20191410 Ver 1_PCN Form Submission_20191011

DWR
MOM— of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
September 29, 2018 Ver 3
21nitial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
G Yes r No
Oiange only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned
20191410
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required
r Fee received
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office*
Fayetteville Regional Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
RLNG Pipeline Project
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Jason Brown
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
10/11/2019
Nearest Body of Water
Gum Swamp
Basin
Lumber
Water Classification
C
Site Coordinates
Version# *
1
What amout is owed?*
r $240.00
r $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Chad Turlington:eads\octurlington
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
Latitude: Longitude:
34.764534-79.272925
FA. Processing Information U
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Robeson
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
* Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
rJ Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)

1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual Permit
12 - Utility Lines
le. Is this notification solelyfor the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
r 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
r Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
O Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
W Owner W Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?
r' Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Piedmont Natural Gas Co Inc
2b. Deed book and page no.:
01695/0485
2c. Responsible party:
2d. Address
Street Address
PO Box 33068
Address Line 2
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28233
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
Jason. [e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Robyn Susemihl
State / Ffovinm / Pagion
North Carolina
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
r Yes r No
r Yes r No

3b. Business Name:
Burns & McDonnell
3c.Address
Street Address
3650 Mansell Road
Address Line 2
Suite 300
City
Alpharetta
Fbstal / Zip Cade
30022
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(d appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality / town:
Wakulla
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
See attached parcel map
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Pipeline intersects Old Maxton Highway (Co. Rd. 1303)
Address Line 2
City
Wakulla
Rstal / Zip Code
28377
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Gum Swamp
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
C
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Lumber
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030402030302
4. Project Description and History
State / Rwinoe / Ragion
Georgia
Country
USA
3e. Fax Number:
2b. Property size:
State / Rwince / Ragion
North Carolina (Robeson County)
Country
U.S.A
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The epsting land use within the proposed pipeline corridor includes agricultural land on the west side of the corridor and forested uplands and palustrine forested wetlands (Gum
Swamp and Jordan Swamp) along the east side of the corridor. Elevations along the pipeline corridor range from approArnately 185 - 210 feet above mean sea level.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes IT No r Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
Topo_8.5x11 _RLNG_PCNfigure_20191008_REV.pdf
1.11 MB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
NRCS_8.5x11_Soils_RLNG_PCNFigure_20190827.pdf 2.38MB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
ApproArnately 209 acres of wetlands were evaluated within the survey area
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:

There were approximately 3,600 linear feet of stream evaluated within the survey area
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The purpose of the project is to meet the growing demand of Piedmont's customers, specifically during peak seasons, by providing a redundant and modernized source of gas delivered
into Piedmont's new Robeson LNG Peaking Facility.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The RLNG Pipeline Project includes the construction and operation of two (2) new natural gas pipelines: Line 456 (8-inch) and Line 457 (24-inch). The two new pipelines will be
collocated along a 4-mile-long corridor. The beginning and ending coordinates are as follows: Beginning: (34.743051 °,-79.282723°) and Ending: (34.797105°,-79.277578°). The two
lines will be installed in a parallel manner beginning at the new Robeson LNG Peak Shaving Facility, located adjacent to the north side of North Carolina Highway 71, approximately five
miles west of Red Springs, and ending at a connection with PNG's existing high-pressure distribution pipeline to the south (just north of Missouri Road).
A 1.3-acre meter station will be constructed at the new Robeson LNG Peach Shaving Facility, and a 0.5-acre tap station will be constructed at the tie in location to PNG's existing
pipeline just north of Missouri Road. Both stations will be graveled and fenced in. An approximately 1,200-foot long and 20-foot wide permanent gravel access road will be constructed
along an existing gravel/dirt road to the tap station.
The pipelines will be installed using conventional open cut construction in most areas; however, the Gum Swamp crossing will be installed using horizontal directional drilling (HDD)
method. Conventional open cut construction of the two lines will require a 130-foot-wide to 70-foot-wide construction corridor. Since the lines will be co -located within one corridor, the
permanent operational width will be 70-feet-wide. Construction will involve the use of common heavy construction equipment (e.g. excavators, dozers, scrapers, side booms) and will be
in compliance with all necessary permits and regulatory conditions. The longer (1,781 liner feet) crossing of Gum Swamp will be an HDD; however, due to Piedmont's Integrity
Management Guidelines, the forested wetland on the surface wil be cleared with roots left in place, resulting in a conversion of PFO to PEM wetlands along a 70-foot-wide corridor. HDD
construction does not require trenching as impacts are limited to the entry and exit points for the HDD. The shorter crossings of Gum Swamp Will be open cut.
Construction and operation of the Project will result in the permanent conversion of approximately 3.5 acres of PFO wetlands to PEM wetlands. There will be no net loss of wetlands as a
result of the Project. There will be relatively minor, short-term direct impact on about 0.1 acre of surface water during construction. Stream beds and banks will be returned to pre -
construction conditions once the pipelines have been installed. Indirect impacts to waters should be minimal as Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be installed for the purposes of
erosion and sediment controls. BMPs will be checked regularly to confirm they are functioning as designed and expected.
Piedmont plans to begin construction in March 2020; and, it's anticipated in-service date is September 2020.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
Sa. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r Yes r No O Unknown
Comments:
Delineations occurred the week of March 11, 2019.
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r Yes
Jeff Harbour
ESI
Kevin Murphrey & Katie Talavera both with ESI
r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No.
FD. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
Is. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
W Wetlands W Streams -tributaries W Buffers
r Open Waters r Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
2a. Site #"(?) 2al Reason (?) 2b. Impact type"(?) 2c. Type of W. 2d. W. name 2e. Forested 2f. Type of 2g. Impact
Jurisdiction *(?) area*

