmental
impacts associated with this proposed work.
7. A discussion about the extent to which the project will result in the loss,
degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife habitat from direct construction
impacts and from secondary development impacts.
Mitigation measures that will be employed to avoid, eliminate, reduce, or
compensate for habitat value losses (wetland, riverine, and upland) associated
with any phase of the proposed project.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. If we can be of assistance or if you
have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Allen Ratzlaff of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 229. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference
our Log Number 4-2-11-061.
cc:
Mr. Ron Linville, Western Piedmont Region Reviewer, North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, 3855 Idlewild Road, Kernersville, NC 27284-9180
Mr. Tom Walker, Chief, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208, Asheville, NC 28801-5006
A N X-; WA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Office of Conservation, Planning, & Community Affairs
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor Linda Pearsall, Director
November 24, 2010
Mr. Darren M. Peine
S&ME, Inc.
9751 Southern Pine Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273-5560
Dee Freeman, Secretary
Subject: Proposed Landfill Expansions - Duke Energy - Belews Creek Steam Station; Stokes County
S&ME Project Nos. 1356-10-041 and 1356-10-042
Dear Mr. Peine:
The Natural Heritage Program has no record of significant natural communities, significant natural
heritage areas, or conservation/managed areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area. Our maps
show a record, from 1958, of the State Significantly Rare creeping sunrose (Crocantheniuni propingicum)
from "1.5 miles north of Belews Creels". Though our mapped locale places the rare plant location inside
the boundary of the southwestern project site, the 1958 date of the record has caused us to consider the
plant site to be historical. Thus, because of the date and vague location of the record, we do not feel that
the project will impact this species.
You may wish to check the Natural Heritage Program database website at www.ncnhp.org for a listing of
rare plants and animals and significant natural communities in the county and on the quad map. Our
Program also has a new website that allows users to obtain information on element occurrences and
significant natural heritage areas within two miles of a given location:
<http://nhpweb.enr.state.nc.us/nhis/public/ginap75_main.phtml>. The user name is "public" and the
password is "heritage". You may want to click "Help" for more infonnation.
NC OneMap now provides digital Natural Heritage data online for free. This service provides site
specific information on GIS layers with Natural Heritage Program rare species occurrences and
Significant Natural Heritage Areas. The NC OneMap website provides Element Occurrence (EO) ID
numbers (instead of species naive), and the data user is then encouraged to contact the Natural Heritage
Program for detailed information. This service allows the user to quickly and efficiently get site specific
NIP data without visiting the NHP workroom or waiting for the Information Request to be answered by
NIP staff. For more infonnation about data formats and access, visit <www.nconemap.com>, then click
on "FTP Data Download", and then "nheo.zip" [to the right of "Natural Heritage Element Occurrences"]
You may also e-mail NC OneMap at <dataq((?ncmail.net> for more information.
Please do not hesitate'to contact me at 919-715-8697 if you have questions or need further information.
Sincerely,
Harry E. LeGrand, Jr., Zoologist
LT??u a1 Herita e Pro One
1601 Mal) Service 6entet weigh, North Carolina 27699-1601 NofthCarohna
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] Internet: www.oneNCNaturally.org Naturally
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled \ 10% Post Consumer Paper Natural Resources Planning and Conservation
STA7Z
?? NAY f0.
L w??
?? IL Rf(??y
Q??M V1?.'
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
Linda A. Carlisle, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
December 20, 2010
Damn Peine
S&ME, Inc.
9751 Southern Pine Boulevard
Charlotte, NC 28273-5560
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
Re: Belews Creek Stearn Station Landfill Expansion, S&ME 1356-10-041 & 1356-10-042, Stokes County,
ER 10-2158
Dear Mr. Peine:
Thank you for your letter of November 17, 2010, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
}
Peter Sandbeck
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599
APPENDIX V
MITIGATION PROPOSAL - NCEEP
rr?