Pipel
Conversion to PEM HDD
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WHA
Yes
Both
2.852
Corridor
tree clearing
(acres)
Pipeline
Corridor
Conversion to PEM
open cut construction
P
tttrdwoocl For
WHENVXA
Yes
Both
0.683
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact 2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.000 3.535
2g. Total Wetland Impact
3.535
2h. Comments:
Al wetland impacts will occur within the permanent operational corridor; however, there will be no net loss of wetlands. These PFO wetlands will all be
permanently converted to PEM.
3. Stream Impacts
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.lmpact type *
3c. Type of impact *
3d. S. name*
3e. Stream Type *
3f. Type of
3g. S. width *
3h. Impact
❑
(?)
Jurisdiction*
length*
S1
Pipeline Construction
Temporary
Excavation
THA-Ditch
Jurisdictional Ditch
Corps
7
62
Average (feet)
(linear feet)
32
Pipeline Construction
Temporary
Excavation
THC-Ditch
Intermittent
Corps
7
249
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S3
Pipeline Construction
Temporary
Excavation
THD-Ditch
Jurisdictional Ditch
Corps
7
125
Average (feet)
(linear feet)
S4
Pipeline Construction
P
Tem ora
P rY
Excavation
TXA-Ditch
Jurisdictional Ditch
Corps7
125
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
SS
Pipeline Construction
Temporary
Excavation
SXA-Stream
Intermittent
Corps
3
145
Average (feet)
(linear feet)
31. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
2,184
31. Total permanent stream impacts: 3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
0 706
31. Total stream and ditch impacts:
706
3j. Comments:
Streams will be impacted where the pipeline is installed using open cut construction method. Once the pipe is in place and the trench is backfilled, the
channel, stream bed, and banks will be restored to pre -construction conditions. No permanent impacts will occur.
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWR)
6a. Project is in which protect basin(s)?
Check all that apply.
r Neuse r Tar -Pamlico
r Catawba r Randleman
r Goose Creek r- Jordan Lake
V Other Lumber
6b. Impact Type
6c. Per or Temp
6d. Stream name
6e. Buffer mitigation required?
6f. Zone 1 impact
6g. Zone 2 impact
No protected basin impacts
T
not applicable
No
0
0
6h. Total buffer impacts:
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Temporary impacts: 0.00 0.00
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Permanent impacts: 0.00 0.00
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total combined buffer impacts: 0.00 0.00
6i. Comments:

Supporting Documentation
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Wetlands, streams and forested areas were avoided to the greatest extent by placing a 100' buffer from wetlands and siting the pipeline along the
eastern most section of agricultural fields where feasible. The largest wetland crossing will use HDD, and the streams will be crossed at a 90-degree
angle to help minimize impacts on surface waters. In other areas where wetlands will be crossed using open cut construction, PING reduced the overall
width its corridor from 130 feet down to 70 feet.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
For the largest wetland crossing, the pipelines will be installed using HDD, which means the permanent pipeline easement will not require earth work.
Tree clearing will be required as part of PNG's Integrity Management Plan; however stumps and root systems will remain in place.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
r Yes r No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
There will be no net loss of wetlands as a result of this Project. Only a conversion from PFO to PEM will occur.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r No
If no, explain why:
There are no protected buffers, protected riparian zones, or protected watersheds within the Project area.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater
program?
r Yes r No
3. Stormwater Requirements
3a. Select whether a completed stormwater management plan (SMP) is included for review and approval or if calculations are provided to document the project will not cause
degradation of downstream surface waters.*
r Stormwater Management r Antidegradation
Plan Calculations
3b. Stormwater Management Plan
3c. Antidegradation Calculations
Comments:
Only clearing operations are proposed in the wetlands with no or limited grubbing; therefore ground coverage will not change. No permanent development or new impervious surfaces
are proposed within wetlands. Impacts to post construction velocity and volume will be negligible.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)

2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15ANCAC 2B .0200)? *
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r- Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r No r N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?
f Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r- No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r- Yes r No
5f. Will you cut anytrees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes (- No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r- Yes r No
Sh. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r Yes r No
r- Unknown
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r- Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Consultation Documentation Upload
RLNG_USF WS_SelfCertify. pdf 1.97 MB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r- Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
PNG performed a Phase I Cultural Resources Site Investigation on over 90 percent of the project area. Although new artifacts were discovered, there
were no artifacts/sites were eligible for listing on the NRHP. The SHPO is currently reviewing PNG's Phase I Cultural Resources Survey Report for the
project. The report can be provided to the USACE upon request. A copy of any consultation or concurrence from SHPO will be forwarded to the
USACE once it is available.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*

r Yes
r No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
There will be no permanent changes to elevations within the floodplain. There will be no permanent aboveground structures or facilities constructed
within the floodplain.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA Floodplain mapper tool
Miscellaneous u
Comments
RLNG Parcel Map showing property owners is attached
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
RLNG Parcel Map.pdf 664.67KB
Signature u
*
W By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
. I agree that submission of this PCN form is a 'transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
. I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
. I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Robyn S. Susemihl
Signature
fh-�14 5 50-38-4 /
Date
10/11/2019

PIEDMONT NATURAL GAS COMPANY - AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION: RLNG Pipeline Project
LOT NO.
PLAN NO. PARCEL ID:
STREET ADDRESS: Pipeline corridor intersects Old Maxton Highway (Robeson County)
Please print:
Property Owner: Piedmont Natural Gas (holder of easement)
Property Owner: _Jason Brown (Project Manager at Piedmont Natural Gasj
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
Robyn Susemlhl , of
(Contractor / Agent)
Bums & McDonnell
(Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, Issuance and acceptance of
this permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
PO Box 33068, Charlotte, NC 28233
Telephone: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
Jason rown, Otdmont Natural Gas
Robyn Susemlhl, Burns & McDonnell
Date: _ August 29, 2019 Date: Au-qust_29. 2019

J I Rd J I RdLacy Rd
J I RdPreston RdN NC-71
H
W
Y
L
e
c
t
o
r
D
r
S
t
a
r
l
i
n
g

D
rGo
v
e
r
n
o
r
M
c
L
e
a
n
R
d
Bu
c
k
R
d Do
c
H
e
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
R
d
Misso
uri
R
dDoc Henderson RdSpringer
D
r
Old R
e
d
S
pri
n
g
s
R
d Preston RdRev B
i
l
l
Rd
Carter R
d
Path: P:\GeoGra\Projects\2018\082\GIS\topo.mxd Date: 4/1/2019 1:40:19 PM
E
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
[phone]
[phone] FAX
Project Location
Robeson County, North Carolina
PNG Lines 456/457
ER18082.00
Apr 2019
EF/KT
Figure:
Project:
Date:
Drwn/Chkd:
www.environmentalservicesinc.com
Di li Th if ti d itd thi fi i f if ti l
1
Lumber River Basin
02,0001,000
Feet
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for
informational purposes only and was not prepared for, and is not
suitable for legal or engineering purposes.This information
presented is not for regulatory review and is intended for use only
by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Source: 2011 National Geographic Society/ESRI, i-cubed
seamless USGS quadrangles (Wakulla and Maxton, NC); Study
Corridor provided by PNG.
Study Corridor
Lay Down Area (previously surveyed)
Pipe Stringing Area
Proposed Lines 456/457
2a|3a
2b|3b
N NC-71 HWY
Governo
rMcL
ean
RdDoc H
ende
r
son
RdRev Bill RdJT
JT
JT
NoA
NoA
NoA
NoA
WaB
NoA
NoA
PoB
Mc
PoB GoAWaBMc
Mc
NoA
LaB
Mc
WaB
Mc
Mc
Mc
PoB
Mc
GoA
NoA
WaB
Mc
GoA
NoB
WaB
Mc Mc
LaB LaB
NoA
NoA
NoA
LaB
PoB
WaB
NoB
Mc W
Ly
WaB
Mc
WaB
Ly
GoA
NoB
Mc
WaB
MaA
WaB
W
Mc
GoA
PoB
BB
Mc
WaB
Ly
NoB
Mc
WaB
WaB
NoA
Ly
Mc
Ly
Mc
WkBNoA
Mc
Mc Ly
Ly
Mc
GoA
WaB
Mc
Mc
GoA
Mc
WkB
Ly
GoA
Mc
WaB
Dn
WkB
NoA
WaBMaB
Ra
WaB
Ru
Ru
Pt
Dn
WaB
Co
Mc
Ra
W
FaB
GoA
Dn
Ra
Mc
WkBLaB PaLy
Path: P:\GeoGra\Projects\2018\082\GIS\soils.mxd Date: 4/1/2019 12:51:34 PM
E
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
[phone]
[phone] FAX
NRCS Soils
Robeson County, North Carolina
PNG Lines 456/457
ER18082.00
Apr 2019
CW/JH
Figure:
Project:
Date:
Drwn/Chkd:
www.environmentalservicesinc.com
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes
2a
Location and Extent is Approximate.
Lumber River Basin
BB
Co
DpA
GoA
JT
Ly
Mc
NoA
NoB
Pa
PoB
Ru
WaB
WkB
Bibb soils
Coxville loam
Duplin sandy loam, 0-2% slopes
Goldsboro loamy sand, 0-2% slopes
Johnston soils
Lynchburg sandy loam
McColl loam
Norfolk loamy sand, 0-2% slopes
Norfolk loamy sand, 2-6% slopes
Pactolus loamy sand
Pocalla loamy sand, 0-3% slopes
Rutlege loamy sand
Wagram loamy sand, 0-6% slopes
Wakulla sand, 0-6% slopes
Soil Mapping Units
0800400
Feet
Study Corridor
Proposed Pipelines
Pipe Stringing Area
Lay Down Area
NRCS Soils Survey
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is
for informational purposes only and was not prepared
for, and is not suitable for legal or engineering
purposes.This information presented is not for
regulatory review and is intended for use only by a
Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Imagery,
CGIA, 2017; NRCS digital Soil Survey of Robeson
County, 2009; Study Corridor provided by PNG.
* Results are considered preliminary and subject to
change absent USACE concurrence.
J I Rd
J I Rd
L
a
c
y

R
d
Spring
e
r
Dr
Katra
i
lLn
Spinks DrPreston RdDoc Henderson
RdBuck RdDocHenderson RdSt
a
r
l
i
n
g