COS stem
.:.1.1
PROGRAM
April 12, 2011
Tom Leap
Duke Energy
EC10cIPO Box 1006
Charlotte, NC 28201-1006 Expiration of Acceptance: January 12, 2012
Project: Craig Road Landfill Expansion County: Stokes
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to accept
payment for impacts associated with the above referenced project. Please note that this decision does not assure that the payment will
be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these
agencies to determine if navment to the NCEEP will be anoroved. You must also comDly with all other state, federal or local
This acceptance is valid for nine months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work, The amount of the In
Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are summarized in the following
table.
River
Basin CU
Location Stream (feet) Wetlands (acres) Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.) Buffer 11
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold Cool Warm Riparian Non-Riparian Coastal Marsh
Impact Roanoke 03010103 0 0 6,080 0.30 0 0 0 0
Credits Roanoke 03010103 0 0 Up to
12,160 Up to
0.60 0 0 0 0
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. If the regulatory agencies require
mitigation credits greater than indicated above, and the applicant wants NCEEP to be responsible for the additional mitigation, the
applicant will need to submit a mitigation request to NCEEP for approval prior to permit issuance. The mitigation will be performed
in accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In-Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
Sincerely, ` ??-
?? V
William Gilmore, PE
Director
cc: Ian McMillan, NCDWQ Wetlands/401 Unit
JohnThomas, USACE-Raleigh
Sue Homewood, NCDWQ- Winston-Salem
Darrin Peine, agent
File
R"tor4Kg... 'E ... Protect, our state,
TA
RUDFW
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net
APPENDIX VI
TABLES
Jr?-
rr?
Table 1- Proposed Impacts
Table 2 - Alternatives Analysis Comparison
Table 3 - Alternatives Analysis Comparative Cost
Estimates
Table 1 - Proposed Impacts
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit
Proposed Craig Road Landfill Expansion
Duke Energy - Belews Creek Steam Station
S&ME Project No. 1356-10-041
Wetland ID Classification Grading/Fill Placement Impact ac
WC1 Forested 0.02
WC2 Forested 0.14
WC3 Forested 0.05
WC4 Forested 0.06
Stream ID Classification Grading/Fill Placement Impact (in
SC1 Perennial / Seasonal 699
SC2 Perennial / Seasonal 0
SC3 Seasonal 0
SC4 Perennial 0
SC5 Perennial 1894
SC6 Seasonal 29
SC7 Perennial 864
SC8 Perennial 768
SC9 Perennial 243
SC10 Perennial 95
Table 2 - Alternatives Analysis Comparison
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit
Proposed Craig Road Landfill Expansion
Duke Energy - Belews Creek Steam Station
S&ME Project No. 1356-10-041
Alternative Alternative Estimated Estimated Haul Distance Estimated Estimated Estimated Anticipated Anticipated Estimated Advantages Disadvantages Is the Project Alternative Comments and Assumptions
ID Description Limit of Facility Area (miles) Gross Cost Cost per Waste Lifetime Cost per Year Need Met ? Selection
Waste Area (acres) Volume Cubic Yard of Disposal (years)2 of Life Order
(acres) (cubic yards) Airspace Rates
c I year)
A Do Nothing N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A NIA N/A No cost; no environmental Does not provide for future No N/A Not practical
impact station operations
Stream ! No additional stream/wetland In efficient land use; moderate Requires 2 separate landfill
Wetland impacts; on current Duke costs; additional development cells within the proposed
B Avoidance 80 98 1.3 5,709,000 $47,970,000 $8.40 900,000 6.3 $ 7,562,000 property; design information is or expansion required to meet Partially 2 expansion area
established need
Proposed Most cost effective option; Stream and wetland impacts Full land use within the
Configuration most efficient land use; on required proposed expansion area
C 123 147 1.3 21
230
000 $77
642
000 $3.66 900
000 23.6 $ 3
291
000 current Duke property; design Yes 1