D
rCar
te
r
Rd
Missouri Rd
Old

R
e
d

S
p
r
i
n
g
s

R
d
JT
NoA
NoA
NoB
WaB
WkB
NoA
Ra
Ra
WaB
Ru
Pt
WaB
Ra
FaB
GoA
Dn
Ra
Mc
WkB
LaB
Pa
Ly
WaB
Mc
WaB
WaB
Mc
GoA
GoACo
Ra
Ra
WaC
LaB
NoB
NoA
NoA
WaBGoA
Mc
DpA
WaB
GoA
WaB
WaB
DpA
Mc Mc
Ly
Mc
Dn
DpA
DnLy
BB
Ra Mc
McRa
WaB
NoA
Mc
NoA
Ra
Ra
Mc
Co
Ly
Mc
NoA LaB
DpA
NoA
Dn
Mc
W
GoA
WaB
WaC
Ra
Ra
GoA
NoB
WaB
Mc
WaB
Ra
Pm
NoB
Dn
NoA
GoA
Ra
WaB
WaB
GoA
WaB
GoA
Ra
Ra
DpA
WaB
Mc
GoA
NoA
Ra
DpA
Ly
GoA
GoA
Ra
Ra
WaB
GoA
NoA
NoA
Ly
DpA
GoA
Dn
GoAWaB
Ly
Co
Co
DpANoANoA
Path: P:\GeoGra\Projects\2018\082\GIS\soils.mxd Date: 4/1/2019 12:51:34 PM
E
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
[phone]
[phone] FAX
NRCS Soils
Robeson County, North Carolina
PNG Lines 456/457
ER18082.00
Apr 2019
CW/JH
Figure:
Project:
Date:
Drwn/Chkd:
www.environmentalservicesinc.com
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes
2b
Location and Extent is Approximate.
Lumber River Basin
BB
Co
DpA
GoA
JT
Ly
Mc
NoA
NoB
Pa
PoB
Ru
WaB
WkB
Bibb soils
Coxville loam
Duplin sandy loam, 0-2% slopes
Goldsboro loamy sand, 0-2% slopes
Johnston soils
Lynchburg sandy loam
McColl loam
Norfolk loamy sand, 0-2% slopes
Norfolk loamy sand, 2-6% slopes
Pactolus loamy sand
Pocalla loamy sand, 0-3% slopes
Rutlege loamy sand
Wagram loamy sand, 0-6% slopes
Wakulla sand, 0-6% slopes
Soil Mapping Units
0800400
Feet
Study Corridor
Proposed Pipelines
Pipe Stringing Area
Lay Down Area
NRCS Soils Survey
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is
for informational purposes only and was not prepared
for, and is not suitable for legal or engineering
purposes.This information presented is not for
regulatory review and is intended for use only by a
Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Imagery,
CGIA, 2017; NRCS digital Soil Survey of Robeson
County, 2009; Study Corridor provided by PNG.
* Results are considered preliminary and subject to
change absent USACE concurrence.
JOHN L. BARTONMB 38 PG 94TAX ID: 931632681200(TRACT 5)CALLIE MAEBARTON BULLARDMB 38 PG 94TAX ID: 931633649700(TRACT 3)LL-020MARY E B CHMURA, VERONICASUE B BRYBOY, MELINDA BSCOTT, and CHARO B LOWRYDB 1266 PG 283MB 38 PG 94TAX ID: 931643257600(TRACT 2)LL-019SANFORD BARTONDB 1211 PG 75MB 38 PG 94TAX ID: 931643386200(TRACT 1)HAZEL BRYANT BARTONMB 38 PG 94TAX ID: 931633483100JAMIE COLLINSand ALLISONCOLLINSDB 1112 PG 119TAX ID:931658620826LL-016HAROLD COLLINSand wife HAZEL M COLLINSDB 2028 PG 829TAX ID: 931657907400JOHN GILBERT WALKER& MELISSA WALKERDB 1936 PG 179TAX ID: 931658107152LISA MICHELLECOLLINS FLORITA andSTEVEN GRANTFLORITADB 1708 PG 277TAX ID: 931657909123JAMES HAROLDCOLLINS& HAZEL M. COLLINSDB 2028 PG 829TAX ID: 931657909123JAMES T. OXENDINE& WF JO ANNEDB 665 PG 299TAX ID: 931636842200(TRACT 1)LL-009UNITED BY FAITHCOMMUNITY MINISTRIESDB 1775 PG 567TAX ID: 931679780438(TRACT 2)LL-026ROSIE L LOCKLEAR LIFE ESTATEROBERT and SYLVIA LOCKLEARDB 1831 PG 267MB 27 PG 149 (TRACT 4)TAX ID: 931641534600PAUL MCINTYRE WHITE &BENJAMIN ALEXANDERWHITE JRDB 432 PG 125MB 17 PG 96TAX ID: 93167236500LL-023DONALRD RAY LOCKLEAR andwife ROSIE L LOCKLEARDB 1912 PG 25TAX ID: 931652021300LL-025ROBERT LOCKLEAR and wifeSYLVIA LOCKLEARDB 1834 PG 160MB 27 PG 149 (TRACT 4C)TAX ID: 931651156200LL-010BELTON RAY OXENDINE andwife CONNIE P OXENDINEDB 1775 PG 543TAX ID: 931760688100(TRACT 3)LL-012WILLIAM R LOCKLEAR andwife TERESA LOCKLEARDB 1775 PG 567TAX ID: 931678373400(TRACT 1)LL-009UNITED BY FAITHCOMMUNITYMINISTRIESDB 1775 PG 567TAX ID:931679780438(TRACT 2)LL-015AFONCIE B. OXENDINE JR.& BEATRICE OXENDINEDB 715 PG 304TAX ID: 931667264900LL-015BFONCIE B. OXENDINE JR.& BEATRICE OXENDINEDB 2028 PG 829TAX ID: 931659250800LL-017JOHN PAUL DUNNDB 984 PG 82TAX ID: 931656352200LL-027BRUCE LOCKLEARDB 1831 PG 269MB 27 PG 149(TRACT 5)TAX ID: 9316502585006RB30798203.92
MONUMENT_PT30799207.09
rbr30807198.68
BENT_IP_WITH_NAIL30809197.66
1" IRON PIPE (AT BEND)30810196.13
RBR30811196.21
2in_pipe30813196.22stone30814196.90
MONUMENT_PT30815192.32MONUMENT_PT30816192.35
LL-000PIEDMONT NATURAL GASCOMPANY, INCDB 1695 PG 485MB 44 PG 119TAX ID: 931862738600LL-002LARRYJAMESFOWLERAND WIFETERSEAHADLOCKFOWLERDB 2034PG 756TAX ID:931778581700LL-004JORDAN SWAMP FARM, LLCDB 2107 PG 358TAX ID: 931784584200LL-000PIEDMONT NATURALGAS COMPANY, INCDB 1695 PG 485MB 44, PG 119TAX ID: 931862738600LL-018BTHOMAS JAMES OXENDINEand wife JO ANNE OXENDINEDB 1193 PG 819TAX ID: 931644686000LL-022ELLEN FAYE LOCKLEAR andhusband STANFORD LOCKLEAR JRDB 1669 PG 275TAX ID: 931642682276VANESSA SCOTT ANDHUSBAND CHAD ERIC SCOTTDB 1720 PG 818TAX ID: 931643514391BRUCE LOCKLEARDB 1294 PG 413TAX ID: 931640879100207+100+001+002+003+004+005+006+007+008+009+0010+0011+0012+0013+0014+0015+00
16+00
17+00
18+00
19+00
20+00
21+00
22+00
23+00
24+00
25+00
26+00
27+00
28+00
29+00
30+00
31+00
32+00
33+00
34+00
35+00
36+00
37+00
38+00
39+00
40+00
41+00
42+00
43+00
44+00
45+00
46+00
47+00
48+00
49+00
50+00
51+00
52+00
53+00
54+00
55+0056+0057+0058+0059+0060+0061+0062+0063+0064+0065+0066+0067+0068+0069+0070+0071+0072+0073+0074+0075+0076+0077+0078+0079+0080+0081+0082+00
83+00
84+00
85+00
86+00
87+00
88+00
89+00
90+00
91+00
92+00
93+0
0
94+0
0
95+0
0
96+0
0
97+0
0
98+0
0
99+0
0
100+0
0
101+0
0
102+0
0
103+0
0
104+0
0
105+0
0
106+0
0
107+0
0
108+0
0
109+0
0
110+0
0
111+0
0
112+0
0
113+0
0
114+0
0
115+0
0
116+0
0
117+0
0
118+0
0
119+0
0
120+0
0
121+0
0
122+0
0
123+0
0
124+0
0
125+0
0
126+0
0
127+0
0
128
+
0
0
129
+
0
0
130
+
0
0
131
+
0
0
132
+
0
0
133
+
0
0
134
+
0
0
135
+
0
0
136
+
0
0
137
+
0
0
138
+
0
0
139
+
0
0
140
+
0
0
141
+
0
0
142
+
0
0
143
+
0
0
144
+
0
0
145
+
0
0
146
+
0
0
147
+
0
0
148
+
0
0
149
+
0
0
150
+
0
0
151
+
0
0
152
+
0
0
153
+
0
0
154
+
0
0
155
+
0
0
156
+
0
0
157
+
0
0
158
+
0
0
159
+
0
0
160
+
0
0
161
+
0
0
162
+
0
0
163
+
0
0
164
+
0
0
165
+
0
0
166
+
0
0
167
+
0
0
168
+
0
0
169
+
0
0
170
+
0
0
171+00
172+00
173+00
174+00
175+00
176+00
177+00
178+00
179+00
180+00
181+00
182+00
183+00
184+00
185+00
186+00
187+00
188+00
189+00
190+00
191+00
192+00
193+00
194+00
195+00
196+00
197+00
198+00
199+00
200+00
201+00
202+00
203+00
204+00
205+00
206+00
207+00
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726

Date:__________________________

Self-Certification Letter

Project Name______________________________

Dear Applicant:

Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Raleigh Ecological
Services online project review process. By printing this letter in conjunction with your
project review package, you are certifying that you have completed the online project
review process for the project named above in accordance with all instructions
provided, using the best available information to reach your conclusions. This letter,
and the enclosed project review package, completes the review of your project in
accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat.
884), as amended (ESA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668c, 54 Stat. 250), as amended (Eagle Act). This letter also provides
information for your project review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 83 Stat. 852), as amended. A copy of this
letter and the project review package must be submitted to this office for this
certification to be valid. This letter and the project review package will be maintained
in our records.

The species conclusions table in the enclosed project review package summarizes
your ESA and Eagle Act conclusions. Based on your analysis, mark all the
determinations that apply:

“no effect” determinations for proposed/listed species and/or
proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or

“may affect, not likely to adversely affect” determinations for proposed/listed
species and/or proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or

“may affect, likely to adversely affect” determination for the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and relying on the findings of the January 5,
2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Final 4(d) Rule on the
Northern long-eared bat;

“no Eagle Act permit required” determinations for eagles.

Applicant Page 2

We certify that use of the online project review process in strict accordance with the
instructions provided as documented in the enclosed project review package results in
reaching the appropriate determinations. Therefore, we concur with the “no effect” or
“not likely to adversely affect” determinations for proposed and listed species and
proposed and designated critical habitat; the “may affect” determination for Northern
long-eared bat; and/or the “no Eagle Act permit required” determinations for eagles.
Additional coordination with this office is not needed. Candidate species are not
legally protected pursuant to the ESA. However, the Service encourages consideration
of these species by avoiding adverse impacts to them. Please contact this office for
additional coordination if your project action area contains candidate species.
Should project plans change or if additional information on the distribution of
proposed or listed species, proposed or designated critical habitat, or bald eagles
becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This certification letter is
valid for 1 year. Information about the online project review process including
instructions, species information, and other information regarding project reviews
within North Carolina is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/pp.html.
If you have any questions, you can write to us at [e-mail] or please contact
Leigh Mann of this office at 919-856-4520, ext. 10.

Sincerely,

/s/Pete Benjamin

Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Raleigh Ecological Services

Enclosures - project review package
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2019-SLI-0720
Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-01627
Project Name: PNG Lines 456/457

Subject:List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally-listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally-protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or
March 28, 2019
03/28/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-01627   2

evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally-listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally-protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed
action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/
eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy
guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and
bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://
www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/
comtow.html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office at [e-mail].
03/28/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-01627   3

Attachment(s):
▪Official Species List
03/28/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-01627   1

Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]
03/28/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-01627   2

Project Summary
Consultation Code:04EN2000-2019-SLI-0720
Event Code:04EN2000-2019-E-01627
Project Name:PNG Lines 456/457
Project Type:OIL OR GAS
Project Description:Piedmont Natural Gas intends to install two parallel natural gas lines
(456/457). One line is 8" and the other is 24". Due diligence efforts are
currently underway.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/place/34.77001216075526N79.27036246880279W
Counties:Robeson, NC
03/28/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-01627   3

Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 4 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1.NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Birds
NAME STATUS
Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
Endangered
Wood Stork Mycteria americana
Population: AL, FL, GA, MS, NC, SC
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8477
Threatened
Reptiles
NAME STATUS
American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/776
Similarity of
Appearance
(Threatened)
1
03/28/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-01627   4

Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Endangered
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
,rim Roy Cooper, Governor
»■■ NC DEPARTMENT OF
■i�i NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES Suss Hamilton, Secretary
INNS Walter Clark. Director, Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-8082
February 4, 2019
Katie Talavera
Env'ronmental Services, Inc. (ESI)
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27603
RE: lmile search: esil
Dear Katie Talavera:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database indicates that there are records for rare species, important natural
communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project
boundary. These results are presented in the attached 'Documented Occurrences' tables and map.
The attached 'Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable hab'tat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is documented within the project area or indicated within a one -mile
radius of the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) for guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httnc-/A"k A11Ai r= lc eu.1%I 1nff eGC i� ir�f rYSr4/A .0 PC) FF L,-" F�mlC IiAe rr%ma=ZT
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
Also please note that the NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional
correspondence if a Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water
Management Trust Fund easement, or an occurrence of a Federally -listed species is documented
near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at mtirn�y.i�,tEer ggn�dcr_{v or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL PESOURCES
�} 121 W JONES ifREET. RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 1651 MAIL SERVICE CENT[R RALEIGH. NC 27699
OFC'JI9.7079120 • FAX [phone]