,
, ,
, , ,
, information is established;
closest to meeting project
need
Develop Other On current Duke property Possible stream/wetland Based on simplifying
Area On impacts; moderate costs; assumption of a square landfill
D-A Property - No. 100 120 1.3 7,118,000 $59,813,000 $8.40 900,000 7.9 $ 7,563,000 design information is not Partially 3 footprint; east of proposed
4 established; additional expansion area
development or expansion
re uired to meet need
Develop Other On current Duke property; Possible stream/wetland Based on simplifying
Area On design information is impacts; moderate costs; assumption of a square landfill
D-B Property - No. 60 76 0.5 4,271,000 $35,034,000 $8.20 900,000 4.7 $ 7,382,000 established additional development or Partially 3 footprint; this is adjacent to the
5 expansion required to meet existing FGD landfill
need
Develop Off Could conceivably meet Possible stream/wetland Based on simplifying
Site Property project needs; possible stream impacts; off-site hauling/traffic; assumption of a square landfill
and wetland avoidance high costs; off-site location footprint
E 110 131 20.0 21,230,000 $169,400,000 $7.98 900,000 23.6 $ 7,181,000 requires new infrastructure; Yes 4
public perception and
permitting obstacles
Private Landfill No new environmental impact Cost prohibitive; off-site City of Winston Salem, Hanes
F N/A N/A 21.0 9
000
000 $335
250
000 $37.25 900
000 10.0 $ 33
525
000 hauling/traffic; does not meet No 5 Mill Road MSW Landfill
,
, ,
, , ,
, need; consumes regional
MSW ca acit
1. Assumes 100 foot offset from limit of waste, does not include borrow area
2. Assumes waste generation of 867,000 cubic yards per year
3. Estimated numbers exceed 1,000 are rounded to the nearest 1,000
Table 3 - Alternatives Analysis - Comparative Cost EstimateE
Application for Section 404 Individual Permit
Proposed Craig Road Landfill Expansion
Duke Energy - Belews Creek Steam Station
SWE Project No. 1356-10-041
Pro ert Acquisi tion Engineering & Construction Hauling Other Development Costs Closure Costs
Alternative Alternative Limit of
Waste Are Property Property
Property
Costs per
Engineering Haul
Hauled
Haul Unit Cost Add'I
Tipping Fees
Closure Cost
Total Cost
ID Description
(acres) 1;tL Cost per
z
Cost s
Acre
Cost Distance a
Tonnage
(tonlmile) Haul Cost Infrastructure
perTon5 Tipping Fees
per Acre Closure Cost
Acre (miles) Cost
A Do Nothing N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A $0.25 N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A
Stream /
B Wetland 80 N/A N/A N/A $400,000 $32,080,000 1.30 5,709,000 $0.25 $1,855,425 N/A N/A N/A $175,000 $14,035,000 $47,970,425
Avoidance
C Proposed 123 N/A N/A N/A $400
000 $49
212
000 1.30 21
230
000 $0.25 $6
899
750 N/A N/A N/A $175
000 $21
530
250 $77
642
000
Conf uration , ,
, ,
, ,
, , ,
, ,
,
Develop Other
D-A Area On 100 N/A N/A N/A $400,000 $40,000,000 1.30 7,118,000 $0.25 $2,313,350 N/A N/A N/A $175,000 $17,500,000 $59,813,350
Pro ert - No. 4
Develop Other
D-13 Area On 60 N/A N/A N/A $400,000 $24,000,000 0.50 4,271,000 $0.25 $533,875 N/A N/A N/A $175,000 $10,500,000 $35,033,875
Pro ert - No. 5
E Develop Off Site 110 313 $5
000 $1
565
000 $400
000 $44
000
000 20.00 21
230
000 $0.25 $106
150
000 $10
000
000 N/A N/A $175
000 $19
250
000 $169
400
000
Property , ,
, , ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, , ,
, ,
,
F Private Landfill N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 21.00 9,000,000 $0.25 $47,250,000 N/A $32 $288,000,000 N/A N/A $335 250 000
1. Property area is based on landfill footprint calculation.
2. Based on internet search of property values conducted on May 18, 2011.
3. Based on historic costs for the Craig Road Landfill Phase 1 completed in 2006.
4. Based on estimated gross volume, assumed waste generation of 867,000 cubic yards per year, and an average unit weight of 1 ton per cubic yard.
5. City of Winston-Salem Hanes Mill Road Landfill - High Volume Tipping Fee.
6. Cost estimates are provided for relative comparison of alternatives only.