%
�
.\ m
q U
\
ƒ
-Y.
o
#
z
k
m
q /
0
k
\ ( /
/
_
m
-F E
k %
q 3
\
(�
$ ®
\)
o
\
| |
\
E
7
c�
\
\j
E E
\
u
$
�a
cn
u
2: X
)
,<
D
«
@
£
)
C
E k
B
m
§
7U�
k
f£\K�
CN
OD
c
g
§
]
§22¥w
Z
K
2 0 U X
aj
.0 \
� (
E
U
I
k�&ƒz
#
I �
2
z
|
$
.
t
E
u
/
$Ln
\
m
w
D
Z
D
m
2 .0
/
I§
§
2
a
t
§|E
2 $
\
<41
2
; CL
0 ,
E
/'0
ƒ
¥�Lu
a
7
2k
°,
/
_
Q
/
a)§
-�
2
C
/
£
°
/
6
- ,
E
S D
c
w
kl�
C
q K
2E
k
=�
c
\
��
#
Z
±$
E
u
t
g8
Ek&
� e
2 M c
E
2
a)
§ 7
uI
3u3
E
0§
v
3
°
0
Q
c
Gi
#
m
m
o
o
E
c )
(
/ /
)
x§
�k
\�
t t
§
<
<
;
\ \
�
\
;k
�
2
f
#
}
0 m
/ C
&n Ln
2
( 4A
k� k
�
2
LL
2
a)
\
k
2

Q1 1
� C
N �'
v) Lr1
Nl M
N 0(n
M
to
N N M
V) in
N
M
Ul
M
In
N
C!)
N
O C
IU
U' L i
'C
C7 0 M
0
(rJ
(D
�
O m
� l7
(9 C7
U
(N7 NU` 17
Q
C}
0
�
N
L
>>
i+
U
y a
C C
N m
C C
a) m of m N
C
ro O
C
ro O
E
0) Q1 m
E C
a7 m m N
O
Q)
JA
t°m
U L U
-vm
L U L U L
rowro� ro
U L
m
1 1 1
U L
roaa►cIvm
L U L
U
L U L
CD ro
°
(�n�
ca ca
ca ��
c�
c�
c ao c
ao
c c�
o
a
a) rn
_rn c,
a)
_rn
'^ u a
�
U a
�
Ln cn
U7 Lfi
(h
U)
In
H
O
V)
H
CD
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1
1
1 I I
1 1 1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
ro
W N
1 1
I 1
1
1 1 1
1
1
1
1
2
�r �t >t
-00
3
O
coa+0_
uC
mo°ioa�i
J
J
m
a`'0(1)Ca`
1
a�ci
U.
I
L
^_ f^_
V
4
ca�i
4
U
a-+ G
E 0
r =
w �.
s
m co m
m
s
u
N
,Ll3 u
O
rn� Noao
ro�a'NO
O 1
N (NF
co
vOi Z �' ❑
m + a d
Q CL
I 1
I� t�
n
m 00 c
O
0
n
O
C d u m
z
w -
ar m
O O
O
00 DO
U3
1
rn
1
of
0a
(D
Q H�
0 0
Ohl Onl
�
N N O
L(L)
L Z
U
I O
N N
(MOl
0)
ON
a/
N
a
YI
C
1
m
U
O
aD
E.
fo a
r
to
3
O
1
3
O
_0
L
w E
❑
w
C
u
W
C
O
V)
L
a1
al
N
�;
N O
W
O
U O
03
u
= E
E'o
O. 0
u c
m
c
Ln
+�+
c m
3
N
c
3
,�
a�
c
u
O
W;u
o
u a
m
m m
o
L
1 1
L >,
m�
0)
Qm
Q-0
m
O
O
'
w
CO
E
m
a)
a
ro
L
c
.0
0
L Q}
E
O
ii
c c o'O
0
m
o
o
o►
3
Z
ro a0 >a
>� >4J a,a
E
m
U
,�
+mac
u
roDmQL>
7
m
n
IA
In
aci
O sue.
c
m'rn+o
u
ro"m
E
o
N! ul v) J
ud.u�aciao
m m
m
X
m
x
d
o
_=
m
E
E o m
C C
i
Q Q m Cl
.0 M
w
CD
v
L
7
u
V
[h
O w
In 01 H
Cr C
Wu W
O
Z
>1r a F EO
U v U .. N v
3 L
Ul 0
r
0
C
U
N
z
❑
w
O
(D 00
to V
rl t0
Ln�
Ol
00
a0
C
p
M M
N
(O
1N C)�
LO
qT
M
t0
y
!il
M M
L
-C
L
U
L L
LnLA
W W
W
C
C
C
C
U
O u
O O
a>,aa;;
L L
L
c'
>> > >>
" t
m
a
m
a
m
M
ro
a
■..
w�C�a
� w. v=
000a�3
w m m
3
m
3
C C C
7 m 7
L
fp
L
m
L
to
1_
ro
x o
m E m
E
roEaEmE
E E' E
ui
m ro L
L m L
W ar
m w
W
T
41
m o m o m o
W
m
m
Vl
m
Ln
m
f�.i.
❑❑❑❑(a.
(L
u.
zuzuzu
>
>
>
>
Ln
Ail

U
N
E
L
O
C_
3
a
C
N
ro
c
a
ro
c
r v
Ca
.0
a
c
0
�6
C
t
L
x
a a
w E
E O
U
O m
E� m
Ln a
m M
a
E O
L
�aLL°
tIi 4, 0
Z tL
LO
w
0
C
d
CD
a

J I Rd J I RdL
a
c
y

R
d
J I RdPreston RdN NC-71 HWYL
e
c
t
o
r

D
r
St
a
r
l
i
n
g

D
r
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r

M
c
L
e
a
n

R
d
B
u
c
k

R
d
D
o
c

H
e
n
d
e
r
s
o
n

R
d
Missouri
RdDoc Henderson
Rd
Springer DrOld Red Springs RdPreston RdRe
v
B
i
l
l
Rd
Carter Rd
Path: P:\GeoGra\Projects\2018\082\GIS\topo.mxd Date: 4/1/2019 1:40:19 PM
E
ENVIRONMENTALSERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
[phone]
[phone] FAX
Project Location
Robeson County, North Carolina
PNG Lines 456/457
ER18082.00
Apr 2019
EF/KT
Figure:
Project:
Date:
Drwn/Chkd:
www.environmentalservicesinc.com
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes
only and was not prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or engineering
purposes.This information presented is not for regulatory review and is intended
for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
1
Lumber River Basin
0 2,0001,000
Feet
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for
informational purposes only and was not prepared for, and is not
suitable for legal or engineering purposes.This information
presented is not for regulatory review and is intended for use only
by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Source: 2011 National Geographic Society/ESRI, i-cubed
seamless USGS quadrangles (Wakulla and Maxton, NC); Study
Corridor provided by PNG.
Study Corridor
Lay Down Area
Pipe Stringing Area
Proposed Lines 456/457
2a|3a
2b|3b
N NC-71 HWY
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
M
c
L
e
a
n

R
d
D
o
c

H
e
n
d
e
r
s
o
n

R
d Rev Bill RdJT
JT
JT
NoA NoA
NoA
NoA
WaB
NoA
NoA
PoB
McPoB GoAWaBMc
Mc
NoA
LaB
Mc
WaB
Mc
Mc
Mc
PoB
Mc GoA NoA
WaB
Mc
GoA
NoB
WaB
Mc Mc
LaB LaB
NoA
NoA
NoA
LaB
PoB
WaB
NoB
Mc W
Ly
WaB
Mc WaB
Ly
GoA
NoB
Mc
WaB
MaA
WaB
W
Mc
GoA
PoB
BB
Mc
WaB
Ly
NoB
Mc
WaB
WaB
NoA
Ly
Mc
Ly
Mc
WkBNoA
Mc
Mc Ly
Ly
Mc
GoA
WaB McMc
GoAMc
WkB
Ly
GoA
Mc
WaB
Dn
WkB
NoA
WaBMaB
Ra
WaB
Ru
Pt
Dn
WaB
Co
Mc
Ra
W
FaB
GoA
Dn
Ra
McWkBLaBLy
Path: P:\GeoGra\Projects\2018\082\GIS\soils.mxd Date: 4/1/2019 11:06:11 AM
E
ENVIRONMENTALSERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
[phone]
[phone] FAX
NRCS Soils
Robeson County, North Carolina
PNG Lines 456/457
ER18082.00
Apr 2019
CW/JH
Figure:
Project:
Date:
Drwn/Chkd:
www.environmentalservicesinc.com
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes
only and was not prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or engineering
purposes.This information presented is not for regulatory review and is intended
for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
2a
Location and Extent is Approximate.
Lumber River Basin
BBCoDpAGoAJTLyMcNoANoBPaPoBRuWaBWkB
Bibb soils
Coxville loam
Duplin sandy loam, 0-2% slopes
Goldsboro loamy sand, 0-2% slopes
Johnston soils
Lynchburg sandy loam
McColl loam
Norfolk loamy sand, 0-2% slopes
Norfolk loamy sand, 2-6% slopes
Pactolus loamy sand
Pocalla loamy sand, 0-3% slopes
Rutlege loamy sand
Wagram loamy sand, 0-6% slopes
Wakulla sand, 0-6% slopes
Soil Mapping Units
0 800400
Feet
Study Corridor
Proposed Pipelines
Pipe Stringing Area
Lay Down Area
NRCS Soils Survey
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is
for informational purposes only and was not prepared
for, and is not suitable for legal or engineering
purposes.This information presented is not for
regulatory review and is intended for use only by a
Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Imagery,
CGIA, 2017; NRCS digital Soil Survey of Robeson
County, 2009; Study Corridor provided by PNG.
* Results are considered preliminary and subject to
change absent USACE concurrence.
J I Rd
J I Rd
La
c
y

R
d
SpringerDr
K
a
t
r
a
i
l
L
n
Spinks DrPreston RdDoc
H
e
nd
e
r
son
Rd
B
u
c
k

R
d DocHenderson Rd
Starl
i
n
g

D
r
C
a
r
t
e
r

R
d
Missouri Rd
Old Re
d

S
p
r
i
n
g
s

R
d
JT
NoA
NoA
NoB
WaBWkB
NoA
Ra
Ra
WaB
Ru
Pt
WaB
Ra
FaB
GoA
Dn
Ra
Mc
WkB
LaB
Ly WaB Mc
WaB
WaBMc
GoA
GoACoRa
Ra
WaC
LaB
NoB
NoA
NoA
WaBGoAMc
DpA
WaB
GoAWaB
WaB
DpA
Mc Mc
Ly
Mc
Dn
DpA
DnLy
BB
Ra McMcRa
WaB
NoA
Mc
NoA
Ra
Ra
Mc Co
Ly
Mc
NoA LaBDpA
NoA
Dn
Mc
W
GoA
WaB
WaC
Ra
Ra
GoANoB
WaB Mc
WaB
Ra
PmNoBDn
NoA
GoA
Ra
WaB
WaB
GoAWaB
GoA
Ra
Ra
DpA
WaB
Mc
GoA
NoA
Ra
DpA
Ly
GoA
GoA
Ra
Ra
WaB
GoA
NoA
NoA
Ly DpA
GoA
DnGoAWaB
Ly
CoCo
DpANoANoA
Path: P:\GeoGra\Projects\2018\082\GIS\soils.mxd Date: 4/1/2019 11:06:11 AM
E
ENVIRONMENTALSERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
[phone]
[phone] FAX
NRCS Soils
Robeson County, North Carolina
PNG Lines 456/457
ER18082.00
Apr 2019
CW/JH
Figure:
Project:
Date:
Drwn/Chkd:
www.environmentalservicesinc.com
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes
only and was not prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or engineering
purposes.This information presented is not for regulatory review and is intended
for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
2b
Location and Extent is Approximate.
Lumber River Basin
BBCoDpAGoAJTLyMcNoANoBPaPoBRuWaBWkB
Bibb soils
Coxville loam
Duplin sandy loam, 0-2% slopes
Goldsboro loamy sand, 0-2% slopes
Johnston soils
Lynchburg sandy loam
McColl loam
Norfolk loamy sand, 0-2% slopes
Norfolk loamy sand, 2-6% slopes
Pactolus loamy sand
Pocalla loamy sand, 0-3% slopes
Rutlege loamy sand
Wagram loamy sand, 0-6% slopes
Wakulla sand, 0-6% slopes
Soil Mapping Units
0 800400
Feet
Study Corridor
Proposed Pipelines
Pipe Stringing Area
Lay Down Area
NRCS Soils Survey
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is
for informational purposes only and was not prepared
for, and is not suitable for legal or engineering
purposes.This information presented is not for
regulatory review and is intended for use only by a
Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Imagery,
CGIA, 2017; NRCS digital Soil Survey of Robeson
County, 2009; Study Corridor provided by PNG.
* Results are considered preliminary and subject to
change absent USACE concurrence.
WHB
WHB
WHB Jordan SwampGum SwampWHD
WHC
THB
THC
N NC-71 HWY
G
o
v
e
r
n
o
r
M
c
L
e
a
n

R
d
Doc Henderson
RdRev Bill RdPath: P:\GeoGra\Projects\2018\082\GIS\JD_fig.mxd Date: 4/3/2019 8:56:57 AM
E
ENVIRONMENTALSERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
[phone]
[phone] FAX
Potential Wetlands/Waters of the US (WOTUS)
Robeson County, North Carolina
PNG Lines 456/457
ER18082.00
Apr 2019
CW/JH
Figure:
Project:
Date:
Drwn/Chkd:
www.environmentalservicesinc.com
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes
only and was not prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or engineering
purposes.This information presented is not for regulatory review and is intended
for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
3a
Not A Survey
Location and Extent is Approximate.
Lumber River Basin
Note: Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or hydrology after initial
site evaluation can affect jurisdictional status and may require re-
evaluation of wetland boundaries.
0 800400
Feet
Study Corridor
Potential Wetland (WOTUS)
Potential Surface Waters (WOTUS)
Potential Stream (WOTUS)
Potential Tributary (WOTUS)
Proposed Pipelines
Pipe Stringing Area
Lay Down Area
USACE Wetland Data Point
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational
purposes only and was not prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or
engineering purposes.This information presented is not for regulatory
review and is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor
prior to regulatory review.
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Imagery, CGIA, 2017; Study
Corridor provided by PNG.
* Results are considered preliminary and subject to change absent
USACE concurrence.
Wetlands: WHA 1-26
WHB 1-141
WHC 1-15
WHD 1-12
WHE 1-9
WXA 1-66
Streams/ Tributaries:
SXA 1-8
SXB 1-4
THA 1-8
THB 1-6
THC 1-7
THD 1-7
TXA 1-6
Surface Waters/ Ponds:
P1 1-5
Delineated Feature Labels*
*These labels correspond to flagging
sequences in the field.
WHA
WHB
Gum SwampWHE
WXA
SXB
SXA
THD
THA
TXA
P1
J I Rd
J I Rd
L
a
c
y
R
d
SpringerDr
K
a
t
r
a
i
l
L
n
Spinks DrPreston RdDoc
H
end
e
r
son
Rd
B
u
c
k

R
d DocHenderson Rd
Starl
i
n
g

D
r
C
a
r
t
e
r

R
d
Missouri Rd
Old Re
d

S
p
r
i
n
g
s

R
d
Path: P:\GeoGra\Projects\2018\082\GIS\JD_fig.mxd Date: 4/3/2019 8:56:57 AM
E
ENVIRONMENTALSERVICES, INC.
4901 Trademark Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
[phone]
[phone] FAX
Potential Wetlands/Waters of the US (WOTUS)
Robeson County, North Carolina
PNG Lines 456/457
ER18082.00
Apr 2019
CW/JH
Figure:
Project:
Date:
Drwn/Chkd:
www.environmentalservicesinc.com
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes
only and was not prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or engineering
purposes.This information presented is not for regulatory review and is intended
for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
3b
Not A Survey
Location and Extent is Approximate.
Lumber River Basin
Note: Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or hydrology after initial
site evaluation can affect jurisdictional status and may require re-
evaluation of wetland boundaries.
0 800400
Feet
Study Corridor
Potential Wetland (WOTUS)
Potential Surface Waters (WOTUS)
Potential Stream (WOTUS)
Potential Tributary (WOTUS)
Proposed Pipelines
Pipe Stringing Area
Lay Down Area
USACE Wetland Data Point
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational
purposes only and was not prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or
engineering purposes.This information presented is not for regulatory
review and is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor
prior to regulatory review.
Source: High Resolution NC Statewide Imagery, CGIA, 2017; Study
Corridor provided by PNG.
* Results are considered preliminary and subject to change absent
USACE concurrence.
Wetlands: WHA 1-26
WHB 1-141
WHC 1-15
WHD 1-12
WHE 1-9
WXA 1-66
Streams/ Tributaries:
SXA 1-8
SXB 1-4
THA 1-8
THB 1-6
THC 1-7
THD 1-7
TXA 1-6
Surface Waters/ Ponds:
P1 1-5
Delineated Feature Labels*
*These labels correspond to flagging
sequences in the field.
Determination Table: Piedmont Natural Gas Lines 456/457, Robeson County, North Carolina
Species/Resource
Name
Conclusion ESA Section 7/Eagle Act
Determination
Notes/Documentation
American alligator Suitable habitat present is deeper
portion of Gum Swamp; surveys not
conducted
Not Required American alligator is listed as Threatened due to
Similarly in Appearance T(S/A). No NCNHP
occurrences within 1 mile.
Wood stork No suitable habitat present No effect Qualified ESI biologists did not identify habitat
associated with Gum Swamp or Jordan Swamp
that would be conducive for wood stork. The
forested wetland is thickly vegetated, and no
large areas of open water were identified during
the evaluation of the study corridor. No
NCNHP occurrences within 1 mile.
Red-cockaded
woodpecker
No suitable habitat present No effect Qualified ESI biologists did not identify any
suitable pine stands capable of supporting RCW
nesting or foraging. No NCNHP occurrences
within 1 mile.
Michaux’s sumac No suitable habitat present No effect Qualified ESI biologists walked the ecotone
between the agriculture field and the forested
wetlands throughout the entire study area. The
agriculture activities occur all the way up to the
tree line. Once at the tree line, the vegetation
becomes extremely thick and the landscape
quickly drops into the jurisdictional wetland.
No NCNHP occurrences within 1 mile.
Bald eagle Unlikely to disturb nesting bald eagles No Eagle Act permit
required
No nest within the action area. No NCNHP
occurrences within 1 mile.
Critical habitat No critical habitat present No effect Per the species list generated through the
ECOS- IPaC online portal